Sunday, November 15, 2009

Want to know why Congress and the Senate are ignoring us?

It looks like Congress and the Senate don't listen to us, the people, because an awful lot of our Representatives and Senators literally can't understand us. They come from backgrounds so wealthy and privileged that the way the rest of us live is beyond their ken. Sphere reports:

Apparently, times aren't so tough all over.

According to a new study compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, 237 members of the U.S. Congress, or 44 percent, are millionaires.

"What's easy to see is that the economic reality of our elected officials is not reflective of the general population," said Dave Levinthal, who helped compile the study's findings.

Nationwide, only 1 percent of U.S. citizens qualify as millionaires.

Among the wealthiest members of Congress are Darrell Issa, R-Calif., whose net worth is estimated at $251 million, and Jane Harman, D-Calif., who boasts a net worth of around $244.7 million.

A slight majority of those elected to Congress are not millionaires. And some of the least well-off members include Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., and Jeff Fortenberry, R-Neb., both of whose net worth is less than zero, according to the RCP database.

By compiling financial disclosure statements and public tax records, the Center for Responsive Politics was also able to examine the investment holdings of elected officials.

In 2008, the same year that the federal government bailed out several U.S. banks, the second most commonly held stock among members of Congress was Bank of America, the data showed. Other popular bank stocks included Wells Fargo, Citi Group and Goldman Sachs, all of which received congressionally approved funds.

And as Congress continues to work on the issue of health care reform, Levinthal noted that industry-related stocks were also commonly held by many on Capitol Hill.

"Pfizer was the sixth most commonly held stock in 2008, for instance," Levinthal said. "Oftentimes, members of Congress are heavily invested in companies who will be affected by decisions the federal government makes."

There's more at the link. The Center for Responsive Politics' Web site provides more detailed information.

Of course, I have no objection whatsoever to a member of Congress or a Senator earning a lot of money through his or her hard work. Rep. Darrell Issa, mentioned in the Sphere article as the wealthiest member of the House of Representatives, amassed his fortune by hard work and innovative design in the electronics field, and I don't begrudge him a penny of it. However, many of his peers inherited family money, or found jobs through political patronage to pay them huge salaries while doing little or nothing to justify them (something like President Obama's wife and her $300,000-plus 'patronage' job with the University of Chicago Hospitals, which was cut as soon as she no longer needed it).

Hmm. Perhaps we should consider a law that no-one may stand for Congress whose net worth is greater than a certain figure? It might ensure that we get Representatives who at least understand what it is to have to earn a living!



Unknown said...

Found a previous comment I left somewhere else...

One of the most annoying aspects of the current system I found is that the critters don’t talk to the voters… a real town meeting type of deal. You are not in congress to push your own agenda, you are there to push ours… if you personally don’t like what we want, tough. You are supposed to represent US and OUR wants and needs, not yours.

Basic requirement : talk to the people who put you in office at least once a month. (and real people, not just a chosen few)

Roy said...

"It looks like Congress and the Senate don't listen to us, the people..."

But Peter, Congress and the Senate *ARE* listening. They are doing the bidding of the people they represent.

Tip O’Neal said it, but it is true. “All politics are local.”

Congresspeople don’t give a damn what the nation as a whole might think. Indeed, there is no “nation as a whole” that thinks. All thinking and acting is done by individuals. And politically, all these individuals are divided up into local house districts and the 50 states. Nancy Pelosi could not care less about what you and I think. She only cares about what the people in her congressional district - San Fransisco - think. And I guarantee you the people from that area overwhelmingly agree with her.

I used Nancy Pelosi as one example, but I could also use people like Robert Byrd and Ted Kennedy. Both of them have (had) long 40+ year careers in the Senate. I didn’t keep voting them in and neither did you. No, the people of West Virginia and Massachusetts did. Why? Because Byrd and Kennedy kept voting *exactly* the way the majority of the people in those two states wanted them to.

Lather, rinse, repeat - throughout the land, especially in urban areas where over half of our population lives.

People go on and on about politicians ad nauseum. But the fact is, our politicians are not the problem. They are only a symptom of the problem.

The real problem is that in the US today, too many people have traded free-dom for free-stuff.

My biggest fear is that a tipping point has already been reached, and it’s only going to get worse.