Tweet
I often marvel at how completely the debate in Washington seems so totally disconnected from the polling data and the concerns of regular Americans in these tough times, but it is important to keep in mind members of Congress aren’t like regular Americans. For the most part they are incredibly wealthy. From Opensecrets.org:
Like their veteran counterparts, U.S. House and U.S. Senate freshmen are together a notably wealthy bunch, enjoying exponentially greater wealth than most of the Americans they represent, according to a Center for Responsive Politics analysis of federal personal financial disclosure reports.
Sixty percent of Senate freshman and more than 40 percent of House freshmen are millionaires, the Center’s study finds. Roughly 1 percent of Americans at large claim the same lofty financial status.
“Even though millions of Americans continue to struggle financially, most of the nation’s newest congressional representatives are a world away from such constituents’ financial realities,” said Sheila Krumholz, the Center’s executive director.
This is one of the many problems with our country having almost no public financing of elections and extremely expensive congressional races. To run for Senate, you need to either be able to directly write your campaign a multi-million dollar check, which inherently requires you to be fabulously wealthy, or you need to spend a lot of time begging very rich people for money, which, by the way, is made much easier if you are already a fairly rich person with lots of rich friends.
As long as being able to spend lots of private money is almost a prerequisite for winning an election, the wealthy people with lots of private money to spend on elections are going to make up a vastly disproportionate number of winners and people with influence in the process.
Which is basically why the carried interest loophole still exists, allowing billionaire hedgefund managers to pay a lower tax rate than teachers.
43 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
OK, so we all know the rich rule ( Plutocracy) is here. So what are we all going to do about it? We can march around in the streets and have them laugh at us from their country club bar stools. You see were just entertainment for those folks, take my word for it. They own the country and they run it as they like and the rest of us will be kept at bay @ gun pt. if necessary.
Great Post Jon Walker
Govt. By the Rich For the Rich
I don’t think all rich people are evil,
I have a hard time believing they really understand the plight of the poor.
In America today, the wealthiest 20% own a whopping 93% of all the “financial assets” in the United States
Michale Moore said last night on the Rachel Show 400 Americans Families have more wealth than the bottom 150,000,000.00 Americans
Me thinks when you roll the curtain back on the USA, you will find that we are Egypt.
This was brought to my attention in 1984 at a high school reunion when I was chatting with one of my friends from elementary school whose father had been our Democratic Congressmen in the early 50s (for about 6 months before he died of a heart attack. My friend was under the patronage of Warren Magnussen or Scoop Jackson, I forget which, and was being groomed for office. Served as a page in the Senate. We roomed together in DC the fall Kennedy was assassinated. His mother was longtime president of the Kitsap County Democratic party. He ran for office and lost the Congressional election in 1972 or 1974 by a few hundred votes. In 1977 he was appointed Federal D.A. for western Washington by Carter, and ran a successful Abscam prosecution that put the attorney Governor behind bars. When Magnussen (or maybe it was Jackson, I forget) died in 1978 he was to be appointed Senator, but an election intervened and we got a Republican governor who appointed Slade Gorton, I think.
Anyway, there was another election coming up, so I asked if he would run, because I like to have friends in high places. He said at the time that he couldn’t get off the ground without a half million of his own money. I asked what about the Party and the Unions? He said, they can’t do shit anymore. You have to buy your way in.
That was 1984.
Speaking of taxes on teachers, under the Walker budget, the new requirement that they make contributions to health insurance and pensions out of take home pay is equivalent to an average additional 8% tax on their take-home pay/income.
So the Walker/Tea-GOP solution to state budget crisis is to impose an 8% added tax on state employee incomes.
“Shared sacrifice” would then mean an 8% surtax on the incomes of everyone, including the millionaires in Congress and the hedge fund guys who last year had billion dollar pay days. But I don’t hear anyone proposing that.
When the House health reform bill proposed a much smaller surtax on millionaires to pay for the exchange subsidies and expanded Medicaid, the White House opposed it. When Schumer proposed to exclude millionaires from the Bush tax cut extensions, Obama opposed that too and the Democratic Congress went along.
So the Washington D.C. consensus, from Tea-GOP to the Democratic Party to the White House is that the way to cut deficits is to raise taxes on working middle class folks, as long as they’re government employees, but give tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires, even if their wealth is derived entirely from government contracts, tax and other subsidies.
Don’t completely disagree with seaglass @1, but OTOH, I think it’s worthwhile to *point this salient fact out* periodically. sadly I doubt the majority of citizens really “get” how wealthy the pols at the federal level are, nor do they connect the dots about how that has an impact on how these millionaires “legislate.” So the post is worthwhile from that standpoint.
Plus it *highlights* how so-called “Democratic” pols no longer are representative of anybody but the uber-wealthy elites. It was Chuck Schumer (D-NY) was so willing to oblige hedgefunders with only having to pay 15% tax rate on the (literally) million$$$$ they make every year.
And now we get to watch serfs pit against serfs in such places as WI, where conservative voters think it’s simply “outrageous” that unionized workers are making a living wage. Get. a. clue.
What do we “do” about this situation in Dee Cee? Well, we can try primarying for politicians who may more fairly represent their constituents (yeah: not sure how effective that will be, but worth a shot). As voters, we can push for campaign finance reform. And we can push to overthrow or modify the SCOTUS Citizens United decision.
I’m not a cock-eyed optimist, but those are some suggestions worth pursuit. Other suggestions welcomed. So what if these wealthy @ssholes laugh at us? In the immortal words of Bob Marley: Get Up, Stand Up, Stand Up for your rights… Don’t give up the fight! I’ll stick with Marley, thanks.
The Big Club. The only thing that’s going to throttle this shit back is a united front. Nothing scares the kleptocrats more than that.
Deserves a repeat, esp bc conservatives simply don’t get that so very very very many of the wealthy elite in this nation have gotten to where they are now via: tax loopholes, tax incentives, tax cuts & government contracts, which have pretty much inured *solely* to the benefit of the upper 2%, but not much to the rest of the 98% of the population.
Yeah: perhaps the uppper 2% “worked hard,” but they got a lot of cuts, breaks and insider deals that the rest of us did not… and speaking for myself, I’ve worked my butt off all of my life (and usually have held down two jobs). I’d sure like a few of those incentives, too, but I’m not *dreaming* that somehow by forcing Unionized gov’t workers to take a “hit” on their salaries & benefits – that that will magically inure to my benefit.
The ONLY thing that will inure more to my benefit is IF the wealthy elites start paying more of their fair share via higher income tax brackets at state & federal levels, via increasing the cap on Soc Sec, via closing some tax loopholes, via Hedgefund earnings being taxed as income not capital gains, via cutting CEO outrageous salaries & pensions, via cutting bonuses to Wall ST & the banks…. for starters.
This financial status of our Congressis old news, but it always bears repeating.
No wonder these folks are so cozy with legislation favoring those with wealth, and no wonder that the new Repubs in Congress have no shame in creating a budget that will increase unemployment – with the ostensible goal of hurting Obama;s reelection chances despite the pain it could cause to the middle class.
Hope you’re right about “scaring” the Kleptocrats; I’m not so sure. But agree completely with the united front. It’s why the fascist media & other organizations are so hell-bent on pit conservative proles against the rest of us proles. Of that you can rest assured.
Just saw that union/Dem love fest is a one way street of what have you done for me lately – at least on union side for some unions.
The Teamsters, painters, boilermakers, electrical workers, sheet metal workers, bricklayers, iron workers and plumbers http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0311/51030.html#ixzz1GDXfL818 are paying for a party night in DC for GOPers that voted to keep “prevailing wage” in gov contracts.
By cutting the police and their 90% of final pay for a pension that begins at age 50 out of the Wisconsin bill because the police union supported the GOPer Walker, it seems The GOP has broken the “united front” a bit.
Those GOP millionaires are indeed clever.
Agree. The wingnut types are being financially raped just as badly as everyone else. The difference is that they simply don’t understand it. As I see it, one of our biggest challenges is to help them to understand it, difficult as that task may be. It’s an incremental process, and won’t happen overnight. However, if we’re to change the course, it must ultimately happen because (as I said) nothing scares the kleptocrats more than a united front.
Wait, so you’re saying that rich people use their advantages of wealth to run for and win elections, then they help write the rules to further favor rich people, and then they use their now greater advantages of wealth to run for and win elections, then… Rinse. Repeat.
I took quite a drubbing around here for repeatedly pointing that out some time ago, and then for further questioning the value of attempting to compete with that cycle by trying to outspend the wealthy at their own game.
Are we finally on the same page?
Precisely. It’s very easy to control the entire population if there are two, separate camps. The central unifying ingredient is to make the wingnuts understand that the financial coup d’état staged by Wall Street is the cause of their ills, even as it is the cause of everyone else’s, too. There is no difference. I know a few people of the wingnut persuasion, and I’ve started recommending that they put “Inside Job” in their Netflix queue. No need to tell them anything other than that it’s a good movie. If they watch the picture, it will turn on a few lights, I’m hoping.
I agree,
I know Gov. Walker over reached here, some of the people Walker is throwing under the Bus, thought they were Republicans, they just got a wake up call.
They’re going to write it off as propaganda, FYI.
Isn’t this kind of like what happened in France before 1789? All these rich people in charge, and all us poor people unable to earn a living wage?
Isn’t lawfully earned wealth an indicator of smarts, ambition and survival instincts? Of course, there are some like the Clintons, Kerry and Gores who made their money through “speaking” fees, marrying increasingly richer spouses and making movies or others like Rubin ans Summers who made their money througn bonuses and “investments”
Great link, thanks-
No.
In politics it’s usually an indication of either
a) who you’re married to
b) who your parents are/were
c) who you’ve stolen from
Probably, but I will still give it a shot. If I hit one out of ten, that’s one more than I had before.
Curious about your last sentence about hedge fund managers and teachers. What is the tax rate teachers pay on carried interest? Didn’t realize it was different than what hedge fund managers or anyone else for that matter.
Jane’s upstairs.
“Isn’t lawfully earned wealth an indicator of smarts, ambition and survival instincts?”
No – I worked for a legacy chief investment officer that pulled down many millions each year – and his only contribution was to be able to call other legacy types and go to dinner.
Trump and his brother each got $20 million via grandpa at age 21 – the brother blew through it, the Donald got massively leveraged – and talked the banks out of ruining him when it all went south , because his legacy background could get better tenants via other legacy types, something the trailer trash, albeit very smart and hard working, folks working for the bank could not do – and the legacy CEO’s of the Banks agreed . So is this a survival skill – something we should admire?
We actually hired a very rich fellow as a senior VP with no background in the job because he could talk to the rich and that was where the future for getting deposits for financial institutions was going.
Making several million and still keeping your ethics is obviously possible because many do it, but I have seen few examples at a 100 million.
True.
There’s only 1 political party in the U.S. and it’s the party of class. The rich do not represent working and middle class Americans.
Except for extremely rare examples, it hasn’t mattered a hoot whether our Senators were millionaires when elected or not! Those who are act to protect & make more for themselves & their cronies, and those who are not act to become wealthy far beyond their capabilities before they were elected. Our two party system is NOT about ideology, it IS about who gets to put us further in debt to further their own greed.
Obama is unquestionably the MOST shameful President we’ve EVER had. What happened to “hope” and “help”? The way he’s turned on those who believed in him is without comparison in historical context. Shame on him & shame on Democrats who, come election time, rationalize their support for him & the Party that has caved to his sleezy Chicago style pandering.
The key item you left out is luck. Most of the rich got that way by being in the right place at the right time or having chosen their parents well. They conveniently forget this later and think they did it all by themselves (or, even worse, that they were chosen by God, one of the “elect,” and so deserve to have much better lives).
Again, I’ll take France circa 1789 for $200, Alex.
Carried interest is a form of capital gains.
I say ignore the carried interest exemption and go straight to the real question: is the capital gains tax itself serving any productive purpose in today’s economy?
The rationalization for capital gains being taxed at a lower rate than ordinary income was that it would free up more capital to grow the economy and thereby create badly needed jobs. That might have been true 80 years ago, but it does not seem to be true today.
Bush cut the capital gains tax rate down to 15% and we lost 8,000,000 jobs. The evidence just does not support the premise behind a capital gains tax preference.
The only way the premise is productive is if you make an investment in a productive venture (company or nonprofit, doesn’t make a difference). I mean a direct investment, buying stock directly from the company, and receiving a preferential tax rate when you sell it.
But allowing a subsequent buyer of that stock to also qualify for a preferential tax rate creates no jobs at all. It is merely a sweet deal for making your income by gambling instead of working.
I say get rid of the capital gains preferences for everything but venture investments directly into productive ventures.
I saw an apt description of our two party system. there are two parties in this country and they are both republican.
We’ve been fighting for a change in campaign finance laws for at least 35 years, to no avail, in fact killed by the recent SCOTUS ruling.
There’s an argument out here – that gets very little ink and no air – that our present system of government isn’t working to the advantage of the nation as a whole or to its people. To date about 30 different countries have adopted our presidential system of government and without exception each has experienced disastrous results, has thrown out the system and adopted some form of the parliamentary system.
As long as we continue under the presidential system of government we will be unable to effect any change in our election laws. It’s a guarantee that our political, economic and social aristocracies will continue to call the shots.
I don’t see it as a presidential versus parliamentary form. Our government is corrupted in all three branches, and if we had a parliamentary form that would be equally corrupted as well.
Our problem more succinctly is the winner-take-all nature of our election-by-district form, aggravated by our optional voting system. People who are outside the mainstream have no way to get representation, and tend to not vote.
Adding some form of proportional representation, along with Australian-style compulsory voting, would help a lot, and get rid of all the Republican impetus to suppress voting by non-favored groups.
Well said Jon…..tax -cuts for the rich went through very easily…You know why that it is…they gave ‘emselves a raise why lamenting to us,”we have to take cuts to our benefits.”
You can always depend on congress(Dems & GOP) to scam ordinary Americans.
Where is the scam?
Jeebus! read the post again.
You think the country is in this sorry state cuz of just 1 political party ? or cuz we, the lesser people aren’t working hard enough ?
“Isn’t lawfully earned wealth an indicator of smarts, ambition and survival instincts?”
I like to say that one can’t make $100,000 without 1,000 people making $10,000.
No one makes huge money without a large foundation of labor being done below him or her in the food chain. To think that one makes money “on his own”, is ridiculous.
I also believe firmly, as a tall not unattractive 54 year-old white man, that demographic statistics alone are worth a hell of a lot today. Fairly and unfairly. I believe that I have an advantage just being who I am.
You really think that poor, smart, ambitious and hard-working are worth as much as that in today’s cultural currency?
And this won’t happen, because it requires the people who have all the control to give up a whole bunch of it. Why would they do this?
shouldn’t that be Chuck Schumer (D- Wall Street)?
SO…a CEO, a Tea Partier, and a Union Member are in a room together, when someone brings in a dozen cookies. The CEO confidently and quickly grabs eleven of the cookies, and has his assistant move the eleven cookies out of the room immediately. The CEO then leans toward the Tea Partier and whispers, “Hey, dude…that union guy is trying to get your cookie.”
This is why I posited, a couple of years ago, that this is why congresspeople loves them their banks.
Talking about banks going bankrupt is a different matter when the FDIC won’t cover what you lose.
Yes,well said.
The key term left out is ruthlessness.
Agree entirely. However it bears repeating as we speak with Tea Partiers that the economic premise is at once both false on the effects and unnecessary on the stated goal, since it doesn’t create jobs, and the system is already awash in excess unused capital anyway.
While it is not clear what the right tax rate is, even Tea Partiers should agree that folks who work should not be paying more tax than folks who don’t.