I would like to see to it that our federal employees (including elected officials) have to live with the same laws that the citizens do.
There should be no special privileges for them. If we have to follow OSHA rules (or those of any other law) so should they.
They should have the same health care coverage we do and should belong to the same retirement system that we do. Their facilities like government restaurants, barber shops, and banks should be fully paid for by the people that use them, not the taxpayers.
For that matter I don’t think that congressmen, senators, or the president and vice president should have government funded retirement accounts.
It seems to me that this would need to be a constitutional amendment since any law that one session of congress passes could be overturned in some later session.
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
I second your recommendations.
LikeLike
While there are many perks, there are NO government funded retirement accounts, no special retirement plans AND Congress is NOT exempt from ACA…
LikeLike
Like other things important in our lives, facts matter and frankly the idiotic misinformation that gets slung around the internet about the “Congressional and federal perks” is absurd! For instancei had the very same health coverage as a Congressman that I had for 26 1/2 years as a Border Patrol Agent (Federal Employees Health Plan), the Congrssional restaurants you refer to are put out for bid and when the public visits Capitol Hill you can eat and pay the same price that Congress and staff pay to eat. The same apples to other services, including the Capitol Hill Credit Union. My retirement as a federal law enforcement agent under the Civil Service Retirement system was better than my service as a Congressman. You can save under the Federal Thrift Savings System the same as any federal employee which includes our military. Contrary to what is claimed in the internet Congress pays Federal Income tax like anybody else. Housing, living expenses and transportation come out of your pocket. In fact, the very wealthy Members of Congress often turn down healthcare and retirement because they get such a better deal in their private plans. (This is why our current Representative chose to keep his private plan and maybe opted out of federal retirement) none the less please do some research and don’t believe the crap on the internet because it is part of the conservative strategy to discredit government. Which by the way is demoralizing the Federal workforce that generally does a great job for our country! All you have to do is pay attention to those rich out of touch Republicans in the house who don’t care how it hurts our economy or our country as long as they undermine our President.
We ALL deserve better and you can help by rejecting the lies and setting the record straight! I was proud to serve my Country in the Army, the Border Patrol and the United States Congress for 45 years.
Silvestre Reyes
LikeLike
Truth… the fabricated stories of congressional retirements run rampant… and the reposting by bloggers without checking the facts hurt their credibility!
LikeLike
Speaking as a retired State Dept employee I second this comment. My retirement is Social Security based. My health care was through a standard insurance policy, which is tied to Medicare rates once you are 65 – and frankly, Medicare has been better. The problems with the federal government have to do with the grotesque campaign finance system, raised to new heights of absurdity by the Citizens United decision that allows billionaires to pour money into politics, anonymously – and the revolving door that turns high-level political officials such as Lanny Breuer into Wall Street banksters with earnings in multiple seven figures (after refusing to prosecute any of those banksters). I have seen these false stories about USG employees and legislators all over the net. It is easy to fact-check. Why don’t you do it? It does in fact seriously affect the credibility of what you write about local politics.
LikeLike
While I support your right to disagree with the post I think that I may not have made my point well.
I think that government employees (federal, state, and local) should be treated the same way civilian citizens are.
I agree that many government employees are hard working and do a good job for us.
As far as credibility is concerned I believe that each issue should stand on it’s own. A person can be wrong on one issue but right on another one. Have we reached the point where you and I must agree on every single issue in order for me to be credible?
Thank you for your thoughts.
Brutus
LikeLike
Well let’s take the original post point by point.
HEALTH CARE–The Los Angeles Times printed this December 2013 article: http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/01/nation/la-na-lawmakers-health-plans-20131201. From the article: “While many members of Congress are indeed signing up for health coverage through the District of Columbia exchange — which was designated as the provider for all members — their experiences have been significantly better than those of average consumers in several respects, including more generous benefits packages, VIP customer service from insurers and the same government-subsidized premiums they’ve always enjoyed.”
The health care situation is in a state of flux. Time will tell how members of congress fare under the new laws.
RETIREMENT–This 2013 report: http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid='0E%2C*PLC8%22%40%20%20 shows that members of congress now are covered (depending upon when the member first joined congress) by one of four different retirement systems.
My understanding is that all congressmen are now enrolled in social security but that depending up which program they choose are eligible for benefits “supplemental” to social security.
OSHA–This 2010 report from http://www.compliance.gov/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Annual-Report-Press-Release-2010-Media.pdf speaks of 6,300 hazards found on congressional properties. This quote comes from the report “The second recommendation is that Congress enact safety and health record-keeping requirements of OSHA. Congress is exempt from the statutory requirement that employers make, keep, preserve, and provide records that are necessary and appropriate for the enforcement of OSHA or for developing information regarding the causes and prevention of occupational accidents and illnesses; records on work-related deaths, injuries, and illnesses; and records of employee exposure to toxic materials and harmful physical agents. ”
While I grant that I found the report on the internet, it is a government report.
FOOD–ABC news offered this 2013 report: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/06/house-spent-about-2m-of-taxpayers-money-on-coffee-pastries-foundation-finds/
This March 2013 New York Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/06/dining/the-lunchrooms-of-capitol-hill.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 includes this: ” (The House and Senate dining rooms are generally reserved for members and their guests; many others are open to the public, but those in the Capitol building require an escort from someone who works there.)”
BARBERSHOP–This March 2013 New York Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/28/us/politics/senate-barbers-get-trimmed-in-latest-budget-cuts.html attributes this statement to the senate sergeant-at-arms: “he expected to cut losses in the shop to $100,000 a year from about $500,000 by privatizing. Eventually, he said, he would like to use private contractors exclusively.”
BANKS–It appears that the house banking scandal of the 1990’s lead to the shut down of “house checking accounts”. The United States Senate Credit Union offers this eligibility list:
Main Select Employee Groups:
The United States Senate
The United States Supreme Court (DC staff only)
The Architect of the Capitol
The Government Accountability Office (GAO)
It does not appear to be subsidized with taxpayer money.
Brutus
LikeLike
So, should an employee of Walmart get the same package as an employee of say, Denny’s or Macy’s? Or say a new employee of any of these entities vs. an employee that has been with the company for say 20 years? Although it would be nice to have a standardized package for all employees I believe that is a bridge too far at this time. I know the packages that I had with several corporations were much better than what is offered to the majority of workers in America today.
The issue really sits with the “unofficial” perks of office, and not what is offered to city, state and federal employees… Cops get “discounted” apartment rentals, some take their cruisers home with them, they get off-duty employment WEARING their official uniform to provide rent-a-cop services… many of these perks are NOT offered to other city, state or federal employees…
As for the congressional dining facilities… In the field I ate from a messkit or T-Trays while sitting on a stump. meanwhile General Officers had field mess facilities, complete with china and gourmet menus… Was I upset that I was not offered the same level of service… nope, not really. I also didn’t have the same level of headaches as him… I truly doubt that the corporate officers at McDonalds go from Big Macs to Quarter Pounders for their meals, either…
As Marie Antoinette reportedly said… “Let them eat cake!”
LikeLike
Mr. Reyes, it’s ironic that your enthusiastic, heart-felt response to this post is possibly longer than any public statement you issued in all of your years in congress. For a guy who lived large on our dime, you sound just a tad bit defensive.
Your comment that “when the public visits Capitol Hill [we] can eat and pay the same price that Congress and staff pay to eat” is rather disingenuous given that the average citizen will never have the opportunity to visit Capitol Hill and eat with the elite. That comment alone shows just how out of touch you are. It is also condescending.
The fact that that the congressional services are “put out to bid” has nothing to do with the prices that you and your fellow congressmen pay/paid to eat relative to the total cost to deliver those services. (Can you spell s-u-b-s-i-d-i-z-e-d?)
I would respect your opinion a little more if you simply acknowledged that members of congress live quite well at the taxpayers’ expense and that there is considerable waste just in congressional spending alone. Congress and the federal government is Never Never Land — never stop spending, especially when that spending benefits the lifestyles of those in DC. Members of Congress and government employees are now the privileged class — which has the privilege of voting themselves raises and spending taxpayer money on luxurious events and boondoggles. We know for a fact that many in congress become lobbyists and consultants to special interests after they leave office, which sounds a tad bit like deferred compensation.
I am also tired of hearing about your military service and years with the Border Patrol. You’re not the only person who ever served this country. A lot of us served in the military; most of us haven’t attempted to trade on it. Most of us also chose not to live off the government for our entire careers.
As a Liberal myself, I find your statement that any campaign against congressional compensation and benefits is simply part of a vast conservative, right-wing conspiracy, once again shows your lack of intellectual honesty. This issue isn’t about Democrats or Republicans. It is about a Congress which is out of control, out of touch, and unproductive, except in protecting the personal interests of its members. (Do you recall anything about members of Congress being immune from insider trading laws until the media made it a public issue?). The majority of the public sees it that way as evidenced by the low approval rating given to Congress.
For a guy who is receiving multiple retirement checks from the government, you doth protest too much. Plus, this post didn’t even touch on the fact that politicians like yourself are also able to dip into your campaign funds to pay for personal expenses — campaign funds which come from special interests who basically “own” congress. It also didn’t touch on how members of congress use their office and their campaign funds to feather the nests of their family members.
Who has undermined whom? From where I sit, Congress — both Republicans and Democrats — have undermined the financial stability of our country, particularly the middle class. Unfortunately, you’re not immune from bearing some of that responsibility.
Enjoy your retirement.
LikeLike
Ms. Marshall,
I agree with much of what you wrote. However, I find it odd and disconcerting that you singled out Lanny Breuer?
What about the former members of Congress who leveraged their time in office to make big bucks as lobbyists; or as directors of public companies that rely on government contracts, subsidies, or dispensation; or even as a “historian” to Freddie Mac?
Some members of congress and high-ranking officials don’t even wait until they leave office. They simply help set their family members up as lobbyists while they themselves are in office.
Yes, the Super PACs are a huge problem, but money doesn’t have to be funneled through a PAC in order to buy influence. Some of the “pay to play” is simply more out in the open as it is here in Texas and right here in our fair city. What fascinates me is how pay-to-play appears to be above scrutiny at the federal level.
We have the best Congress that money can buy. Unfortunately, it is sold and re-sold regularly to the highest bidders.
LikeLike
What many of you may not know is that Obamacare is forcing most small businesses to go to the “giverment exchange” instead of keeping what they have in place. Obamacare does this by only allowing a 35 percent tax credit for paying for your employees healthcare premiums if you stay with your current carrier, but allows a 50 percent tax credit if you use the “giverment exchange”.
That in itself is downright Anti-Trust. So all local small insurance brokers are screwed. Make all giverment employees go to the exchange too. I plan on staying with my broker and asking my CPA to go ahead and take the 50 percent credit. Screwem.
LikeLike