this post was submitted on 06 Jan 2024
198 points (94.2% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3565 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

He's not alone: AOC and others have argued lawmakers should be paid more in order to protect against corruption and make the job more accessible.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Knightfox@lemmy.one 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

They’re not allowed to do that though. Most of them get away with it, but it’s against the rules.

Do you have a source on that, because when I googled it the only thing to come up was Jackie Speier recommending banning it in 2020. There is even a recent Business Insider which talks about Mike Johnson doing it and makes no reference to it being against any rules.

https://www.businessinsider.com/speaker-mike-johnson-sleep-in-his-capitol-hill-office-2023-11

Here is a 2015 NPR article that says there are no rules against it https://www.npr.org/2015/12/26/458207661/meet-the-lawmakers-who-sleep-shower-work-all-on-capitol-hill

From California?

How about Arlington or Alexandria?

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The building isn't rated as a residence, so it's most likely a fire code violation to use it as a residence. Aside from that:

squatters benefit from free utilities, cable TV and internet access, and cleaning services. This may violate congressional ethics rules, which prohibit members from using official resources for anything other than incidental personal needs. At the least, lodging on government premises should be treated as a taxable fringe benefit -- in the same way that congressional parking spaces are.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-04-06/u-s-lawmakers-shouldn-t-be-sleeping-in-their-offices

So, while there isn't a rule that says specifically "congresspeople may not sleep in their offices", there are all kinds of rules about what constitutes housing in DC that are not met by congressional offices:

https://dob.dc.gov/service/dc-housing-code-standards

https://realestateinthedistrict.com/is-your-dc-bedroom-legal/

How about Arlington or Alexandria?

That's still going to be a second residence, it may not be a $2500/month residence, but it's not going to be free.

[–] Knightfox@lemmy.one 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

That’s still going to be a second residence, it may not be a $2500/month residence, but it’s not going to be free.

I think you're confused by my original reply, I wasn't saying it should be free or that they could just drive from their primary residence. I was saying that using the cost of DC housing as a reason for higher pay doesn't make sense when they don't have to live in DC itself. It's perfectly reasonable that they may have to have a place outside of DC and commute in.

So, while there isn’t a rule that says specifically “congresspeople may not sleep in their offices”, there are all kinds of rules about what constitutes housing in DC that are not met by congressional offices:

Part of the issue is that you're applying normal rules to an abnormal group. Traditionally I would agree with you that people shouldn't sleep in their work offices, but this is hardly the weirdest thing that is normal in Congress. Also it doesn't really matter if it meets the fire code or DCs building standards, Federal law has priority over local law. Even the DC Fire Code specifically says that it does not apply to any building or premises owned by the US Government.

Heck, there are a ton of special laws which Congress has passed which only apply to Congress, including prohibiting DC local government from charging property tax or income tax on Congressmen. There are even laws regarding allowances that Congressmen get which essentially says that there are quantifiable benefits of the job which cannot be counted as income for taxes.

The only rule that matters is whether Congress has specifically blocked it.

EDIT: I just double checked and the DOB link you sent says at the very top

"The Department of Buildings (DOB) is mandated to ensure public health, safety, and welfare by enforcing property maintenance codes on all residential and non-residential structures in the District of Columbia, excluding federal government buildings."