• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Congressman Jim Moran: "Members of Congress are underpaid."

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

PlayALLtheGames

Banned
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/04/05/a-democrat-thinks-members-of-congress-are-badly-underpaid/

"I think the American people should know that members of Congress are underpaid. I understand it’s widely felt that they underperform, but the fact is that this is the board of directors for the largest economic entity in the world. And a lot of members can’t even afford to live decently when they’re at their job in Washington"
Click to expand...

Worst part about this is this guy is my congressman here in Arlington, VA. He used to be ok; not sure what the hell happened. I literally LOL'd at the last sentence and I'm stunned at how poor the timing of this comment was.

I sent him a note through his website, reminding him that his base pay is in addition to the numerous perks politicians get simply for being politicians.

The real issue is that Moran keeps having to give his money to his three ex-wives and it sounds like he's just bad at managing money in general.
 
S

Stet

Banned
get-a-brain-morans.jpg
 
D

dabig2

Member
Let them eat bills. Or at least do their goddamn job. They're lucky they can't get fired after a quarterly review by their constituents.
 
B

badcrumble

Member
People talking about cutting pay for members of Congress is a really good example of Idiot Populism.

If you can't make a living and feed your family while maintaining two households (one in your district, one in Washington) as a member of Congress, only the already-wealthy will hold political office and you'll make it impossible for anyone poor to consider public office. That's a situation that's already bad enough as it is.
 
C

CrankyJay

Banned
Define decently. These guys basically get inside information on stocks. If they can't make money off of that they probably shouldn't be in congress.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Why don't we tie their salary to the minimum wage. Every time they vote to raise their own pay, they're forced to raise the minimum wage. I'm sure no one would mind them voting themselves some raises is it meant they weren't the only one to see a benefit.
 
H

hodayathink

Member
Most people in Congress are already rich by the time they get there, because of how much money you need to actually win an election at that level (and getting to that level of popularity [enough to win a Senate seat] usually means you've done pretty very well at some level either in business or in politics).
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
badcrumble said:
People talking about cutting pay for members of Congress is a really good example of Idiot Populism.

If you can't make a living and feed your family while maintaining two households (one in your district, one in Washington) as a member of Congress, only the already-wealthy will hold political office and you'll make it impossible for anyone poor to consider public office. That's a situation that's already bad enough as it is.
Click to expand...

I mean, they do make $174,000 yearly. I'm fairly sure that can be reduced without making it impossible for anyone who is poor to consider public office.
 
B

badcrumble

Member
Crab said:
I mean, they do make $174,000 yearly. I'm fairly sure that can be reduced without making it impossible for anyone who is poor to consider public office.
Click to expand...

I'd be down for replacing some of the pay with expense accounts (like reimbursals for X dollars of travel to and from the home district and Y dollars of rent in Washington DC or the surrounding area).
 
S

Seth C

Member
How about fuck you. You are serving your country, not getting rich. Their salary should be the median income for the area they serve and have their housing and meals while in DC covered. Get fucks like this out of there.
 
B

B-Dubs

No Scrubs
Zoe said:
Do those other employees have to live and travel to two places?
Click to expand...

We could just give them a dormitory to live in while in DC. The government buys a few buildings, or builds them, and gives each Congresman an apartment. So long as their family isn't moving to DC full-time.

badcrumble said:
I'd be down for replacing some of the pay with expense accounts (like reimbursals for X dollars of travel to and from the home district and Y dollars of rent in Washington DC or the surrounding area).
Click to expand...

See, this is reasonable. If the problem is they can't afford the travel and extra apartment, then we can just reimburse them for it if they can't afford it.
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
UK MPs represent about 100,000 persons per riding and get paid $110,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Canadian MPs represent about 100,000 persons per riding and get paid $145,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

French deputies represent about 110,000 persons per riding and get paid $125,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits

US Congresspersons represent about 735,000 persons per riding and get paid $170,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Australian MPs represent about 150,000 persons per riding and get paid $180,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Besides "politicians suck, pay 'em peanuts, viva la revolucion", US congresspeople are actually underpaid in a comparative context given the average number of people per their district. There are of course other measures to consider; multiple of average wage in the country, differences in cost of living, etc but it's certainly not the case that US politicians are overpaid compared to politicians in other comparable countries.
 
C

Culex

Banned
badcrumble said:
People talking about cutting pay for members of Congress is a really good example of Idiot Populism.

If you can't make a living and feed your family while maintaining two households (one in your district, one in Washington) as a member of Congress, only the already-wealthy will hold political office and you'll make it impossible for anyone poor to consider public office. That's a situation that's already bad enough as it is.
Click to expand...

My wife and I have a combined income of about 88k, and live comfortably. As a member of congress, I'd be making TWICE that (without spousal income), have health insurance that is paid by the public, and plenty of other opportunities to make an extra buck.

They are definitely NOT underpaid.
 
I

ISOM

Member
Stumpokapow said:
UK MPs represent about 100,000 persons per riding and get paid $110,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Canadian MPs represent about 100,000 persons per riding and get paid $145,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

French deputies represent about 110,000 persons per riding and get paid $125,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits

US Congresspersons represent about 735,000 persons per riding and get paid $170,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Australian MPs represent about 150,000 persons per riding and get paid $180,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Besides "politicians suck, pay 'em peanuts, viva la revolucion", US congresspeople are actually underpaid in a comparative context given the average number of people per their district. There are of course other measures to consider; multiple of average wage in the country, differences in cost of living, etc but it's certainly not the case that US politicians are overpaid compared to politicians in other comparable countries.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see an asset comparison to other countries. As far as I know there is no insider trading laws in congress.
 
H

Heshinsi

"playing" dumb? unpossible
badcrumble said:
I'd be down for replacing some of the pay with expense accounts (like reimbursals for X dollars of travel to and from the home district and Y dollars of rent in Washington DC or the surrounding area).
Click to expand...

The majority of them are millionaires though.

http://time.com/373/congress-is-now-mostly-a-millionaires-club/

For the first time, more than half of congressional lawmakers are worth at least $1 million
Click to expand...

The Center for Responsive Politics analyzed the personal financial disclosure data from 2012 of the 534 current members of Congress and found that, for the first time, more than half had an average net worth of $1 million or more: 268 to be exact, up from 257 the year earlier. The median for congressional Democrats was $1.04 million and, for Republicans, $1 million even.
Click to expand...

Congressman McClueless said:
And a lot of members can’t even afford to live decently when they’re at their job in Washington
Click to expand...
 
D

devilhawk

Member
If they eliminated all their outside income, insider trading etc., I would definitely agree they should get a pay raise.
 
P

Paskil

Member
He's right, to a certain extent. I don't agree with them getting a raise though. Government jobs are nearly always paid less than their private sector equivalent. Also, if you're so worried about what a board member at a top company is making, GO GET A FUCKING JOB WITH THAT COMPANY.

You're a public servant, not a CEO or board member. To expect similar pay is ridiculous and laughable.
 
S

smokeandmirrors

Banned
Stumpokapow said:
UK MPs represent about 100,000 persons per riding and get paid $110,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Canadian MPs represent about 100,000 persons per riding and get paid $145,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

French deputies represent about 110,000 persons per riding and get paid $125,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits

US Congresspersons represent about 735,000 persons per riding and get paid $170,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Australian MPs represent about 150,000 persons per riding and get paid $180,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Besides "politicians suck, pay 'em peanuts, viva la revolucion", US congresspeople are actually underpaid in a comparative context given the average number of people per their district. There are of course other measures to consider; multiple of average wage in the country, differences in cost of living, etc but it's certainly not the case that US politicians are overpaid compared to politicians in other comparable countries.
Click to expand...

So the answer is to increase the number of representatives then.
 
A

Anion

Member
$170,000 seems fine to me, cause I dont want the job pay to be too little for the poorer ones who are good/ideal congressmen/women and I dont want them to make more extra money to fool around.

Notrollious said:
So the answer is to increase the number of representatives then.
Click to expand...
Well if your talking about parity, I think it could be cheaper to increase pay by a bit more than hire another ~170k+ person
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Stumpokapow said:
UK MPs represent about 100,000 persons per riding and get paid $110,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Canadian MPs represent about 100,000 persons per riding and get paid $145,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

French deputies represent about 110,000 persons per riding and get paid $125,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits

US Congresspersons represent about 735,000 persons per riding and get paid $170,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Australian MPs represent about 150,000 persons per riding and get paid $180,000 USD plus office budgets and housing subsidies and health benefits.

Besides "politicians suck, pay 'em peanuts, viva la revolucion", US congresspeople are actually underpaid in a comparative context given the average number of people per their district. There are of course other measures to consider; multiple of average wage in the country, differences in cost of living, etc but it's certainly not the case that US politicians are overpaid compared to politicians in other comparable countries.
Click to expand...

Personally, I'd have said the problem here was "the United States does not have enough elected officials to properly represent its population" and not "the United States does not pay its elected officials enough".

EDIT: Beaten like Federer at Roland Garros.
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
badcrumble said:
I'd be down for replacing some of the pay with expense accounts (like reimbursals for X dollars of travel to and from the home district and Y dollars of rent in Washington DC or the surrounding area).
Click to expand...

Travel is a separate expense from salary in almost all countries, including the US. The base allowance in the US is about a quarter-million dollars but there's a mileage rate because obviously someone taking the train to their house in Maryland isn't subject to the same pressures as someone whose district is a billion square mega-acres in Alaska or whatever. Rent deductions vary from country to country, but most politicians in DC are not really living in "luxury"--that's certainly not to say that they're poor or living in public housing, but most aren't able to maintain a regal palatial residence. This article about the house where Dick Durban, Bill Delahunt, Chuck Schumer, and George Miller lived together is certainly not an anomaly.

IGSaint said:
I'd like to see an asset comparison to other countries. As far as I know there is no insider trading laws in congress.
Click to expand...

Americans congresspersons are dramatically richer than most other countries politicians when they enter, and when they leave.

Notrollious said:
So the answer is to increase the number of representatives then.
Click to expand...

Crab said:
Personally, I'd have said the problem here was "the United States does not have enough elected officials to properly represent its population" and not "the United States does not pay its elected officials enough".
Click to expand...

This might not have the intended effect; studies of very large deliberative bodies show significant stresses related to the size of the body. The problem is dramatically exacerbated in the US because by virtue of not being a parliamentary system. There are a few problems associated with this: because the executive is separate from the legislature, there's limited structural penalty for going against your own party. Moreover, the legislative branch and the executive can be split and at odds. Finally, the US has a massively more open primary/nomination system than other democracies, so candidates tend to be quite a good deal more diverse relative to the party median than in other countries. You know how the US has party whips to make sure members vote with the party? Yeah, whips are much much weaker in the US compared to most parliamentary democracies, where total obedience by the average MP is expected. All this puts together to say that there are a lot of mechanisms that make the system run less smoothly than in most countries and contribute towards gridlock. Increasing the size of the chamber would for the most part make this worse. I don't study deliberative chambers so I wouldn't be able to tell you the latest research, but I know the consensus is that there are big scaling problems.

As a point of comparison, India's parliament has 800 MPs. For 800,000,000+ voters and 1.2 billion+ constituents.

Another difference that might make those original numbers a little hard to compare directly is that the US Senate is much more powerful than the upper house of most countries, and that Senators do a lot more direct district representation than most upper houses. So some burden that the population numbers would have you believe is placed on the congressperson is also spread to the senator.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Stumpokapow said:
This might not have the intended effect; studies of very large deliberative bodies show significant stresses related to the size of the body. The problem is dramatically exacerbated in the US because by virtue of not being a parliamentary system. There are a few problems associated with this: because the executive is separate from the legislature, there's limited structural penalty for going against your own party. Moreover, the legislative branch and the executive can be split and at odds. Finally, the US has a massively more open primary/nomination system than other democracies, so candidates tend to be quite a good deal more diverse relative to the party median than in other countries. You know how the US has party whips to make sure members vote with the party? Yeah, whips are much much weaker in the US compared to most parliamentary democracies, where total obedience by the average MP is expected. All this puts together to say that there are a lot of mechanisms that make the system run less smoothly than in most countries and contribute towards gridlock. Increasing the size of the chamber would for the most part make this worse. I don't study deliberative chambers so I wouldn't be able to tell you the latest research, but I know the consensus is that there are big scaling problems.
Click to expand...

Which brings in the second part of the argument: make the United States a parliamentary democracy instead of sticking with an outdated and broken system that was specifically designed to be non-democratic and non-functional, and displays remarkable degree of inertia towards becoming anything different.

#presidentialismsucks
 
C

Ceebs

Member
Someone should ask him "If you can't afford to live decently on your pay, how do your unpaid interns survive at all?"
 
T

TheWarrior

Banned
Stumpokapow said:
Besides "politicians suck, pay 'em peanuts, viva la revolucion", US congresspeople are actually underpaid in a comparative context given the average number of people per their district. There are of course other measures to consider; multiple of average wage in the country, differences in cost of living, etc but it's certainly not the case that US politicians are overpaid compared to politicians in other comparable countries.
Click to expand...

You should look into those who serve in Congress and their net worth before going in and then after their service. Most end up multi millionaires. Senators even more so.
 
W

_woLf

Member
Little does he know the lengths most people in this country would go to even make half of what he does a year.
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
TheWarrior said:
You should look into those who serve in Congress and their net worth before going in and then after their service. Most end up multi millionaires. Senators even more so.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned in my second reply, I am aware; this is not a function of their salary, though. It's a separate issue. The idea of saying, for example, "Congresspersons shouldn't be paid paid at all because they're just going to exploit the system and get loaded rich anyway lol" is a pretty bad way to look at this as an issue.
 
Rentahamster

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Moran needs more money to support his son since he doesn't have a job after resigning after that video of him giving tips to assist in voter fraud.
 
T

TheWarrior

Banned
Stumpokapow said:
As I mentioned in my second reply, I am aware; this is not a function of their salary, though. It's a separate issue. The idea of saying, for example, "Congresspersons shouldn't be paid paid at all because they're just going to exploit the system and get loaded rich anyway lol" is a pretty bad way to look at this as an issue.
Click to expand...

Fair enough points.

Your first comment caught my attention.
 
Squirrel Killer

Squirrel Killer

Member
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

John Delaney from MD announces 2020 Presidential run, first to challenge Trump.
2
52
6K
Steel replied
US Incarceration Rates Exceed those of Jim Crow Era
2
77
10K
Morat replied
  • Locked
Nader Denounces Trump Budget as Corporatist, Militarist & Racist: "The Mask is Off".
2
99
12K
Blader replied
  • Locked
The Democratic National Committee Chair Debate |OT| - Dem One: A Politics Story
2
79
8K
kirblar replied
  • Locked
Here Is What Donald Trump Wants To Do In His First 100 Days (from October)
3 4 5 6 7
334
47K
Lime replied
Top Bottom