RSN Fundraising Banner
Nasty or Frugal? Key Democrats Out to Stop House Members From Living in Offices
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=49992"><span class="small">Kate Irby and William Douglas, McClatchy D.C.</span></a>   
Monday, 21 January 2019 10:00

Excerpt: "Members of the House of Representatives who live in their Capitol Hill offices shouldn't get too comfortable."

Rep. Dan Lipinski, D-Illinois, used to live in his Washington, D.C., office when he was away from his Chicago district. Here he cooks his dinner in a microwave before eating at his desk. Lipinski moved into an apartment in 2014 to have more privacy. (photo: Chris Sweda/Chicago Tribune/MCT)
Rep. Dan Lipinski, D-Illinois, used to live in his Washington, D.C., office when he was away from his Chicago district. Here he cooks his dinner in a microwave before eating at his desk. Lipinski moved into an apartment in 2014 to have more privacy. (photo: Chris Sweda/Chicago Tribune/MCT)


Nasty or Frugal? Key Democrats Out to Stop House Members From Living in Offices

By Kate Irby and William Douglas, McClatchy D.C.

21 January 19

 

embers of the House of Representatives who live in their Capitol Hill offices shouldn’t get too comfortable.

The practice is going under the knife from the new Democratic leadership. Top Democrats are considering making the live-in lawmakers pay for bunking in prime government real estate — or ending the practice altogether.

“How would you feel about attending a meeting in someone’s bedroom?” asked Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi, a veteran member of the Congressional Black Caucus, which has spoken against the practice for years.

Office-dwellers counter that the practice is frugal and efficient.

“My constituents want me to do the job they elected me to do,” said Rep. Andy Barr, R-Kentucky. “They appreciate frugality too and appreciate the fact I’m focused on doing my job and not moving into Washington.”

The black caucus has long been appalled by the arrangements.

“A lot of our Republican colleagues are very hard on people in public housing ... when they in fact are living in public housing, without paying any taxes on it,” said Rep. Cedric Richmond, D-Louisiana, a former caucus chairman.

Thompson called the practice “nasty,” saying it’s freeloading on the government’s dime. He’s been trying to end the practice for years.

“Free janitorial, free cable, free security, free utilities. Ain’t a bad deal, is it?” said Thompson, who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee. “The reality is, you’re gaming the system.”

Not true, said office-dweller Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Kentucky.

“They’re going to clean your office anyway and we’re using the gym we pay for. If I thought there was an expense to the government by doing it, that would be different,” he said.

The initial fate of the sleep-ins in the House rests with its administration committee.

Chairwoman Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-California, said the panel will tackle the issue later this year. She has already asked the Architect of the Capitol, a nonpartisan informational source for members, to provide an estimate of the fair market value of living in a congressional office

“There’s a lot of sentiment that that is not something that should be permitted,” Lofgren said.

But she’s not sure there an obvious solution, asking “How do you enforce it?”

The practice of lawmakers living in their offices is more common in the House than in the Senate, where no members have confirmed they live where they work. On average, senators tend to be wealthier than House members, though their salaries are the same.

There’s no official count of how many members live in their offices, but reports put the bipartisan number somewhere between 50 and 100.

Some sleep on mattresses in their multi-room office suites that they then stow in closets during the day, others on futons and still others on Murphy beds that fold into the wall.

There are members-only gyms where they can shower and laundry facilities on Capitol grounds.

Members from all over the country sleep in their offices, including Republican Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-California, and Reps. Ted Budd, R-North Carolina, Steve Watkins, R-Kansas, Barr and Guthrie. Before stepping down earlier this month, House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, slept in his office while in Washington.

Some office-dwelling lawmakers argue that if they weren’t allowed to bunk in their workspace, congressional seats would only be occupied by millionaires who could afford to maintain two residences.

Rank-and-file members of Congress make $174,000 annually. The House speaker earns $223,500 while the majority and minority leaders in both chambers receive $193,400.

Members living in those offices, such as Watkins, said it should be their right to do so, given that they also need to maintain homes in their districts and Washington, D.C. rent is costly.

In August, Washington, D.C. had the nation’s 26th highest average monthly rent at $2,145, according to Rent Cafe, a national apartment listing service.

The average cost of rent in Washington for a studio apartment is $1,642 per month, according to Rent Cafe. The average cost of a studio in the Capitol Hill neighborhood is $1,808 per month. That doesn’t include utility costs.

“It’s a preference of mine to save money — I’m a newlywed, and my wife and I would like to buy a house in the district,” said Watkins, who currently rents a property in his Kansas district. “We don’t have enough money to do so, and this is a way for us to save up.”

Thirty members of the Congressional Black Caucus — including Thompson, House Majority Whip James Clyburn, D-South Carolina, and House Committee and Oversight Reform Chairman Elijah Cummings, D-Maryland — sent a letter to the House Ethics Committee in 2017 questioning “the legality and propriety of a significant number of members choosing to use their Congressional offices as overnight lodging facilities.”

“Staff members and other House employees are subjected to seeing and at times interacting with members in their sleeping attire, underwear, and even partially nude,” the letter states. “This is intimidating and offensive; thus, contributing to a hostile work environment.”

The practice continued.

Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Missouri, a black caucus member, said it’s also annoying that some lawmakers use sleeping in their office to boast to voters back home that they haven’t been seduced by the Washington swamp because they haven’t purchased or rented a home there.

Former Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, used to conduct video “cot-side chats” on his congressional website, speaking into a camera from the foot of a cot inside his office. He once called the cot “The No. 1 attraction in my office.”

“People who live in their office and get all this praise about sacrifice are, in fact, living off the government whereas I have to pay,” said Cleaver, a United Methodist minister who pays $2,000 a month for a rent-controlled unit in the United Methodist building near the Capitol. “My rental payment in Washington is greater than my mortgage in Kansas City.”

Lofgren said the process for addressing the housing issue would start with public hearings, though she said it’s hard to say when that will happen since her committee has to attend to other priorities first. The final decision could ban members from living in their offices altogether or charge them for using the space.

Thompson said Congress needs to address the lodging situation by either raising lawmaker’s salaries — a politically unpopular move that’s unlikely — or finding other creative ways to make living outside their offices economically feasible.

“Either we address it to the point that we do a per diem, which we don’t have which other state assemblies and legislatures do when they’re in session,” said Thompson, who has rented the same Capitol Hill efficiency apartment for 25 years. “Or give me the ability, if my job requires me to be somewhere else, that I could deduct the cost of that somewhere else on my taxes.”

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+6 # elizabethblock 2019-01-21 11:48
"Some office-dwelling lawmakers argue that if they weren’t allowed to bunk in their workspace, congressional seats would only be occupied by millionaires who could afford to maintain two residences."
Good point. We've already got too many millionaire legislators.
 
 
0 # SusanT136 2019-01-21 12:23
Members of Congress should be allowed to get a tax deduction for their rent, up to $1500/mo, or a tax credit for something like $9,000/yr for the rent they pay in DC. More than that might encourage extravagant rentals for the wealthier members. For those who are not wealthy, and ultimately we want MORE “regular” people in Congress, this could make a huge difference. It’s not cheap to maintain two residences, especially if one is in a high cost area. And while $175,000/yr is a lot of money, since they’re (theoretically at least) working for this money they’re paying a higher tax rate than those who make their money from capital gains. Add in a mortgage at home and a couple of kids and that $20,000-$25,000 /yr for DC rent could hurt. And a House rep is only in for 2 years and then has to either get re-elected or start looking for another job. And i agree it IS weird for staff to have to potentially deal with their boss sitting around in his bathrobe. Paul Ryan is a wealthy guy, so there’s definitely some strange psychological thing about this for someone like him.
 
 
+8 # ER444 2019-01-21 14:48
OK let's see. 174,000 dollars a year. 2000 dollars a month for an apartment = 24,000 dollars. That leaves 150,000 dollars. Of course that is tax deductible so the real cost is a third less, - 8000 dollars, so we are back to 158,000 dollars. Ummm, where is the problem?
 
 
0 # SusanT136 2019-01-21 20:31
Quoting ER444:
OK let's see. 174,000 dollars a year. 2000 dollars a month for an apartment = 24,000 dollars. That leaves 150,000 dollars. Of course that is tax deductible so the real cost is a third less, - 8000 dollars, so we are back to 158,000 dollars. Ummm, where is the problem?

I don’t know for sure but Thompson’s remarks seem to state that the rent is NOT tax deductible. That’s what he seems to want.
 
 
+9 # Texas Aggie 2019-01-21 15:07
I fail to see the problem.
 
 
+1 # Robbee 2019-01-22 09:58
Quoting Texas Aggie 2019-01-21 14:48:
I fail to see the problem.

- if there is a problem, and i'm not sure there is, it's that repukes love to wall themselves off from irate citizens?

even in their home districts! among their constituents they learned not to hold town halls about health care access?

scalice had to stop holding baseball practice?

and, god forbid, what if humans they would scrape off their boots started picketing their apartments?

repukes have excellent reason to hate dwelling in an apartment to which every day they must come and go? to follow a known pattern of behavior? to occupy a city with a hostile citizenry?

why on earth would the black caucus want to desegregate white males acting out apartheid?

give the secret service a break? outside office walls, they have to protect members of congress from d c citizens?

if there is a problem? is it local citizens' access to out-of-town lawmakers? who come to d c to represent folks mostly hundreds of miles away? mostly white? mostly wealthy employers of america's capitalist, campaign-donor class?

what do you think? - does the black caucus consider this an apartment-renta l issue? or an access issue?
 
 
0 # Robbee 2019-01-22 10:19
what would alexandria?

what would bernie say?

about a repuke congressman's

hide-a-way?
 
 
0 # chrisconno 2019-01-21 18:52
So the republicans enjoy subsidized housing. Wouldn't that make them lazy drug dealing freeloaders?
 
 
0 # jouster 2019-01-21 20:50
Aren't there enough REAL issues for Congress to discuss?
 
 
0 # DongiC 2019-01-22 06:05
If we want representatives of common means in the House of Reps, we must help them with their housing costs in DC. Special incentives of one kind or another. It is very do able.
 
 
0 # Observer 47 2019-01-22 10:11
Considering the mountains of much more egregious abuses and critical issues, it's ludicrous for the Dems to waste political capital going after something so petty. If that's all they can collectively find to investigate and protest, we're in even bigger trouble than I thought.