Democrat Walter Boasso was asked to account for a vote he cast for a bill that would provide health care to legislators who have served a minimum number of years in state government. While Boasso explained how he would not have been a beneficiary of that legislation, he failed to note how his opponent, Republican Bobby Jindal, cast a vote in order to increase his pay for serving in the US House. Boasso may have cast a vote to provide health care for legislators serving in state government for an extended amount of time, but it was Bobby Jindal who cast a vote that was unambiguously to his own benefit.
In June 2005, Jindal voted against a "motion to order the previous question" during the debate on the Appropriations Bill for the Departments of Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the Federal Elections Commission and the District of Columbia. The "motion to order the previous question" would have required members of the US House to debate and vote on a proposed raise of $3,100 for members of Congress that was tucked into this massive appropriations bill. The most vocal opponent to the proposed raise was Democrat Jim Matheson of Utah, who filed an amendment to have the proposed raise removed from the bill. But Jindal and other members of Congress joined together in order to foreclose debate and a vote on Jim Matheson's fiscally responsible amendment. Jindal, in other words, voted to increase his salary by $3,100, even if this would have required Congress to increase the national debt and raid the Social Security Trust fund.
It was not Walter Boasso who cast a vote directly to his own benefit; it was Bobby Jindal, who joined with Members of the US House in order to block a Democratic amendment that would have removed a proposed wage increase from an appropriations bill.