Members of Congress lease cars - who cares?
Did you see the write up in the D&C today about some of our local Congressional delegation using leased cars and spending taxpayer money? Slaughter, Reynolds and Walsh. In fact the ENTIRE house (well beyond our local folks) is spending 77K per month or 900K per year.
Um - who cares. I mean, really, who cares?
Yes, taxpayers pay for their salaries, franking privileges, staff, pens and pencils and other resources needed for them to work in Congress. In fact we pay for the elections to get them to Congress -
My question is this.
Are they breaking the law or otherwise hiding something?
Like say, um, some financial guy using state resources to drive his wife around and covering it up? Or say a particular ex-mayor using city resources to guard and chauffeur his mistress and burying the cost in obscure city budgets?
Oh, Randy Kuhl? He probably gets mileage, as well he should, for the driving he does to go to all his town meetings. Something he does well (the having the public contact not the answering their questions part) and frankly I applaud Congressman Kuhl for having these meetings.
Actually - Maybe a better angle would be all the Town Hall meetings Reynolds, Walsh and Slaughter have to routinely met their constituents.
i don’t care about leases. i think this highlights insanely gerrymandered districts. if members had normal shaped districts, they could get by with some rusted out econo box like the rest of us.
Very astute point, dennis. The ridiculous shape and scope of these districts is not the fault of taxpayers, but the fault of our elected leaders who have created and enabled this system.
Wow, I most certainly do.
Stlo, you’re certainly entitled to decide that it’s worth our tax dollars for them to have cars. I hope that’s what you mean. However, you seem to imply that because it’s a small amount — compared to the size of the federal budget, of course — that it’s not worth discussing.
Well, it’s not a small amount. These folks make $140k. A large majority are already “wealthy” by common standards. I’d prefer they not soak the taxpayers for the cost of a car.
Also, I find it telling to learn which politicians decide to take extra perks. It’s not a complete revelation of character, but it’s a helpful indicator of how they feel regarding our money.
Further, the D&C could be doing what the Washington Post is doing — that is, devoting news space to how candidates dress. In this case, the D&C is enlightening the public about perks for our elected leaders. The public can decide if those perks are appropriate, but I can’t believe anyone would get upset that the D&C is running the story. It’s wholly legitimate.
Don’t understand the “already wealthy” reply. All congressmen should be treated equally no matter how wealthy they already are.
Jeremy -
it is worth our tax dollars to allow them to function. I’ll leave it up to them if a leased vs owned car is the way to go.
I just don’t’ see the front page worthiness of the story here. It was on the Front page like someone had discovered some wrong doing.
I mean a quick look at some of the the inside headlines
4A- Study: Less costly health care possible
4A - Senate puts Surveillance bill on hold
OK - these were pick-ups from wires or other newspapers. Let’s compare the front page coverage of this non-story and the story that also appeared on 1A
Oversight spotty for actions of local development corporations.
the story on LDCs was written by D&C staff writer Jill Terreri and frankly the contents of that story impact WNY more than the contents of the car lease story.
The D&C missed the boat (or car) as the case may be.
Stlo,
Good point on story priority and placement. But we’ll agree to disagree that this is a “non-story.”
And with regards to health care, the media in general seems to find it too borrrrring to actually study and devote space to. Sad.
This is a non front page story. Sure - reportable but not with the blaring headlines or implications that accompanied it.
The amount of money is just too small. It’s just not enough of a perk to make a difference to me.
I’ll tell you my opinion: all these guys should be paid *more*, given cars to lease and so on…but should be expressly forbidden from taking anything — a trip, a meal , a gift — from lobbyists or think tanks.
It’s an important job. If you think it through, each member of the Congress controls. in effect about 1/540th of a trillion and a half trillion dollar budget. That’s about 4 billion per member.
Are there are any CEOs of 4 billion dollar companies who earn under 140K?
I don’t think we should nickle and dime our Congressmen. At the same time, we should make damn sure they’re not on the take. In that sense, we’re lucky: Walsh, Kuhl, and Slaughter are squeaky clean from that perspective.
That said, I have no problem with the D&C running the piece.
I too have no problem of the D&C running this piece but context and placement are important here. This non-story deserves as much real estate as an article about LDCs and lack of oversight? I think not.
Look at the Print Edition to see what I mean.
I agree now that I see the print edition.
The bigger question would be which car dealership is awarded the lease? Are they local dealerships, federal contracts, or do the Congresscritters decide on their own which dealership they use.
My second question would be what type of car? Don’t you think it’s reasonable to request that our government officials drive vehicles that show our commitment to the environment? The lease of a hybrid or electric vehicle should be mandatory.
i bet billy fucillo is in on this. i just know it.
That Dennis would be HUGE Rochester, HUUUUUUGE!
Happy Holidays Dennis - thanks for all the good you do!
I remember a few years back seeing Louise in Monroe County leaving the airport with a sheriff’s escort…I’m thinking that costs money and that’s excessive. Plus she had a driver.
So the leased car thing is an issue with me. Louise represents regular, working people. I’m not sure she needs or deserves an official police escort or a car paid for by me.
Louise represents “regular working people”. So what does that mean? Regular working people don’t have cars?
Look - I don’t know the circumstance of the the police escort a few years ago but that doesn’t bother me as well. Getting back to car leases.
She has a budget allocation to do her job and she is choosing to spend a portion of it on this leased car. Is it the most efficient thing to do? I don’t know. I’m not a member of Congress - therefore bound by their particular needs and concerns.
In the grands scheme of things - this lease thing doesn’t matter. There is enough to be pissed at with regards to Congress.
Stripping out Tax Breaks to oil companies and not enabling renewable energy alternatives with that revenue.
Continued support of contractors in Iraq at the expense of our troops (how much money actually goes to the troops and how much of all these supplemental budgets go to Blackwater and KBR?
Health Care,
Civil rights
This lease story is a distraction for the main issues of the day.
the driver louise had was probably a staffer. it is quite common for staff members to attend events with their bosses and then they usually drive so their boss can make phone calls, get info on the next event, etc. and escorts cost extra money if they can not be covered as part of a ‘regular shift’. so louise getting a sheriff probably not extra. george w coming to town, that is extra.