Remuneration vs. Reelection: A Senatorial Balancing Act‪.‬

Unique events often give rise to other unique events. Such was the case of Hurricane Katrina--the costliest and most destructive natural disaster in U.S. history. The resulting casualties and staggering damage estimates from the savage storm in late August 2005, led the U.S. Senate to vote overwhelmingly (92 to 6) against a Senate pay raise. Most senators apparently felt that voters would not look kindly on a Senate pay raise given the devastation caused by Katrina. The Senate vote was largely symbolic because the House of Representatives was not going to take a vote on rescinding a pay raise for members of Congress. Thus, senators voting against the raise knew their votes would resonate well with voters but have no impact on the annual congressional pay raise sanctioned by law. Of the six senators who did vote for the pay raise, five--James Jeffords (I-Vt.), Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), and Kit Bond (R-Mo.)--were long-time incumbents whose seats were not threatened, and one--Paul Sarbanes (D-Md.)--was about to retire.