Senate votes to deny convicts pensions.
By on Jan 12th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Senate votes to deny convicts pensions.
“Members of Congress convicted of serious crimes would lose their taxpayer-paid pensions, sometimes totaling more than $100,000 a year, under a measure unanimously approved by the Senate Friday.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Good, that might teach these politicians not wheel and deal by breaking the law..and expect a pension.This might make them think twice…
January 12th, 2007 at 2:46 pmThis is Brilliant should stop SOME corruption
January 12th, 2007 at 2:47 pmBravo, Dems.
But don’t slow down, there’s still a lot more wrongs to right in this country.
The biggest wrong is still sitting in the Oval Office…when are you going to take care of that?
January 12th, 2007 at 2:49 pmWorks for me. course I think the current pension plan is pretty silly. Serve one term in office, and live off the public dole for the rest of your life.
January 12th, 2007 at 2:49 pmDo they get to keep their pensions if they’re subsequently pardoned by the President?
January 12th, 2007 at 2:53 pmI’m thrilled with this as it is one of my biggest pet peaves. I’ve written to our leaders regarding this, so I’m happy they’re listening. However, I hope the list of “serious” crimes isn’t limited to the few mentioned in the article. I think the scope should go farther to include a conviction of any felony. Remember, these are the people that make laws. At a minimum I expect they should abide by them. All of them.
January 12th, 2007 at 3:08 pmYea Baby! Cut off their funds.
January 12th, 2007 at 3:10 pmAlong with losing their pensions, the convicted members of Congress should be handed a tin cup for panhandling to let them gather some loose change for retirement money! Great job Dems!
January 12th, 2007 at 3:11 pmGood! One step closer to the possibility of stripping Dubbie of all his post-term bennies along with his inpeachment/conviction package.
January 12th, 2007 at 3:15 pmI’m on board with this one. Nice job!
January 12th, 2007 at 3:18 pmSen. Kerry and TheNationalTaxpayers Union AGREE? Surely he 5th sign of the apocolypse!
January 12th, 2007 at 3:20 pmI can hear Rush now, “But, but, but…..”
January 12th, 2007 at 3:20 pmI wonder if Bush is gonna veto this….?
January 12th, 2007 at 3:20 pmAnd they aren’t done with their first 100 hours. Republicans couldn’t come up with this idea in 6 years. This is a simple fact to all who still see the clothes on the emporer.
Debate this hacks.
January 12th, 2007 at 3:22 pmHa!
“convicted of serious crimes”
I translate that to mean anything other than white collar or crimes committed by a powerful politician.
Why else was it passed unanimously. The Repugs only for it after they made sure Delay was excluded.
January 12th, 2007 at 3:22 pmBOUT TIME
January 12th, 2007 at 3:39 pm/expects veto
ROTFLMAO!!!! I LOVE this!!! if you look at the list in the past 15 years of all Senators and Representatives convicted of “serious” crimes, the dems win hands down 3-1. 3 Dems to 1 Repug.
ROTFLMAO!!!
January 12th, 2007 at 3:47 pmThis bill stinks, as it should have been retroactive, holding former members accountable for their misdeeds.
How about a “no lobbying for 5 years provision”. Keep these pigs from going right back on the federal teet.
Same shit, different year.
January 12th, 2007 at 3:55 pm“ROTFLMAO!!!! I LOVE this!!! if you look at the list in the past 15 years of all Senators and Representatives convicted of “serious†crimes, the dems win hands down 3-1. 3 Dems to 1 Repug. ROTFLMAO!!! Comment by Douglas G. — January 12, 2007 @ 3:47 pm”
Yet it took the democrats to enact this. Why don’t those numbers add up my fellow zionist? And as much as I would like to agree with you on this one, the last congress hasn’t all been convicted of the crimes we both know they committed. Abramoff is just beginning to sing like the cowardly conservative coward we both know him to be.
But that’s what I love about my fellow conservatives. Our ability to remain *optimistic* on the morals of your representatives, even when we keep getting proven wrong. Like my uncle *adolph* used to say in Austria, if you’re gonna lie – lie big! He’d be proud of you, and the rest of our Neo Con Jewish brigade! For the fatherland!
January 12th, 2007 at 3:56 pm…this way all of the pending GOP convicts will be subject to it, rather than grandfathered out of it…..put the punishment in place, THEN go after those to whom it will apply….
January 12th, 2007 at 4:07 pmThis is very good news.
January 12th, 2007 at 4:21 pmNeither Bush nor Cheney should get any pension.
One word: “Duh!”
January 12th, 2007 at 4:33 pmI wonder if Bush is gonna veto this….?
Comment by Briseadh na Faire
Interesting little corner GWB finds himself in….
January 12th, 2007 at 4:43 pmI WOULD LIKE TO ASK? WHAT ABOUT MARK THE PED FOLEY.
WHEN THE NEO CONS WERE STILL IN CONTROL AND THE FOLEY INCIDENT WAS BROUGHT TO LIGHT. THE SO CALLED ETHICS (GOP) WAS SAID IT WANTED TO FURTHER INVESTIGATE. wHAT THE HELL HAPPENED? wILL FOLEY BE ENTITLED TO OUR MONEY PER ANNUM AND ALL THE FREE HEALTH CARE AFFORDED A FORMER MEMBER OF CONGRESS?
THE NEO CONS ARE AT IT “AGIN.”
January 12th, 2007 at 5:03 pmTHEY ARE SPINNING THAT SEN. BARBARA BOXER MADE REFERENCE THAT MONA LISA LICE (CONDI) WAS GAY. SEN BOXER NEVER MADE ANY REFERENCE ABOUT LICE.
MAT DRUDGE, KARL the nazi ROVERER AND OTHERS ARE ONLY TRYING TO DEFLECT THE FACT THE GARGOYLE’S (BUSHCO) SPEECH WAS A COMPLETE FALILURE.
WHEN WILL THESE INSENSITIVE POOR EXCUSE FOR HUMANS LEARN, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH?
THE LYING THAT COMES FROM THE WHITE HOUSE, THE BLAIR HOUSE AND ALL OTHER NEO CONS INCLUDING THE UNFAIR AND UNNBBBALANCED SO CALLED NEWS NETWORK fox.
MONA LISA LICE IS A LESBIAN AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT.
WHEN THEY TRY TO COVER DICKIE pooh CHENEY’S DAUGHTER MARY’S GAYNESS. MARY HERSELF, TO THE DISMAY OF DICKIE AND LYNNE CAME OUT.
CONDI NEED DO THE SAME. COME OUT CONDI! EVERYONE KNOWS YOU HAVE A FEMALE WIFE. CONDI, BUTCH UP FOR GOSH SAKE.
Afternoon all, they need to have a broad brush with this bill and include ethics violations…Haven’t read it yet but it’s a great start….No matter to me if it take’s Dem’s or Rep’s off the paycheck and medical coverage forever…If they are guilty of the crime’s this will be a good penelty…..
Regarding dead eyed rice, there again I don’t care if she is gay, I just want to see her and this bunch in office Impeached, jailed and their asset’s seized……Welcome to reikers miss rice meet your new cell mate zelda sound’s wonderful…LOL…Blessings
January 12th, 2007 at 5:44 pmMy only questions is…
Can we make this RETROACTIVE????
January 12th, 2007 at 6:07 pmTo bad birth control isn’t retroactive, we all know how quick some evil people would be gone…..Blessings
January 12th, 2007 at 6:13 pmGREAT…
BUT…
…Why isn’tit retroactive?
January 12th, 2007 at 7:32 pmEspecially for our represinatives and senators. Good call. Should be unappealible or veto proof. Let’s make sure that this is for the president and concievably any one connected with his UNTRUTHS. The bunch is rotten through the stem. Hang out the laundry!
January 12th, 2007 at 7:37 pmThis is a damn good thing. Make them SOB’s think about what they are doing to the rest of us. Good Job, Senate. About time you grew some cohones. Let’s see what the Decider decides, veto or not?
January 12th, 2007 at 7:48 pm#27 Sharon
January 12th, 2007 at 8:07 pmLOL I’ve always said Dubya should of been a poster boy for birth control!
this is a no-brainer.
January 13th, 2007 at 12:19 amhttp://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aFOgp5SUnMlo&refer=home
Japan Warns of Tsunami Following Major Quake in Pacific Ocean
Bloomberg – 23 minutes ago
By Steven Bodzin and Hiroshi Suzuki. Jan. 13 (Bloomberg) — Japan’s Meteorological Agency issued a tsunami warning over the eastern coast of Hokkaido in northern Japan after an earthquake northeast of the island that the US Geological Survey measured …
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/SP199617.htm
January 13th, 2007 at 1:17 amTsunami warning in Japan after strong Pacific quake
Reuters AlertNet
“serious” crimes? is “serious” a legal term I’m not aware of? sounds like they are being given a helluva lotta wiggle room to me..
January 13th, 2007 at 1:59 am“There’s something that really grates in the notion that you can put the public’s trust and the public’s business up for sale and then walk away and have the people that you betrayed turn around and pay for you to be able to have a fat pension,” said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., author of the amendment.
Senator Kerry, you might find more people to suppport you if they could stay awake long enough to hear what you’re saying. This could have been shortened to ,”The people don’t want congessional thieves to receive pensions.” Now no one knows why you’re passing this bill because they fell asleep in the middle of your remarks. I do believe that John Kerry is his own worst opponent in his bids to be president.
January 13th, 2007 at 8:00 amIt’s about freaking TIME that someone tried to do something about the corruption in Congress. Why should members of Congress essentially be rewarded breaking the law? It’s a pity that if passed, this would only apply from this point forward — Cunningham and Traficant will still be receiving their pensions
January 13th, 2007 at 8:07 amgood points about vetoes and pardons… I think Bush can only veto something if Congress tries to make it a law; that is, their own in-house rules and procedures are not veto-able… also, I think he can only pardon people accused of breaking actual laws, not Congressional rules… I could be wrong about that… here’s hoping this sticks… hard, and in the gut…
January 13th, 2007 at 11:04 amAnd they aren’t done with their first 100 hours. Republicans couldn’t come up with this idea in 6 years. This is a simple fact to all who still see the clothes on the emporer.
Debate this hacks.
Comment by hellinabucket
And still no Iraq legislation… Odd
Iraq was what got them elected, right? Iraq was #1 priority, right?
But at least the thieves won’t get more money!
January 13th, 2007 at 11:18 amCool, politicians are public figures should set example to the common citizen by leadershi p through example. I even think politicians should not be paid , only those intersted in serving public out of conscience should be allowed into politics. POlitics should not be used to further personal benefits.
http://www.tekno-world.blogspot.com
January 13th, 2007 at 11:24 am#39 Sorry, Rajeev, but a constitutional amendment would be needed to not pay them.
“Article I, Section. 6.
Clause 1: The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. ”
But I do believe that annual pay raises are unconstotutional under the 27th Amendment.
“Amendment XXVII
No law varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives shall take effect until an election of Representatives shall have intervened. ”
How they get away with it is beyond me. Now, because a new election of Representatives has intervened, this most recent raise is okay. But they should not be getting another one one year from now.
January 13th, 2007 at 1:47 pmWayne, if I’m not mistaken, this last “pay raise” is technically a COLA (”cost of living adjustment”). This is a feature of most government-based benefit/pay deals–it applies to military paychecks as well as Social Security paychecks–and the theory was to allow government workers and Social Security recipients (who, if you look at those paychecks, are relatively low-paid) to keep up with inflation. The raises didn’t usually match the inflation rate, usually being based on a typical-for-government arcane formula which kept the COLA between half and three-fourths of the inflation rate. (I do think that our members of Congress should exclude themselves from COLAs. It’s one thing for a Social Security recipient living on a monthly fixed income of $1000 and facing the much higher inflation rates brought on by costs of medications and fuel to be given a COLA and something quite different for those in Congress on a monthly income exceeding $12000 to get a COLA.)
January 13th, 2007 at 3:06 pmAs for the 27th Amendment, this didn’t end any annual pay raises, per se. What it *did* do, however, was put an end to a current Congress from voting on a major pay raise (say from $140,000/year to $145,000/year) and having it go into effect “immediately”–that is to say, for those who voted on the raise. Under the current law, if you’re in the 110th Congress and you vote for a pay raise, while there’s a better than 90% chance you will benefit from that raise, you won’t get it until the 111th Congress is seated (and this is one matter that Congress is reluctant to take up in an election year as it gives one’s opponent the potential of “he voted to give himself a pay raise if he gets to go back to Washington”–okay, granted, Congress is reluctant to take up a lot of matters in an election year, but this is one matter that the voters will see as being more about the politician’s best interest over his constituents’).
“Iraq was what got them elected, right? Iraq was #1 priority, right?”
Yes, you are right. How dare they not have “solved” it in two weeks.
January 13th, 2007 at 3:25 pmShould William Jeffrerson Clinton ( Deemed GUILTY of commiting PERJURY IN A FEDERAL COURT OF LAW THIS SCUM-BAG Needs to sit in a prison cell for 50 years for perjury He makes 90 million a yr and His Perjury charge resulted in a $5 fine If that was me i’d be in jail and fined more than that
January 13th, 2007 at 4:10 pmFake Bill Clinton
If I recall correctly, Bill Clinton was not even indicted on charges of perjury as he agreed to plead guilty to lying under oath (which is not the complete definition of perjury) and to surrender his law license for five years.
I think all the scum pliticians who made Bill Clinton’s admittedly stupid sexual behavior into a national crisis are the ones who should not receive pensions.
January 13th, 2007 at 5:40 pmYes, you are right. How dare they not have “solved†it in two weeks.
Comment by Glenn Becker
I don’t expect it “solved” in two weeks, but there should besomething on the schedule at least. So far all tht has happend is that Ted the Swimmer has run his mouth and a token letter from Pelosi and Hoyer to Bush.
I guess inaction is the order of the day. By God we got stem cell research passed in one day. We got Minimum wage passed in one day. But they can not take one day to discuss Iraq? BS, flag on the play.
Bush pulls one way, 110th Congress the other, and the troops are in the middle getting f*&ked by BOTH of them.
January 13th, 2007 at 6:02 pmYahtzee!
January 14th, 2007 at 3:48 amRobert,
Shove the straw man up your ass. With almost four years of a botched, war of choice, it might take more than a couple of weeks to fix what your party F*CKED UP so badly.
Just shut up. Murtha and others are poised to stop the escalation, that’s the first step. Besides, you and your Neocon agenda-ists are all too aware of consequences of an IMMEDIATE WITHDRAWAL, since that’s the only “fear” card left to play, RIGHT LOSERS?
January 14th, 2007 at 10:36 am