Taxpayers Pick Up Congressional Rides
Carping about the government wasting taxpayer money is always an easy, satisfying endeavor, whether that carping is grounded in logic or not. People like to complain about high taxes while simultaneously bemoaning their city’s crumbling infrastructure and lousy schools. Here’s a great example involving our favorite topic: cars.
Members of the House of Representatives get to lease cars with taxpayers footing the bill, including maintenance, insurance, registration fees and — God help us — gas. Senators have to pay their own way. Of the 435 representatives in the House, 125 take advantage of this option, and only one owns a hybrid (Democrat Michael McNulty of New York leases a 2007 Mercury Mariner Hybrid).
Leased vehicles range from a Chevrolet Impala for $219 a month (Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y.) to a Lexus LS 460 for $998 per month (Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y.).
The purported reason for this fringe benefit is so representatives can travel across their districts to speak to constituents. That’s all well and good, but does Florida Democrat Alcee Hastings really need to respond to constituent concerns in an Infiniti M45?
Furthermore, reading the Times article, it’s surprising how many of the car-leasers are Democrats, and how many of these supposedly environmentally conscious politicians are trekking around in SUVs that get 16 mpg. Some of the offenders include Illinois Democrat Bobby Rush's Lincoln Navigator (13/18 mpg), Louisiana Democrat Charlie Melancon's Chevy Tahoe (15/20 mpg), and New York Democrat Edolphus Towns' Lincoln MKX (16/23 mpg).
What Would You Drive, if the Taxpayers Paid? (The New York Times)
Previous
Subscribe to our feed
Email us your tips!
The whole article only mentioned one Republican rep that drives a 2004 Chevy TrailBlazer. So is the article neutral or biased?
Most americans would do the same if someone else were picking up the tab. The same thing happens with most large companies. Top executives get vehicles or vehicle allowances and we pay for it by buying their products. It's just that it's so hypocritical for politicians to preach one thing and then do this.
I'm on the fence about this one. On the one hand, to the constituent it smacks of hypocrisy that we taxpayers should foot the bill for personal extravagances, but on the other hand, high-ranking politicians are people who've earned their place at the top of a very long, very wobbly ladder that probably started in law school.
So, I can see how it would seem kinda odd that these people, no matter what station they came from in life, would have clawed their way to the absolute top of the city, state or federal political ladder and suddenly expect to show up in a Ford Focus. That also smacks of hypocrisy to me.
No, they should PAY for their vehicles out of their own (not insubstantial) salaries.
The difference between these people getting free transport and some fatcat in private industry, is that in this case each of us is FORCED to buy their "product" through taxes.
The salaries of the directors of 3M or Sony may be high but none of us are forced into buying their stuff. They are in a competitive market and reap the dividends (rightly or wrongly). Politicians are not in their positions for financial gain, they are there as representatives of the people. As such, their salary should be enough, and stuff like this is not just hypocritical, but wrong.
As a former Democrat and Republican this is a prime example of why at the end of the day I will only support a candidate who cuts my taxes. All of their other positions are meaningless. I don't care if Saddam ran for office, if he cuts my taxes I'll vote for him.
This is a good article as it's a brief reminder of how mucy YOU the taxpayer gets ripped off every single day. I read somewhere that ultimately any form of taxiation is a form of slavery. At first I thought it was crazy but now I absolutely understand it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm willing to pay reasonable taxes, however there is study after study that supports there is so much waste in our government that if you cut out all of the pork a 16% tax rate would be more than enough to run our government.
How does it feel knowing that you work 60-90 days a year just to pay your politicians and their life style?
I am not surprised they get a car. Not like they could not afford one. What surprises me is that there is not a limit on the lease. A lease for just shy of $1K? I am more impressed with the the reasonable judgment of representatives that had the option to lease something this stupidly expensive and did not.
I suspect we're not getting the full story here. I would bet that members of Congress get a flat monthly allowance for autombile leases/purchases that would cover an average car - and everybody gets the same amount. If they want to drive an M45 or Lexus, the difference would come out of their own pockets.
Reporting was neutral...
Did you noticed that lot of them were blacks? Is that racial?
Do black congress men like to drive different car and need to get to their office different way like the way Rev Wright said? If blacks learn differently and clap differently, maybe they go to their office differently with different (expensive and tax payer paid) cars.
As it says in the original story:
"There are few restrictions on what kind of car the members can choose, and there is no limit on how much they can spend"
I like the comment from the Buffalo rep that said she got a Buick Lucerne because it had GPS tracking in case she was caught in a snow bank. Are you kidding me? People voted for her? Drive a Toyota and use the GPS tracking on your cell phone!
Regarding the racial comments - how would the average Joe know the race of those mentioned here - except for the one pictured. I wouldn't.
I think only idiots of the lowest order care about the race of Congressional members who lease expensive cars at the taxpayers expense. It's not even worth mentioning because WRONG IS WRONG no matter what the race, gender, religion, sexual orientation or ethnicity of the people involved. Comments like the one above only fuel the divisiveness that exists in this country. If these people want to drive whatever car they choose, then let them buy/lease it with their OWN money like the rest of us! That's all that should be said in any way you'd like to phrase it like the rest of the respondents to this post.
On a lighter note, I'm calling for the ban of fake port holes! I don't know how the situation is where you live but it has gotten completely out of hand here where I live. I've seen some with two different styles. IMO, this is just as or more tacky than the fake cell phone antennas back in the 1990s. Who's with me on this?
Port holes?
Pot holes?
I don't think it was biased, but rather pointed out the people who are representatives of New York. From what I know, there are many more democrats that are members of congress representing New York and in the area surrounding New York City and state, with the obvious exception being the member from Louisiana. Since it was the New York times, I would think that is why you saw the members that you did. Besides, the NYT is not exactly known for being conservative in its reporting and editorials.
J,
Port holes, side vents or whatever you want to call them. You know, the things that some people among us go to AutoZone, Pep Boys, etc. to purchase so they can attempt make their Toyota Tercels or Oldsmobile Aleros mimic a Buick, Escalade, or Maserati.
My last straw with these things was when I saw a set on a '08 Infiniti G35. I wanted to drag the offending driver out by his neck for an "intervention" but refrained because I've heard that jail isn't such a great place.
Adrian,
I'm with you on that ban. Weirdest I've seen:
Scion xB
Well, the discussions sure have drifted OT...but to add to it...what the heck is with the 08 Focus on the side vents from Ford directly? I'm sure that, with the power & performance of the Focus, it surely needs those ;)
Dave,
Not as bad as a Ford Festiva.