Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How do so many politicians get rich?
The Virginian ^ | 1/2/2009 | Moneyrunner

Posted on 01/02/2009 5:32:23 AM PST by moneyrunner

Politicians have salaries that are higher than average, but not THAT high.

A Senator’s salary is $169,300 and a member of the House of Representatives earns the same. That’s a good income but not enough to become ultra-wealthy.

So …

I've always wondered how Lyndon Johnson became a millionaire while earning for a lifetime a modest federal salary.

How did Nick Mavroules, who became a Congressman in 1978, avoid detection for so long? He pleaded guilty in 1993 to bribery and racketeering charges.

How come Rep. Charlie Rangel (NY) owns so much property in New York and an expensive villa in the Dominican Republic? -- all of this on a representative's salary.

(Excerpt) Read more at moneyrunner.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: corruption; crime; rangel

1 posted on 01/02/2009 5:32:24 AM PST by moneyrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
"I’m going to keep this Senate option for me a real possibility, you know, and therefore I can drive a hard bargain. You hear what I’m saying? And if I don’t get what I want and I’m not satisfied with it, then I’ll just take the Senate seat myself."
2 posted on 01/02/2009 5:37:44 AM PST by mvpel (Michael Pelletier)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Sweetheart deals, outright corruption/theft, bribery.....you name it.

Any wonder these morons will do anything to be re-elected?


3 posted on 01/02/2009 5:38:13 AM PST by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

“Public Service” /S


4 posted on 01/02/2009 5:39:39 AM PST by steelyourfaith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

I dunno, ask the CFR architect? Campaign Financial-oligarchy Reform has worked so well, hasn’t it?

“The supremacy of finance capital over all other forms of capital means the predominance of the rentier and of the financial oligarchy; it means that a small number of financially “powerful” states stand out among all the rest. The extent to which this process is going on may be judged from the statistics on emissions, i.e., the issue of all kinds of securities.” - Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

Ask the fed, the treasury, the banking committee.


5 posted on 01/02/2009 5:45:38 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
How do so many politicians get rich?

They are part of the ruling class. They consolidate power, and the money-centered oligarchs buy in. The oligarchs trade money and power with each other, and the rest of us work our butts off and fund the whole thing.

Pretty good racket, eh?
6 posted on 01/02/2009 5:48:20 AM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

How many ‘modest salary’ government officials have a high- salary lobbyist spouse or family member????


7 posted on 01/02/2009 5:49:22 AM PST by Le Chien Rouge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

I read an interesting comment the other day, which suggested we make all congressmen and senators wear NASCAR like jump suits. All the companies that have “invested” would have their logos on the jump suits and we’d know who the congresscritter was beholden to.


8 posted on 01/02/2009 5:51:22 AM PST by 2nd Bn, 11th Mar (The "P" in Democrat stands for patriotism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

They make their money the old-fashioned way, they embezzle it.


9 posted on 01/02/2009 5:52:51 AM PST by dfwgator (I hate Illinois Marxists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Just ask Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. Personnaly I think Bribery is involved.I’m really angry that those two haven’t had their perp-walk yet.


10 posted on 01/02/2009 5:59:33 AM PST by puppypusher (The world is going to the dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
That's easy they (collectively) are a bunch of crooks and they get away with it by professional courtesy with other crooks
If not then explain as the country is collapsing financially, who else other than crooks would vote themselves a $4700 a year raise, and WTF do we do about it, not a damn thing. Why does America stand for such criminality?

Perhaps the great and powerful "O" is just what America deserves to teach us a lesion in humility. Kinda like in the old testament.

11 posted on 01/02/2009 6:05:37 AM PST by SERE_DOC (Today's politicians, living proof why we have and need a second amendment to the constitution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

The solution is to eliminate career politicians. The total amount of time served as an elected official should be no more than 8 years local/state; 8 years federal. No matter what! Yes, that means Presidents would not have long track records etc., but so what. There are plenty of other ways to develop a track record and show qualifications without being a career politician. Tell me how three years of law school and a subsequent career in pretty much nothing but politics qualifies someone to be an arbiter of how the rest of us live. In my view anyone who voices the desire to spend their life in politics should be excluded from public office.


12 posted on 01/02/2009 6:11:58 AM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
I've always wondered how Lyndon Johnson became a millionaire while earning for a lifetime a modest federal salary.

LBJ got ALL of his money from his wife. Lady Bird was independently wealthy.

The stuff about Rangel is what interests me the most.

13 posted on 01/02/2009 6:12:22 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

As I posted on another thread; one has to remember what a congress critter really is. Most are lawyers that could NOT make it in the vile and corrupt world of lawyerism...so they resorted to politics. They were born liars and thieves and once OPM (other peoples’ money) becomes available to them, they’re like foxes in the henhouse. They got rich the old fashion way; they stoled it, swindled it, stepped on the little guy to get it, etc. When you mix the mental disease of liberalism with this kind of ilk, you get what you see now residing in DC. That whole stinkin’ rats nest needs to be voted out of there and all new everyday-type people (non-lawyer types) selected from Harry Reid’s “unwashed masses” need to be voted in. It surely couldn’t be any worse than this bunch of used a$$-wipes. Term-limits need to be instilled to keep the corrupt trash outta there. As you can tell, I’m a real big fan of this corrupt bunch of lying thieves.


14 posted on 01/02/2009 6:12:25 AM PST by lgjhn23
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
$169,300. is not a bad salary when most all of your other expenses are also paid by the plebs.

Who pays those salaries?
Who pays for their healthcare benefits?
Who pays for their automobile?
Who pays for the insurance on said auto?
Who pays for the gas to run said auto?
Who pays for all their traveling expenses -- here and abroad?
Who pays for their housing?
Who pays their homeowners insurance?
Who pays for their over the top, fit for a king, lifetime retirement and healthcare benefits after only 2 years on the job?
Who pays their phone bills and/or other utilities?
Who pays for their re-election campaigns?

$169,300 is not a bad salary for an average workweek of what...2-3 days.

What other job allows you to take 2 years off your job, with full pay and benefits, travel the country and the world while looking for another job?

What employer allows YOU to decide when you get a raise and how much that raise will be, regardless of job performance?

The bribes, payoffs and all the other little perks are just a little gravy on the side.

And the American people yawn, roll over every 2 and 4 years and go back to sleep.

15 posted on 01/02/2009 6:13:28 AM PST by Just A Nobody (I *LOVE* my Attitude Problem - NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
LBJ got ALL of his money from his wife. Lady Bird was independently wealthy.

I remember hearing about Lady Bird traveling through Texas, forcing radio stations to sell themselves to her. "Sell or the FCC will shut you down." She knew the game.

16 posted on 01/02/2009 6:22:58 AM PST by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

There is probably some truth to that, but Lady Bird inhereted a ton of money from her father.


17 posted on 01/02/2009 6:24:43 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: puppypusher

“Just ask Chris Dodd and Barney Frank...”

As a Ct resident, I’ve watched Dodd for years mooching off the private sector. Dodd never pays for anything. Dodd has never worked an honest day’s labor his entire worthless life.


18 posted on 01/02/2009 6:26:23 AM PST by y6162
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: lgjhn23
Yours is actually a rather good description. People with few useful skills other than the low arts of popularity are naturally attracted to an opportunity to use their influence to control and dispense large sums of other people's money. In that capacity, the fewer principles they have, the better, as conscience and duty are positive impediments to a life of crime.

However, I see term limits as the wrong solution - setting artificial time constraints on a Congressperson's tenure does not address the true source of the problem: the expansion and concentration of political power in the Federal government; in this instance, in the Legislative branch. Remove Congress' power and authority to act on matters beyond the scope of their Constitutional duties, and many of their excesses would no longer be possible.

If Congress will not voluntarily limit their extra-Constitutional meddling, than the Supreme Court must be prompted to act. Perhaps they might also examine the jurisdictional excesses of the Federal Judiciary and the Executive branch while they are at it.

In any case, we are never going to get back to what America was intended to be until the people decide that the costs of a government run amok are too great and painful to bear in relation to whatever pilfered trinkets are held forth by the petty crooks and shysters who now control Congress.

19 posted on 01/02/2009 6:35:47 AM PST by andy58-in-nh (Ronald Reagan had a vision of America. Barack Obama has a vision of Barack Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Bottom line: they don’t get term limited out before they’ve mastered gaming the system.

TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!


20 posted on 01/02/2009 6:43:22 AM PST by JimRed ("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
The solution is to eliminate career politicians...

Term limits sound good in theory, but what they'd do would be to remove from office the few decent politicians that get elected too soon, and would force the vast majority (crooks) to make their fortunes in a shorter period of time.

You addressed another problem with term limits - vetting. We're about to find out how bad a president can be without going thru a decades-long vetting process, and I think it's going to turn out bad.

As long as politicians have something to sell, there's always going to be corruption. The real solution is very limited gov't conducted at as low a level as possible, and as transparently as possible.

21 posted on 01/02/2009 6:43:41 AM PST by LIBERTARIAN JOE (Don't blame me - I voted for Ron Paul!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
She was also involved with Halliburton and it's subsidiary, Brown and Root. They made a lot of money in Vietnam.
22 posted on 01/02/2009 6:47:52 AM PST by seemoAR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
There are plenty of other ways to develop a track record and show qualifications without being a career politician.

Case in point: Dr. Walter E. Williams. Smart, perceptive, practical, accomplished. Conservative but not an idealogue. I'd vote for the man in a minute!

Also, our sweetheart Sarah. Came up through the system without being corrupted by it, and appears willing to serve then return to being mom, grandmom and neighbor. We'll have to ask her about that!

23 posted on 01/02/2009 6:52:28 AM PST by JimRed ("Hey, hey, Teddy K., how many girls did you drown today?" TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: andy58-in-nh
I am a fan of term limits, but have to agree more important is to cut the federal government at the knees through any means reasonable. Get the money out of the hands of the criminals.

And they really are criminals, in the sense they take peoples' money involuntarily and use it for their own purposes. Bob Dole actually said this in the debates against Clinton, but you can see how far it got him.

The federal government could be cut 40%, revenues, programs, spending, and we'd all be better off. Competition is what keeps the "economy" efficient, not the extortion of government.

24 posted on 01/02/2009 6:56:05 AM PST by jnsun (The LEFT: The need to manipulate others because of nothing productive to offer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

The way they get rich is your typical way of money laundering bribes into “clean” money. An example would be Bill Clinton getting ridiculously paid for his “speaches”, while his wife is a Senator. Does anyone think that it’s usual for speach makers, no matter how experienced or interesting, to be paid a quarter million dollars per speach?

Another way is to somehow bleed excess campaign contributions into your own pocket.


25 posted on 01/02/2009 6:56:41 AM PST by winner3000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: puppypusher
Well there's bribery and -- apparently -- there is legal bribery. There there's the huge grey-area in between.

As long as the government is into punishing & rewarding segments of society via the tax code, congressmen are going to get rich doing favors for donors. This is mainly done for carefully constructed tax loopholes, but also it is done through the earmark spending process.

26 posted on 01/02/2009 6:58:18 AM PST by Tallguy ("The sh- t's chess, it ain't checkers!" -- Alonzo (Denzel Washington) in "Training Day")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: JimRed
Bottom line: they don’t get term limited out before they’ve mastered gaming the system.

TERM LIMITS, NOW AND FOREVER!

Term limits would only increase the power of the unelected staffers, lobbyists, and bureaucrats in Washington.

Representatives and Senators already have term limits. The limit is based on how often their electorate wishes them to serve. Every two or six years the people in their district have the power to return them to Washington or return them to private life.

27 posted on 01/02/2009 6:59:20 AM PST by Anitius Severinus Boethius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mvpel
One of the favorite means of bribery is just what Blago and Emmanuel were apparently discussing; one favor now to be repaid at a later date. That's just “friendly cooperation,” unless you're caught on tape agreeing to do it.

There are also things like stock market and real estate deals paying more than they should.

28 posted on 01/02/2009 7:01:52 AM PST by Missouri gal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LIBERTARIAN JOE

I think the unintended consequence of congressional term limits would be to shift power from the actual congressman toward their chiefs-of-staff. These CoS types get recycled more than an aluminum beer can as it is. Some will go from working for one side of the aisle to the other, too.


29 posted on 01/02/2009 7:03:58 AM PST by Tallguy ("The sh- t's chess, it ain't checkers!" -- Alonzo (Denzel Washington) in "Training Day")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: mvpel

Diane Feinstein legislates to protect her financial interests in China which includes steel mills and hotels.


30 posted on 01/02/2009 7:11:47 AM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Le Chien Rouge
How many ‘modest salary’ government officials have a high- salary lobbyist spouse or family member????

How about if we pass a constitutional amendment to put a conflict of interest law in place.

If any congress critter takes a contribution in excess of $500.00 he is not allowed to introduce or vote on any bill/measure that would affect the donor.

31 posted on 01/02/2009 7:15:48 AM PST by dearolddad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
“When Buying and Selling are Controlled by Legislation, the First Things to be Bought and Sold are Legislators.”

PJ O'Rourke
32 posted on 01/02/2009 7:17:22 AM PST by Kozak (USA 7/4/1776 to 1/20/2009 Requiescat In Pace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy
I think the unintended consequence of congressional term limits would be to shift power from the actual congressman toward their chiefs-of-staff...

Another reason that term limits aren't the answer to gov't corruption - good point.

33 posted on 01/02/2009 7:17:28 AM PST by LIBERTARIAN JOE (Don't blame me - I voted for Ron Paul!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

I’m sure it’s all just coinky-dinks. /s


34 posted on 01/02/2009 7:20:39 AM PST by Let's Roll (Stop paying ACORN to destroy America! Cut off their government funding!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

If any of these Congress turds had to work in a SOX (Sarbanes-Oxley) environment, they’d repeal the law in no time because it would expose to the light of day their “legit” criminal activities.


35 posted on 01/02/2009 7:32:47 AM PST by Trajan88 (www.bullittclub.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
Term limits, conflicts of interest, bribery, blah blah blah.

No action on any of these points will address the actual problem: Unlimited Federal ability to steal (tax income).

Nothing will change until a serious tax revolt takes place. These "public servants" have been stealing from their employers for decades, and now they are burning down our house. Without our money fueling this insanity, the entire corrupt wreck grinds to a screeching halt.

They do not respect us. They do not respect the law. They do not respect their own oaths. And with the new "President", Al Franken, et al, they don't even respect votes to determine a valid winner.

We must starve the Beast, because it is rabid, ravenous, and reproducing .

Tax revolt: It's the American way

36 posted on 01/02/2009 7:43:44 AM PST by TonyStark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline

In Tennessee it was and continues to be quite common for legislators to accept “consulting fees” in the tens of thousands of dollars.


37 posted on 01/02/2009 7:44:35 AM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Obama is living proof that stupid people should not be allowed to vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jnsun
It gives me no pleasure to say it, but the American people (as presently constituted) are not going to voluntarily vote to limit the scope and power of their government. As long as a majority can be convinced that others are paying more than they are for the "benefits" distributed by Congress, the game will continue.

The concentration of taxpayers into a progressively smaller group and the growth in the number of tax beneficiaries is an intentional policy designed to make government programs permanent and irreversible.

At the heart of the Democrats' scheme is the promotion of Dependency as a positive value by first decoupling effort from result, and then responsibility from duty. The Progressive "meta-story" in pursuit of these objectives goes like this:

Americans cannot succeed any more on their own; there are too many powerful forces in their way (primarily, Big Corporate interests). No matter how hard you work, you can never get ahead, because you are working harder for less money due to the greed of those same Powerful Interests. Therefore, you need our (the Democrats) help. We'll tax and regulate those greedy powers and give you back what you really deserve. After all, you cannot be expected to be responsible, even if you feel it is your duty, because the system is set up to make you only think you're getting ahead, when in truth you are falling farther behind.

But don't worry: it's not your fault, and we will make it all better by looking out for the interest of people like You: working families struggling to make ends meet. Your duty, then, is allow us (the government) to help those who cannot help themselves by giving up control of some money and decisions (like health care) for the greater good so that everyone can have a more equal share of the American Dream.

And most people today, after hearing this line of argument spun successfully by the schools and by a compliant news media, buy it wholeheartedly. For that reason, I doubt that movement toward reform will come from the electorate absent organized voices proposing a clear and convincing case for American originalism, independence, and freedom. That used to be the Republican Party; at the moment it is not.

38 posted on 01/02/2009 8:01:47 AM PST by andy58-in-nh (Ronald Reagan had a vision of America. Barack Obama has a vision of Barack Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

“I’ve always wondered how Lyndon Johnson became a millionaire while earning for a lifetime a modest federal salary.”

Money from Brown and Root and a lot of others and getting plum federal radio licenses put in his wife’s name.


39 posted on 01/02/2009 8:36:52 AM PST by DemonDeac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

A very high number start with a lot of money too.


40 posted on 01/02/2009 8:37:39 AM PST by DemonDeac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson