New Rule Could Give House Lawmakers a Tax-Free $34,000 Pay Bump

hopefully this will help them all get more nothing done while not serving the people (other than bs) and giving them more time to raise $ for the next election cycle of lies.

At $174,000 a year, I do not know how they survive.
"but after all, tomorrow is another day."

reminds me, put tissues on the marketing list

---

!#$@@$#!

never do yesterday or today what you can put off til tomorrow or next year.

174 is low pay these days.

Pretty sure this is just the money they receive above the table.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/13/2023 08:44PM by bfd.

Quote
gadje
174 is low pay these days.

Something like 91% of Americans make less than 100k. They'd live like Kings with $174k

Quote
vision63

Quote
gadje
174 is low pay these days.

Something like 91% of Americans make less than 100k. They'd live like Kings with $174k

not in a high cost of living area, when you have to save for college and for retirement, and when your house is 1M. Sure, I could live like a king in a low cost of living area.

The pay for political office is tricky because it has to be sufficient to live on in one of the most expensive cities in the US but not so much that folks run for office solely for the salary. If it's too low, only wealthy people would be able to hold office.

---

Hurts like a bastid...

I'm okay with this.

---

e pluribus unum

Quote
gadje

Quote
vision63

Quote
gadje
174 is low pay these days.

Something like 91% of Americans make less than 100k. They'd live like Kings with $174k

not in a high cost of living area, when you have to save for college and for retirement, and when your house is 1M. Sure, I could live like a king in a low cost of living area.

Yeah, it's nothing if you have to buy lots of expensive stuff. Average salary in DC is just over 100k, so it seems they should be able to get by significantly better than your average person in DC. They can easily afford 5000/mo. rent. I don't know why they would buy a house, since they don't really live there.
I agree though that this is probably not much of an issue in the whole scheme of things.

so 60k in rent alone, and correct me if I am wrong, but this is AFTER tax money. All of a sudden, that 174k BEFORE TAX does not seem that much, does it?

George Santos is in favor of it.

---

“No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong.” -- François de La Rochefoucauld

"Those who cannot accept the past are condemned to revise it." -- Geo. Mathias

The German word for contraceptive is “Schwangerschaftsverhütungsmittel”. By the time you finished saying that, it’s too late

$174,000 would not allow you to qualify for a house mortgage in most of the San Francisco Bay Area.

---

"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan

first off, as the link says, the bill proposes $34k on top of the current $174k, aka $208k.
Net worth The top 200 are worth >$1M. That is personal net worth. So the partner, if there is one, is not included. Nor is the family.

per year expenses.
taxes - lets say 30%, no way, but ..... $62000.
avg rent $2300 let's say $3000 .... $36000
health care, and $25000 avg family of 4, reduced by ~72% subsidy...... $6250
That leaves ~ $104k for food and .... ? And I'd bet the average remainder is higher.
Certainly, there is more to it than what I've listed, but ....

days at work in DC. ~160.
Yes, there is no doubt it very expensive to live in most US cities, where their constituents earn, average, <1/3 of their salary.

.... are we getting our moneys worth?

---

!#$@@$#!

never do yesterday or today what you can put off til tomorrow or next year.

Quote
davester
$174,000 would not allow you to qualify for a house mortgage in most of the San Francisco Bay Area.

The best way to not have what you want is to convince yourself that you can't.

I'm pretty sure House members get significant coverage of expenses in addition to their salary.

$208k/year is not enough to have a decent place in DC and in your home district without personal wealth.

DC is EXPENSIVE.

And I'd like there to be representatives that can do the job without being a Goldman Sacks banker first.

I know many, many people who spend 60% of their income on rent. I'm sure most politicians feel living in a 2 bedroom apartment is below them, but maybe it shouldn't be.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/14/2023 12:48AM by kj.

Their pay has been the same since 2009. They have inflation increases but they've voted them down each year since 2009. They do get a lot of personal allowance for their professional activities but it's supposed to be only for professional and their offices. I imagine there's a lot of stuff that's purchased for professional activities that somehow end up in a family room, of course. They are limited to right around $30k of other outside income and they can't accept honorariums. They no longer get a $3k deduction for having 2 homes.

It seems to me that the $174k would be tough to have 2 homes for many senators/representatives who come from higher priced areas. I think the US should have some sort of extended stay hotel kind of facility for senators/representatives in DC. Not luxurious living but good enough. I know that some of them essentially live in their offices while in DC. I think that should be restricted along with the extended stay hotel facility opened.

Of course, the House and Senate are full of millionaires [www.opensecrets.org] . An interesting question is how many of those millionaires made their money outside of their congressional activities and how many are simply good investors with their congressional salaries. And still followed the law about conflict of interest investing.

If you want to see an overview of what representatives/senators get can be found by googling, "Congressional Salaries and Allowances: In Brief" and clicking on the first link.

elected officials are PUBLIC SERVANTS - why don't we (taxpayers) provide them with dorm-level housing and a stipend they can live on. Maybe some food vouchers. Nothing fancy like lobster.

---

---

they are supposed to be public servants, but I think many now, are only in it for the money.
judging from the way some accumulate $ after serving a term or 2, I'll not weep for any.

---

!#$@@$#!

never do yesterday or today what you can put off til tomorrow or next year.