KIPLINGER FORECASTS

Home > Business & Politics

COMMENT

BUZZ UP

DIGG

CHECK OUT:

EXECUTIVE POLL

Bernard Madoff, convicted of running an $65 billion Ponzi scheme, was sentenced to 150 years in jail. What’s your take on his punishment?

Compare Price Quotes 100+ Services

OUR PREMIUM CONTENT

The Kiplinger Tax Letter
The Kiplinger Agriculture Letter
The Kiplinger California Letter
Kiplinger's Biofuels Market Alert
Kiplinger's Retirement Report

SUBSCRIBER HELP

CURRENT LETTER

By Knight Kiplinger

The Kiplinger Washington Editors

July 2, 2009

By year-end or so, Congress will give the nod to a major rewriting of the nation's financial regulatory system. This week’s Kiplinger Letter explores whether the package will do more harm than good and what lawmakers are likely to include.

ALSO IN THIS ISSUE: The Economy, Business Costs, Taxes, Supreme Court, Energy, Workplace Regulations, Climate Change, Health Care Legislation and Foreign Policy

PREVIOUS ISSUES

CORRECTIONS

TRY THE LETTER:
Subscribe | See Sample

YOUR FEEDBACK

SUBSCRIBERLOG: Got a topic you'd like to discuss? Or a problem or question? Please join our exclusive forum for Letter subscribers only.

ASK US: A Kiplinger Letter editor will promptly answer subscriber questions.

OPEN FORUM: Share your insights and analysis with other visitors.

I just attended a franchise seminar. The speaker represents a few hundred franchises that (he says) are hand picked. He has the prospect (aka victim?) answer some questions about themselves then he makes recomendations - based on your personality, capital situation, etc.. If you pick a franchise, then he does some due dilligence for you. If you both decide it's a good idea, he helps you get started. He says he offers this service free of charge, which means he gets a commission if he's able to sell you a franchise. Has anyone done this? Successfully? Unsuccessfully?

-- fender

Congressional Perks: Not Exactly Hard Times on Capitol Hill

The hours are long and the commute can be tiresome, but being a member of Congress does have its advantages.

By Richard Sammon, Senior Associate Editor, The Kiplinger Letter

June 19, 2007

RELATED FORECASTS

A Trillion here, a Trillion There -- And Soon It's All Spent

HELPFUL LINKS

National Taxpayers Union on congressional benefits

EDITOR'S PICKS

Membership has its rewards. That holds true in Congress, even as new ethics rules are being applied in the wake of last year's lobbying scandals. Free meals and gifts from lobbyists will be curbed, and there'll be spotlight on the controversial practice of earmarking funds for pet projects popular back home. Lobbyists will also be required to disclose more information on who they make political contributions to and who their clients are. But that's where reforms will likely end.

A host of special perks will remain available to lawmakers, and there's little to no talk of trimming them back -- much to the ire of watchdog groups that claim the benefits prevent lawmakers from understanding the trials and struggles of ordinary citizens and small business owners.

A base lawmakers' salary, for instance, is now $165,200 (a little higher for House and Senate leaders). There is a cheap but excellent federal health care plan and life insurance. Plus free outpatient care from military hospitals. There is an inflation-adjusted pension plan that's almost three times as generous as the typical private sector pension, and there's a special thrift-savings accounts, a kind of 401(k) plan, that comes a one-to-one match up to 5% of a member's salary.

What do you think of their pay? High, about right or low? Take our poll.

On top of that, they're given a sizable budget of $2 million to $4 million a year for office administration and staff expenses. There is a furniture expense account, subsidized mass mailings to constituents (known as the franking privilege) and free income tax-return preparation assistance. In addition to all that, members also receive a special tax deduction for maintaining a second residence, and yet more, there are the numerous foreign trips (spouses included) often to exotic places hosted by nonprofit groups. House members, but not senators, can also keep frequent flier miles they rack up on official travel and use them for personal trips later.

What's more, members have exclusive use of the Congressional Research Service to do their legwork. There is free use of broadcast taping studios, free reserved parking at the office and at Washington-area airports and a free member-only gym and pool, expedited passport services and of course the well-appointed and subsidized members' dining rooms.

For weekly updates on topics to improve your business decisionmaking, click here.

READER COMMENTS

Post a comment

Hide comment form

Read all comments (11)

Read recent comments

POSTED BY: madmilker (June 19, 2007 09:32 AM)
And the sad part.... "we the people" let it happen....so don't blame the people in D. C.......blame the people on the street.

POSTED BY: Rich Sammon (June 19, 2007 01:35 PM)
What do you think of the size of the congressional salary, $165,200 a year? Do you feel that is about right, too high or too low for elected representatives? - Rich Sammon, Kiplinger.

POSTED BY: madmilker (June 19, 2007 02:09 PM)
George Washington only served 8 years and than went back to his farm. He told everyone as he was leaving...come and serve your Country than give someone else the opportunity to do the same. Nowadays people think they need to go and die there. Thats not good for any free country. Too many foxes that can get in the hen house.

POSTED BY: steve gould (June 19, 2007 03:37 PM)
Why should we be shocked ? "We the people" are the ones to blame,and its only getting worse. Bush is acting more and more like a dictator, so why do we expect the rest of the machine to lead with dignity and responsibility? VOTE !!!

POSTED BY: Jordan Owens (June 19, 2007 04:09 PM)
I think the pay is a little low for the responsibility they have but is much too high for the quality of work that most of them do. I think the pension should be abolished completely and they can attempt to survive on a 401K just like most of the rest of us. Their match is also a little generous. I think meals and gifts from lobbyists should be abolished completely and they should be able to claim productive meals on their expenses. I think the office administration and staff budget is much too high as well $2-$4MM per year? They need some lean office training. I would assert that 95% or more of the functions they perform in any given day do not provide any benefit to society and many of them actually work to the detriment of most of us.

POSTED BY: Michael K (June 19, 2007 06:47 PM)
I am sorry to say, that I am disgusted with the way our govt is run!! Money rules Washington - not the people. You want ethical government? Simple - every tax payer contributes $20 to campaign funding to be shared between three parties - yes three parties, Dems, Reps, and Independant parties. No other gift or donations from any other source. And further more - if congress gets free med and pension. So do we. No more of this elite class crap. Problem solved.

POSTED BY: Kendall C. (June 19, 2007 06:55 PM)
Excessive. Why don't withhold a percentage of their pay. Ask/establish a list of goals that they need to acomplish. Then at the end of the term give them a percentage of the withheld for things that they accompllished. Oh and still can't pass the budget, then you should be working for FREE!

POSTED BY: Darryl Hofe (June 26, 2007 09:47 AM)
In recent history, the political class has morphed from the brief, sacrificial public servitude envisioned by the founders to career politicians motivated to say, spend or do what is needed to win the next election. Long-term interests are an afterthought, to wit: Social Security, energy dependence, border integrity, education, etc. That they aggrandize themselves on the way to the next election should surprise no one.

POSTED BY: Cd1234567891 (July 02, 2007 01:34 PM)
Adding insult to injury: WITHOUT public debate or direct vote, Congress has again assured itself of an annual automatic pay increase of about $4,500, bringing their salaries to ~170,000/year effective Jan. 2008, for effectively a part time job. (In 2006, the House was in session only 108 days). (IMO) it is fiscal irresponsibility for to increase Congress' pay at a time when the US Govt is spening billions of dollars on war, and carrying a stratospheric budget deficit. The battle may not be over. The Senate still has to approve. Further, legislation has been introduced to override their no action action. Email your House Rep and Senators to let them know: No more pay increases to Congress until the War is OVER.

POSTED BY: Weiwen (July 20, 2007 09:04 PM)
index lawmakers' pay to the increase in the bottom 5%. that way, they have incentive to take care of everyone, particularly those who earn the least.

POSTED BY: Randall (August 12, 2008 08:07 AM)
There are times such as these that spending needs to come to a screeching halt in the government. To do this, Congress and the President need pay and perks cuts. NO MORE FREE NOTHING! The y are the employee and the voting public is the employer. Where in the working sector do you find an employee making more money than the boss. They want health care? They pay for it just like the public! They want to travel? They buy a ticket just like the public! THERE HAS TO BE MORE CONTROL OVER HOW THE TAXPAYER IS GETTING RAPED BY THE ONES THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE WORKING FOR THEM! No more perks. 40 hours a week plus overtime! 14 days vacation a year plus holidays! They don't get a raise unless the taxpayers vote on it. Government needs to start thinking about who they work for!

MORE: Kiplinger Forecasts | Business & Politics

TOOLS: