While I feel for you personally, 10:28, I think they should start cutting the money of everyone connected with Congress by 50 percent at least. This sequester is a ridiculous joke. It's not that there aren't a lot of things that could be rethought or eliminated in the federal budget, but the sequester is nothing more than Congress throwing up its hands and flat out refusing to do its job. Appropriations is the main job of the Congress. If anyone else refused to do their job, they'd be fired. If those idiots wanted to show courage, they'd buckle down and make some hard calls rather than the posturing and grandstanding from both sides. So their staffs should take the greatest hits, maybe they'd decide they "feel the pain" and get off their butts and compromise.

Which committee?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Even worse than a furlough--my husband works for a House committee and his pay is being cut 10% for the rest of the year (and next year), with no days off.

Interesting. I didn't think that was legal.

To cut someone's salary? Hardly any non-union employees have a contract that can be enforced.

Anonymous wrote:Even worse than a furlough--my husband works for a House committee and his pay is being cut 10% for the rest of the year (and next year), with no days off.

Interesting. I didn't think that was legal.

Anonymous wrote:Even worse than a furlough--my husband works for a House committee and his pay is being cut 10% for the rest of the year (and next year), with no days off.

Yes, a furlough would be MUCH better. At least that way he'd get days off for the reduction in pay. That's the pits.

Even worse than a furlough--my husband works for a House committee and his pay is being cut 10% for the rest of the year (and next year), with no days off.