Posted on 03/18/2013 5:24:21 AM PDT by IbJensen
The barbershop of the U.S. Senate has run deficits of approximately $350,000 a year for each of the last 15 years. So Senate sergeant at arms Terry Gainer has decided to try out a new model, one that has looked rather unfashionable during the Obama era: privatization.
Gainer has tried to trim Senate Hair Care Services for the past few years. Now the political climate troubling everyone else on Capitol Hill is allowing him to move faster than he anticipated towards privatizing it completely.
“I’ve accelerated my goal to get there through leveraging sequestration,” Gainer explains. “The only real way we’re going to change this thing around without pricing ourselves out of the market is by reducing the number of fulltime employees.”
The sequestration’s required spending cuts provide convenient cover. Gainer is offering early retirement to all eligible employees, hoping to replace them with independent contractors. Four employees have already accepted the offer, and they plan to retire in the next 60 days. Gainer likens these “buyouts” to those that corporations often make. He has no timeline for complete privatization, but is determined to see it through.
If previous efforts to end taxpayer funding of the Senate barbershop are any guide, it will take much longer than one might expect. According to a report from the Office of the Sergeant at Arms, Senator Paul Douglas (D-Ill.) spoke out against the federally funded barbershop back in 1951, suggesting that taxpayers need not pick up the tab for their legislators’ haircuts. Arizona senator Carl Hayden quickly rejected Douglas’s efforts, gaining support by arguing that the barbershop was an important institution passed down from the great statesmen who came before them.
A Senate barbershop that provides government-subsidized cuts, shaves, and shines is a tradition that predates the Civil War. Over the years, its legend has grown. The barbershop was thought to be more private than the cloakrooms: a place that sometimes shaped the course of human events. In 1937, the debate about President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Judiciary Reorganization Bill—the effort to pack the Supreme Court with justices favorable to the New Deal—may have forever shifted after one encounter there. According to the report from the sergeant at arms’s office,
Republican Senator Styles Bridges, an opponent of the bill, visited the barbershop to receive a shave. The barber placed a warm towel over Bridges’ face to soften his whiskers. A few minutes later, Democratic Senator Henry Ashurst, one of the bill’s defenders, bustled into the shop in search of Senator Prentiss Brown, who had remained undecided during the debate. Ashurst mistook the shrouded Bridges for Brown and, hoping to sway him, bent down close to his ear and began to whisper secrets about White House policy related to the bill. Bridges lay completely still, absorbing the information, and Ashurst left the shop deceived about Bridges’ identity. The bill suffered a 70-20 defeat in the Senate.
Rick Santorum’s proposal suffered an even greater defeat when he took on the barbershop in 1997. Senators and barbers alike were quick to object. “If you start to privatize,” intoned Arlen Specter, Santorum’s fellow Republican senator from Pennsylvania, “[y]ou put a lot of people out of a job, and you have a lot of disruptions.” Specter and his colleagues were also concerned about finding a barbershop that would cater to lawmakers’ irregular timetables. “I don’t know when you could get a haircut with our schedule around here. You can slip in and out of the barbershop in 20 minutes. If you have to go downtown, it will take an hour and a half,” Specter complained. Like Douglas’s effort before him, Santorum’s plan failed to survive a Rules Committee vote, but then-sergeant at arms Greg Casey decided to consolidate the Senate barbershop and beauty parlor anyway.
Santorum lamented the hopelessness of his attempt to battle the barbers’ influence among his comrades: “When your barber has you in the chair, and he says, ‘You’re not going to cut my job, are you?’ what are you going to say?”
Gainer has taken away the burden of persuading senators to agree. He points to the House of Representatives’ success in contracting out its barbershop’s services. House Republicans successfully privatized their taxpayer-subsidized barbershop in 1995, when they passed a resolution from then-speaker Newt Gingrich’s privatization task force. The operation had been losing $50,000 annually, according to Roll Call.
Senate Hair Care Services has cost taxpayers about $5.25 million over 15 years. They foot the bill of more than $40,000 for the shoeshine attendant last fiscal year. Six barbers took in more than $40,000 each, including nearly $80,000 for the head barber.
Gainer, who is entering his seventh year as sergeant at arms, accepts the blame, saying “shame on me” for not moving to privatize it sooner. But he adds, “I’ve tried to be more of a humanitarian than some people would like, and not just wallop everyone’s heads off at once.”
As press and politicians continue to play Chicken Little over sequestration, it’s comforting to know that at least someone in the Senate recognizes that the institution could use a trim.
What, these perfumed princes can’t go to a regular barbershop in the d.c. area to have their ear and nose hair trimmed!?
They’re special.
As an important institution I fully expect the Republic to crumble the day it closes it's doors. /S
Just a small illustration of the madness that infects Washington, DC.
What are their paychecks for?
I can at least partially sympathize with the Senators about the convenience of having a barber on site. Heck, I wish we had that here at my office. Have a heckuva time getting to a barber that is working when I’m not.
But that doesn’t translate into a necessity for public funding of such an institution.
Couldn’t a barbershop space be provided, and then rented out on a daily basis to several barbers and their staffs - one organization gets Mondays, another Tuesdays, etc.? I imagine that the ability to advertise that a shop was one of 5 or 3 or whatever official Senate barbers would be valuable.
You know, it’s very easy to do yourself, especially for most older men. And how many young guys are there?
Here is an idea, close it down, along with every other frill service they’ve given themselves.
They can get a haircut out in town, just like everyone else.
I have some clippers and thought about doing it myself.
Senators get taxpayer-funded haircuts?
What are their paychecks for?
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Maybe we need a woman to carry on this fight.
I know that WE wouldn’t stand still for having taxpayer hairdos for Lady Pols and Officials.
Just think,
“Lord knows what kind of politician ‘we’ would attract if not for giving them free haircuts or perms”
‘WE’ need a voice to hammer everytime one of these idiotic perks are uncovered.
My ‘favorite’ line is
“No telling what kind of candidate would show up without getting ............(fill in the blank)......
After all, go back 30-40-50 years and that was the ‘line’ that was used when all these perks were either being added or solidified, effectively keeping them intact forever.
Wonder how much a sitting Pol gets for his ‘hay’ allowance because he has to have a horse in DC as well as at home.
I haven’t really looked into to it BUT would it surprise ANYONE if ‘they’ weren’t still drawing perks that were instituted Day One and never upgraded?
Kind of like Phone Co still ‘charging’ fee from Spanish/American War.....(or they were till ‘exposed’ recently - ‘we’ know that the name was changed if nothing else, they aren’t going to ‘give up’ the 4 or 5 cents etc)
In DC they can get afros.
I wonder if the women get free hair styling, too. You know what a good cut, color, and style cost these days? LOL
How about the way they mince about on their toes referring to each other as ‘my honorable friend, or the honorable senator from Hackensack?
They need to get down and dirty and fight. Since we’ve got some old bags in the mix I think it would be acceptable for an enraged Republicrat to seize a Patty Murray and hit Diane Fineswine with her. Smacking Schmuckie Schumer around would be satisfying as well. As far as the simple Hairy Reed is concerned they should just depants him, shorts and all, then force him to walk around like that.
The fone phactory collects the tax for the feds, they don’t charge it. Also the universal access fee’s for Mr. Gore. These taxes go for the Obama phones. Now there are enough stories about that EVIL phone company but let’s at least be accurate. Fair is too much to hope for. (48 years of service retired - I know where the skeletons are buried)
seems we are paying for senators hair cuts along with the Mooche’s billions in clothes.
Michelle’s clothes binges
http://nymag.com/daily/fashion/2010/10/analyst_places_27_billion_valu.html
yet they can’t find one single thing to cut...how about their salaries for one and platinum health care while our’s is RATIONED and comes out of our pockets.
You forget we sit still while we are paying for MOOCH’s billions in clothing purchases, make up, hair care, and her families. On top of her/their vacations, miss use of AF1, personal parties, a staff for the dog...I have 3, and I take care of them.
I bet we are paying for her momma’s clothing and stuff too. Can’t have the First Hippo’s momma not wearing the same designer clothes as she does, it just would not be fair or equal.
STUPID MARXIST that they are.
Some people shouldn’t wield barber tools, I’m one of them. Some people shouldn’t try to talk on a cell phone while driving a car, I’m one of those too.
I went to a barber once. My wife was in the hospital and I needed a hair cut. I like having my wife cut my hair, I don’t have to pay her plus I can pat her on the butt while she’s doing it if I want to.
She cut my ear once, with a comb, of all things, made it bleed too. I’ve never let her forget it either.
Two words, “Great Clips.”
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.