It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

One Member of Congress = 18 American Households: Lawmakers’ Personal Finances Far From Average

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 12:44 AM
link   
No shock that the U.S, Congress is far from representative of the average American person. Some pretty interestiing facts in this article.


It would take the combined wealth of more than 18 American households to equal the value of a single federal lawmaker’s household, the Center for Responsive Politics’ latest analysis of congressional wealth finds.

The median net worth of a member of Congress was $1,029,505 in 2013 — a 2.5 percent increase from 2012 — compared with an average American household’s median net worth of $56,355. Once again, the majority of members of Congress are millionaires — 271 of the 533 members currently in office, or 50.8 percent.


Sure, Some of these people come in already rich, some self-made, but how many of even these people become richer due to their office? And how many become rich once they get there? Due to insider information? Due to the direct influence they have on laws that effect them and not most of the rest of us? Something's clearly "off" here, whether it's in the disproportionate amount of rich who get elected, who maybe are able to buy their way in ("The median net worth of freshmen lawmakers this year was $995,000."), or whether it's the disproportionate amount who get rich after.


While the median net worth of an American family has declined by nearly one-third between 2007 and 2013, members of Congress have recovered quite well from the recession. The Senate’s median net worth went from $2.3 million to $2.8 million over that period, while for members of the House the numbers went from $708,500 to $843,507.

Not all members of Congress are millionaires. While there are seven whose net worth is in the nine figures, totaling at least $100 million, there are two dozen who are in the minus column.


Yeah, not all are millionaires. But more than half are. And the others? Well give them a while.

And before y'all get going, realize that it isn't a partisan issue. Check out the list of the The Top 20 Wealthiest Members and Top 20 Congressional Stocks.

They're not there to represent the people of the United States. Their salaries to begin with are four times what the average American makes. Another WTH issue.

Not sure how true this comment is, but I will investigate it further when I have some time...

Congress, after continuously using insider trading law exceptions to enrich its members, made insider trading by its members illegal in 2012 (this was known as the STOCK act, bill S.2038)

The mechanism to enforce this was public access to the records of the members of congress.

Then, the 113th congress quietly passed bill S.716.ES into law (how quietly? Unanimously, no debate, no recorded vote, total voting time: 14 seconds), which eliminated public access to the records of the president, vice president, any member of congress, and any candidate for congress.


The United States Congress: 14% approval rating and a 94% re-election trend.

Are we stupid, or what? Yeah. We're stupid.




posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 12:54 AM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity




Congress, after continuously using insider trading law exceptions to enrich its members, made insider trading by its members illegal in 2012 (this was known as the STOCK act, bill S.2038)

The mechanism to enforce this was public access to the records of the members of congress.

Then, the 113th congress quietly passed bill S.716.ES into law (how quietly? Unanimously, no debate, no recorded vote, total voting time: 14 seconds), which eliminated public access to the records of the president, vice president, any member of congress, and any candidate for congress.


what can one say...its there in black and white



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

I can't find the roll call on S.716.ES.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 03:13 PM
link   
So let me get this straight.

Congress is the 1% who mocks the 1%.

Who skips out on their own tax obligations while creating, and raising taxes on the 99%.

Yep we sure do live in a kleptocracy.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 08:01 PM
link   
It's recommended that you provide a link to the quoted texts in your Original Post.

There is no roll-call on S. 716.

The STOCK Act still applies to members of congress, the president and the vice president. What S. 716 did was to remove that requirement of congressional and executive staff. So far as I understand you can see the annual income and net worth of any member of congress.

Finally, since when has congress, as a whole, 'mocked' the 1%?



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

I said it was from a comment I saw. I'm still looking. Thanks for the information.

Here's some additional information, including a 60 Minutes clip.

Obama signs STOCK Act modification

President Obama quietly signed legislation Monday that rolled back a provision of the STOCK Act that required high-ranking federal employees to disclose their financial information online.

The White House announced Monday that the president had signed S. 716, which repealed a requirement of the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act requiring the disclosure, which had previously been delayed several times by Congress.

That provision, added to the bipartisan bill aimed at halting insider trading by members of Congress, would have required roughly 28,000 senior government officials to post their financial information online, and had come under harsh criticism from federal government employee unions.
Both chambers of Congress quickly — and near silently — approved the repeal legislation at the end of last week by unanimous consent, just before heading home to their districts.

The STOCK Act was signed by the president a little over one year ago in a highly visible signing ceremony, where he said the legislation would tackle the "deficit of trust" that exists between Washington and the rest of the nation.


60 Minutes Clip

There was a vote. A fast one. To keep the public from seeing electronic information as near as I can tell.


Amends the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act of 2012 (STOCK Act) with respect to mandatory public, on-line reporting of financial disclosure statements by congressional staff and executive branch officers and employees.

Applies mandatory public, on-line reporting of financial disclosure statements only to Members of Congress, congressional candidates, the President, the Vice President, and executive branch officers at levels I and II of the Executive Schedule who require nomination by the President and confirmation by the Senate.

Extends until January 1, 2014, the deadline for:

the Secretary, the Sergeant at Arms, and the Clerk to develop systems to enable the electronic filing of financial disclosure reports as well as their on-line public availability;
the Director of the Office of Government Ethics to develop such systems for financial disclosure forms filed by covered executive branch officials.
Repeals: (1) the prohibition against requiring a login to search or sort the data contained in the publicly available financial disclosure systems, and (2) the requirement that a login protocol with the name of the user be utilized by a person downloading data contained in the reports.[Source]


S.716 - A bill to modify the requirements under the STOCK Act regarding online access to certain financial disclosure statements and related forms.

04/12/2013 Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.(text: CR H1979)
04/11/2013 Passed/agreed to in Senate: Introduced in the Senate, read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S2583-2584; text as passed Senate: CR S2584; text of measure as introduced: CR S2593)
edit on 2/4/2015 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Congress, or in Canada, the Senate, if I was in charge and I could shape government into how I'd want it.

Members of congress or senators would serve their terms like jury duty, randomly selected, paid little if at all, to serve for a short time, then NEVER again.

It's the entrenchment that hurts us all.

Henry Kissinger, that guy must be immortal, he must be serving someone well to be in congress for that long.



posted on Feb, 7 2015 @ 02:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Toadmund
Henry Kissinger, that guy must be immortal, he must be serving someone well to be in congress for that long.


Henry Kissinger has never been a member of congress.

The problem I see with your idea is that we'd get someone or some people who have no desire to be there and would be willing to pass very, very bad legislation just so they can leave or intentionally do harm to some subsection of the population.



new topics

top topics



 
6

log in

join