Printable View
http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/in...ajamas_on.html
I saw this on the Today Show and am curious to hear what everyone's take on this is.
I don't understand why this is a big deal. It's not like it costs the taxpayers anything if their congressmen spend the night in their offices. And it doesn't affect their ability to get their jobs done. They actually seem pretty dedicated.
What a silly thing to make a fuss over!!! Does it cost US taxpayers one dime extra?? NO!!
Apparently the folks who are fussing over this have too much free time on their hands... something that for congressmen seems to be in very short supply.
As long as he's not having "a sleepover" with any of his staff.... why should anyone give a rats ass...
It is dedication if they are always close by their work. Heck that would drive me nuts being in the office all the time. You can see they spend their money at the gym to shower, so no wasted taxpayer resources on utilities. I don't see why it's an ethics issue. If they can't sleep in their office during off-work hours, then they shouldn't be allowed to use the bathroom when they are working!
Pete Hoekstra apparently slept on a couch in his office throughout his time in Congress. When he left office, the Holland Museum bought his couch from the government to display as an example of how cheap Dutch people are. You just can't make this stuff up.
These are not dorms. These are public buildings, bought-and-paid-for by taxpayers. On top of that, Congressmen get paid $174,000 a year [[by us) in part because they're expected to maintain a local residence in addition to their permanent residence. If they're not going to spend the money on rent, return it to the taxpayers instead of living rent-free on our dime.
Hypocrites, as usual.
Gp, Why the outrage? if anything, Rep. Hansen Clarke seems to indicate that he is not another hog at the trough. I respect people who hang on to their money. He isn't hurting anything. In fact, he is preventing sprawl and saving gas. As he noted, he has more time for his job. That's what his district sent him to Washington for; not to maintain a second residence.
It is long pass due for the Congress to have a Congressional Dorm to house our Representatives. Currently they are forced into the superheated DC rental market which just so happens to put them within the greedy grasp of lobby firms that own most of the rental properties in the ABC named streets which surround The Hill.
Such a dorm would be self-funded through market rate fees for the rooms. Many Reps bring their entire families to Washington because having two homes can be very pricey depending on housing costs in their home district. A $175k wage is a handsome income, but if you're facing double mortgages in two separate places, the urge to cut corners is very natural. Remove that urge and we might actually get some fair work out of those folk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnome
If you're pulling down $175,000 a year, you can afford an English basement apartment on Capitol Hill. If you decide to use taxpayer-funded "lodgings", then you should be returning a good $14,000 of that salary [[after taxes) to the taxpayers.
Just avoiding the bedbug problem, I reckon.
Gp, thanks for your review, but if you re-read my above post, you might noticed I mentioned that the Reps would pay Market rate for their digs inorder to keep the cost go the taxpayer as low as possible.
Granted tax dollars would have to be used to build the dorm in the first place, but there isn't much unusual about that.
I personally have no problem with them sleeping in their offices. I don't want the money back. I just want them to do their job as quickly and efficiently as possible. For example: You work in downtown Detroit, but live in West Bloomfield. You decide to stop driving to work and take the bus instead. So you save gas, wear and tear and parking fees. Should your employer drop your pay rate because you are being sensible?
As long as the congressmen are not still sleeping when their staff shows up...or when they are supposed to be in the house chamber, I don't see the big deal.
I would rather them sleep in their offices than live in that house owned by "The Family" where they can be indoctrinated into a radical agenda.
But that's not your say or America's say at the moment. They can live where they want, and do what they want with their income. And since they have clearance to be in those buildings at any time of the day or night, they have the right to stay in their office as long as they please.Quote:
Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto