In a flashy front page scoop, the Burlington Free Press reported today that Vermont’s three D.C. amigos “will follow President Obama’s lead in giving some of [their] income to charity in response to federal spending cuts.”
The damage? $8700 apiece for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Congressman Peter Welch (D-Vt.), who each make $174,000 a year, and $9670 for Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), who pulls in $193,400.
Here’s how Gannett’s Nicole Gaudiano, who covers the Vermont delegation for the Freeps, put it in the story, which ran with the headline, “Shared Sacrifice”:
The lawmakers, who announced their decisions in response to a Burlington Free Press query, say they will donate 5 percent of their congressional salaries to Vermont charities.
But here’s the thing: It doesn’t quite sound like the three “announced” anything — nor that they were “follow[ing] President Obama’s lead.”
It sounds a little more like Gaudiano posed a question to the delegation and, not wanting to look like tone-deaf congress-critters, they then decided they were better off giving away the cash than suffering a few tough headlines.
In other words, the tail of the Freeps was wagging the dog of Bernie’s beat-up old wallet.



What if they suggest rather than a retirement plan from Congress, they and all Congress critters will just get Social Security when they retire? Stop the Drones .Close Gitmo. Free Bradley Manning and Assange.
Dear Paul, I personally find you headline truly “Off Message.” If your point is that there is no reason for Welch and Sanders to share a sacrifice they didn’t endorse or vote for and Leahy should, then why don’t you just run with that? Or is it that you’d like to expose a perceived farce of an article about an announcement that never happened and just sounded like a good idea to agree to? From what I know about our delegation they are leaders. They make tough decisions. They also speak to the press everyday and are much more savvy then to just agree to something on a whim because a reported asked about it.