[Report Abuse]
[Login to Blog] PoliticsNation's Blog
GA Rep complains about congressional 6dig salary!

Take Me To Post Comment Form




Rep. Phil Gingrey is unhappy with his six-figure Congressional salary.

The remarks came during a closed-door conference meeting, where Republicans were discussing Obamacare exemptions, as the National Review reported:

The Georgia Republican, whose latest personal financial-disclosure forms show his net worth is at least $3 million, had little sympathy for lawmakers and even less for staff.

Capitol Hill aides, he said “may be 33 years old now and not making a lot of money. But in a few years they can just go to K Street [the Washington, D.C., shorthand for becoming a lobbyist] and make $500,000 a year. Meanwhile I’m stuck here making $172,000 a year.”

Stuck? Making six figures? With a net worth of $3 million? The salary alone is more than triple than median income in America, which comes in at just over $50,000 a year according to the latest Census data. After complaining about his paltry salary, Gingrey then joined 216 other Republicans in voting to slash food stamps by nearly $40 billion dollars.

This is not the only time the Georgia Republican’s comments have gotten him in trouble. He inspired a round of critics back in January when he defended Rep. Todd Akin’s comments about “legitimate rape.”

“When he said legitimate rape versus non-legitimate rape, I don’t find anything so horrible about that,” Gingrey said. ”But then he went on and said that in a situation of rape, of a legitimate rape, a woman’s body has a way of shutting down so the pregnancy would not occur. He’s partly right on that.”

And just a few months ago, Gingrey was slammed for suggesting that schools should teach children “traditional” gender roles.

“Maybe part of the problem is we need to go back into the schools at a very early age, maybe at the grade school level, and have a class for the young girls and have a class for the young boys and say, you know, this is what’s important,” he said.

“You know, this is what a father does that is may be a little, a little different–maybe a little better than the talent that mom has in a certain area and same things for the young girls…This is what a mom does and this is what’s important from the standpoint of that union, which we call marriage,” he continued.

The comments even earned him some critics over at Fox News. No word yet on how they feel about his salary.


Latest Activity: Sep 20, 2013 at 3:43 PM


Bookmark and Share
Forward This Blog
Print Blog
More Blogs by PoliticsNation
Send PoliticsNation a Message
Report Abuse


Blog has been viewed (407) times.

PoliticsNation commented on Friday, Sep 20, 2013 at 15:54 PM

The House's passage today of the Republican leadership's bill to cut SNAP (formerly known as food stamps) by almost $40 billion over the next decade marks a new low for an already dysfunctional Congress. It would increase hunger and hardship all across our country.

By cutting food assistance for at least 3.8 million low-income people in the coming year -- including some of the very poorest Americans, many children and senior citizens, and even veterans -- this cruel, if not heartless, legislation could jeopardize a vital stepping stone to many families who are still struggling to find work or who depend on low-wage jobs. As the nation slowly climbs out of the deepest recession in decades -- with 22 million people still unemployed or underemployed -- millions of families rely on SNAP to help feed their children.

SNAP recipients already are preparing for an across-the-board cut in their SNAP benefits beginning in November that will reduce their modest benefits to less than $1.40 per person per meal.

For decades, policymakers have shared a bipartisan commitment to reducing hunger and hardship. This legislation turns its back on that commitment.

sebekm commented on Friday, Sep 20, 2013 at 16:30 PM

The current U.S. population is estimated at more than 316 million.

See: http://www.census.gov/popclock/

The number of people now enrolled in SNAP is 47 million.

See: http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2...

This means that approximately one out of every 7 people in this country is on food stamps. The Obama administration has spent nearly five years pumping up the food stamp rolls and boasting about doing so. What they should have been doing is pumping up the jobs in this economy to get people OFF of food stamps and into being productive citizens of this country.

The problem is not cutting the food stamp program. The problem is the current administration failing to create the economic environment where people can earn a decent living and buy their own food - rather than having it given to them by the government.

PoliticsNation commented on Friday, Sep 20, 2013 at 16:41 PM

@seb..You can't defend that. I don't care what you post...People have been on food stamps for years. I hate to tell you but the food stamp program didn't start under the Obama Administration. You can't defend allowing people to go hungry. I'm surprised you would try to defend the GOP sitting back while veterans, disabled children and adults starve.

PoliticsNation commented on Friday, Sep 20, 2013 at 16:50 PM

Contrary to stereotypes, there is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy. Indeed, surveys of welfare recipients consistently show their desire for a job.

http://m.savannahnow.com/column/2013-...

PoliticsNation commented on Friday, Sep 20, 2013 at 16:58 PM

In this America, people blame welfare for creating poverty rather than for mitigating the impact of it. An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll in June found that the No. 1 reason people gave for our continuing poverty crisis was: “Too much welfare that prevents initiative.”

In this America, the House can — as it did in July — pass a farm bill that left out the food stamp program at a time when a record number of Americans, nearly 48 million, are depending on the benefits.

In this America, a land of immigrants, comprehensive immigration reform can be stalled in The People’s Branch of government, and anti-reform mouthpieces like Ann Coulter and Pat Buchanan can warn that immigration reform will be the end of the country.

And in today’s America, poverty and homelessness can easily seep beneath the wall we erect in our minds to define it.

A December report by the United States Conference of Mayors that surveyed 25 cities found that all but 4 of them reported an increase in requests for emergency food aid since 2011, and three-fourths of them expected those requests to increase in 2013.

The report also found that 60 percent of the cities surveyed had seen an increase in homelessness, and the same percentage of cities expected homelessness to increase in 2013.

JimmyMack commented on Friday, Sep 20, 2013 at 17:43 PM

PN...You are indeed a breath of fresh air. You are smart. You know your facts.
And I am glad that you are here stating them.

JimmyMack commented on Friday, Sep 20, 2013 at 18:00 PM

For this one I am going scriptural: Psalms 37:35

"When we see a Christian brother or sister suffering today, we can respond in one of three ways: 1. We can say, as Job's friends did, that the afflicted person brought this on himself. 2. We can trust in God. 3. We can help the person in need. Although many governments today have their own laws for helping those in need, this is not excuse for ignoring the poor and the needy within our reach.

PoliticsNation commented on Friday, Sep 20, 2013 at 18:53 PM

@Jimmy..thanks for sharing and knowing your facts. It's good to know some people still fear the man upstairs.

gacpl commented on Sunday, Sep 22, 2013 at 00:24 AM

@seb didn't say they haven't been people on food stamps for years, he was talking about how many are being added to the rolls at a uncontrollable rate since obama took office.

http://www.dailyjobsupdate.com/wp-con...

sebekm commented on Sunday, Sep 22, 2013 at 11:24 AM

True, gacpl. That was my point. The problem is NOT the food stamp program, per se. It's when the government ADVERTISES welfare (which is what food stamps are); does everything possible to get more people ON food stamps; BRAGS about adding people to the food stamp rolls; and meanwhile twiddles their thumbs on the real problem: JOBS.

The current unemployment rate is a sham, since it doesn't include those people who have simply given up looking for work. If the real unemployment number was published, it would be somewhere between 15-20%. A whole lot of these people are BLACK. The real questions are:

*Why is the real unemployment number so high?

*Why has the government chosen to spend all their energy and political capital for five years on a program that will MAYBE positively affect 15-17% of this country (Obamacare), and blow an opportunity to devote that energy and capital on programs that will affect nearly ALL Americans: jobs?

*Why did so many people in Mr. Obama's political constituency who are most negatively affected by unemployment (i.e., black people) vote for him in 2012?

There are many ways to "help" "those in need." The best ways do not include KEEPING them "in need" - unless your ultimate objective is to keep them beholdin' to you and voting for you next time.

Funkentelecky commented on Sunday, Sep 22, 2013 at 13:22 PM

Contrary to stereotypes, there is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy. Indeed, surveys of welfare recipients consistently show their desire for a job.

http://m.savannahnow.com/column/2013-...

PN, this article explains why welfare recipients aren’t doing their fair share for the country by receiving entitlements instead of actually working because the entitlement pays more than minimum wage. The able bodied folk that are receiving these funds need to get off their tails and go to work and contribute to our countries government spenditures.

Michael Tanner is a Senior Fellow with the Cato Institute and just reading the first two sentences of the post just doesn’t give its whole message.

Just to set the record straight, I personally know some lazy people on welfare. And I will also say that anyone that is able bodied and is still living on the dole is lazy too.

Funkentelecky commented on Sunday, Sep 22, 2013 at 13:28 PM

Here is the full post:

Contrary to stereotypes, there is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy. Indeed, surveys of welfare recipients consistently show their desire for a job.
But there is also evidence that many are reluctant to accept available employment opportunities. Despite work requirements included in the 1996 welfare reform, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services says less than 42 percent of adult welfare recipients participate in work activities nationwide.
Why the contradiction?
Perhaps it’s because, while poor people are not lazy, they are not stupid either. If you pay people more not to work than they can earn at a job, many won’t work.
A new study by the Cato Institute found that in many states, it does indeed pay better to be on welfare than it does to work.
Most reports on welfare focus on only a single program, the cash benefit program: Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. This focus leaves the misimpression that welfare benefits are quite low, providing a bare, subsistence-level income. In reality, the federal government funds 126 separate programs for low-income people, 72 of which provide either cash or in-kind benefits to individuals.
Because there are so many categories of welfare recipients and so many different types of benefits, it is extremely difficult to determine how many people get what combination of benefits. For the purposes of this study, we assumed a hypothetical family consisting of a mother with two children, ages 1 and 4, and calculated the combined total of seven benefits that family could receive in all 50 states.
If that mother received Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, it is almost certain that she would also receive food stamps and Medicaid as well. Roughly 87 percent of Needy Families do.
Approximately 61 percent of all Needy Families fitting our profile also receive aid from the Women, Infants and Children program, or WIC, so we included that benefit. (If the children were older, they would not be eligible for WIC but would receive other benefits such as subsidized school lunches and breakfasts.) We also included utilities assistance, given that half of welfare recipients are on that program.
Housing assistance was a tougher call.

Funkentelecky commented on Sunday, Sep 22, 2013 at 13:31 PM

Nationwide, the rate of participation varies from nearly 82 percent of Needy Families in North Dakota to virtually none in Idaho. Housing programs also generally have waiting lists, meaning long-term welfare beneficiaries are most likely to receive benefits. Many states also prioritize families with young children like our profile family. We decided not to include those benefits for states where participation was less than 10 percent. In California, it is 11.4 percent.
Finally, we included the federal Emergency Assistance Food Program, which provides free commodities like milk and cheese. Our profile family would qualify in all 50 states, although usage figures are imprecise.
In Washington, D.C., and 10 particularly generous states — Hawaii, Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Maryland, New Hampshire and California — these seven programs provide a mother with two young children an annual benefit worth more than $35,000 a year. The value of the package in a medium-level welfare state is $28,500.
That may sound low, but it’s important to remember that welfare benefits are not taxed, whereas wages are. So to put the welfare benefit package in perspective, we calculated the amount of money our recipient would have to earn in pretax income to bring home an equal amount of money if she took a 40-hour-per-week job.
After computing the federal income tax, the state income tax and payroll taxes, as well as taking into account federal and state earned income tax credits and the child tax credit, we came to the inescapable conclusion that welfare pays very well.
In fact, in 33 states and the District of Columbia, welfare pays more than an $8-an-hour job. In 12 states, including California, as well as the District of Columbia, the welfare package is more generous than a $15-an-hour job. In Hawaii, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington, D.C., welfare pays more than a $20-an-hour job, or more than 2.75 times the minimum wage.
But how does the package compare with salaries for everyday jobs? In California and 38 other states, it pays more than the starting wage for a secretary. California isn’t one of the 10 states (plus the District of Columbia.) where welfare pays more than the average pretax first-year wage for a teacher, nor is it among the three most generous states, where welfare benefits exceed the entry-level salary for a computer programmer. But California welfare benefits can still exceed 96 percent of the state’s median salary.

Funkentelecky commented on Sunday, Sep 22, 2013 at 13:31 PM

Of course, not every welfare recipient meets the study’s profile, and many who do don’t receive all the benefits listed. (On the other hand, some receive even more.) Still, what is undeniable is that for many recipients in the most generous states — particularly those classified as long-term recipients — welfare pays substantially more than an entry-level job. By not working, welfare recipients may be responding rationally to the incentives our public policy makers have established.
And yet we know that over the long term, a job is better than welfare. Census figures show that only 2.6 percent of full-time workers are poor, compared with 23.9 percent of adults who do not work. And, while many anti-poverty activists decry low-wage jobs, even starting at a minimum-wage job can be a springboard out of poverty. As a result, if Congress and state legislatures are serious about reducing welfare dependence and rewarding work, they should consider strengthening welfare work requirements, removing exemptions and narrowing the definition of work. Moreover, states should shrink the gap between the value of welfare and work by reducing current benefit levels and tightening eligibility requirements.
Michael D. Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and the author of “The Poverty of Welfare: Helping Others in Civil Society.”
• 2


Log In to post comments.

Previous blog entries by PoliticsNation
 
GA Republicans vow to restrict blacks from voting
September 11, 2014
BREAKING: Ga. Republican Secretary of State Brian Kemp caught on tape admitting that Democrats will win the November election -- if minorities are registered to vote. No wonder he issued subpoenas this week to stop voter registration. LISTEN: http://bit.ly/1tLgigZ Georgia State Senator vows to block early voting site too 'near' ...
Read More »
 
Are you clubbing or are you loving?
September 08, 2014
Domestic violence (also known as intimate partner violence) can happen to anyone, regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, income, or other factors. The Victims •One in 4 women will experience domestic violence during her lifetime. •Women experience more than 4 million physical assaults and rapes because of their partners, ...
Read More »
 
Georgia Association of Educators back Jason Carter
August 27, 2014
I woke up this morning with a smile on my face. I thought to myself--Georgia is on the right path. The citizens of Georgia are starting to vote for their best interest and not out of fear or hate. The Georgia Association of Educators, which represents 42,000 educators, has endorsed ...
Read More »
 
A Mother’s White Privilege-Written by a White Mom
August 26, 2014
To admit white privilege is to admit a stake, however small, in ongoing injustice. It’s to see a world different than your previous perception. Acknowledging that your own group enjoys social and economic benefits of systemic racism is frightening and uncomfortable. It leads to hard questions of conscience may of ...
Read More »
 
Corporate Welfare-GOP Wants Us to Pick Up Tab!
August 25, 2014
Nobel prize-winning economist Joseph E. Stiglitz,argues that we must reform the tax code and stop subsidizing tax dodgers. A recent report by Americans for Tax Fairness suggests that corporate taxes are near a 60-year low — and that’s partially because corporations have become adept at not paying their share. Robert ...
Read More »
 
[View More Blogs...]





 
Powered by
Morris Technology