How did the role of politician get to be so lucrative?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to think back - when was the last time that a person who wasn't wealthy ran for president?
Maybe Harry Truman? Dwight Eisenhower?

Carter?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rich in politics isn't anything new. Ever heard of Tammany Hall or Richard Daley? The list is long for those in local and national politics that have built their fortunes as a result of being in office. Politics attract those who are seeking fortune and power. Always has, and unfortunately, probably always will.

In recent years I can think of only one president that when elected didn't have a net worth in the 7 digit and above range. Clinton. And he wasn't poor or middle class but less than a million.

Clinton, a perfect example. Not wealthy when he came into office and he left office broke too.
But then he turned that around big time in the next several years.

Regardless of what Hillary claimed it was pretty much an falsehood they were broke and even though there was some money issues that was quickly taken care of by wealthy friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to think back - when was the last time that a person who wasn't wealthy ran for president?
Maybe Harry Truman? Dwight Eisenhower?

Carter?

Carter wasn't super wealthy but wasn't poor and if you adjust for inflation his net worth in 76 was higher than Clinton's in 92. A lot of his net worth was in land and that is a rather difficult asset to pinpoint. Land is worth so much on the tax rolls and is really valued by what someone is willing to pay.

Gerald Ford was more modest compared to many as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting rich in politics isn't anything new. Ever heard of Tammany Hall or Richard Daley? The list is long for those in local and national politics that have built their fortunes as a result of being in office. Politics attract those who are seeking fortune and power. Always has, and unfortunately, probably always will.

In recent years I can think of only one president that when elected didn't have a net worth in the 7 digit and above range. Clinton. And he wasn't poor or middle class but less than a million.

Clinton, a perfect example. Not wealthy when he came into office and he left office broke too.
But then he turned that around big time in the next several years.

Regardless of what Hillary claimed it was pretty much an falsehood they were broke and even though there was some money issues that was quickly taken care of by wealthy friends.

I think PP was being sarcastic. But I think that wikipedia link would be more interesting if it showed net worth upon entering office and net worth some fixed amount of time after leaving, like 5 years or something.

I think there are a lot of people willing to pay former politicians for all kinds of things ranging from speeches to lobbying to buying influence in many arenas. Ex-Presidents would obviously be at the top of that list.

[Anonymous]

It's Republicans who keep pushing to allow more corporate money in politics. Yet it's they who are the first ones whining about Hillary giving a $650,000 talk for Goldman Sachs.

Womp, womp.

They created the monster. At some point you'd think they'd be smart enough to try and kill it rather than running around shrieking about it. But maybe not smart enough after all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to think back - when was the last time that a person who wasn't wealthy ran for president?
Maybe Harry Truman? Dwight Eisenhower?

Most recent was definitely Bill Clinton. And I don't remember Bob Dole being wealthy either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus, Bernie finally flames out and now we have to deal with these dumbass posts?

What?
I'm not the OP, but have been wondering also if this isn't one of the most highly paid professions.
Consider if you run even for a Congressional seat in a hotly contested district, the campaign contributions will flow in and the candidate, even if he or she loses, gets to keep the leftover money.
The ones who really make out big time are the winners who don't need that much cash to run for re-election. They also get to keep all campaign contributions. It is a very lucrative business for those who can do it successfully.

You clearly don't know anything about campaign finance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus, Bernie finally flames out and now we have to deal with these dumbass posts?

What?
I'm not the OP, but have been wondering also if this isn't one of the most highly paid professions.
Consider if you run even for a Congressional seat in a hotly contested district, the campaign contributions will flow in and the candidate, even if he or she loses, gets to keep the leftover money.
The ones who really make out big time are the winners who don't need that much cash to run for re-election. They also get to keep all campaign contributions. It is a very lucrative business for those who can do it successfully.

You clearly don't know anything about campaign finance.

Seriously. Please tell me where you learned this? Was it the same chain email that said that all members of Congress have a pension equal to their salary until they die?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus, Bernie finally flames out and now we have to deal with these dumbass posts?

What?
I'm not the OP, but have been wondering also if this isn't one of the most highly paid professions.
Consider if you run even for a Congressional seat in a hotly contested district, the campaign contributions will flow in and the candidate, even if he or she loses, gets to keep the leftover money.
The ones who really make out big time are the winners who don't need that much cash to run for re-election. They also get to keep all campaign contributions. It is a very lucrative business for those who can do it successfully.

You clearly don't know anything about campaign finance.

o.k., enlighten me. When a senator or congressman leaves office what happens to their unused campaign funds under the campaign finance laws?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus, Bernie finally flames out and now we have to deal with these dumbass posts?

What?
I'm not the OP, but have been wondering also if this isn't one of the most highly paid professions.
Consider if you run even for a Congressional seat in a hotly contested district, the campaign contributions will flow in and the candidate, even if he or she loses, gets to keep the leftover money.
The ones who really make out big time are the winners who don't need that much cash to run for re-election. They also get to keep all campaign contributions. It is a very lucrative business for those who can do it successfully.

You clearly don't know anything about campaign finance.

? The bolded statement is correct. They can keep it. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/06/14/unused-campaign-funds-spent-in-unusual-ways/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to think back - when was the last time that a person who wasn't wealthy ran for president?
Maybe Harry Truman? Dwight Eisenhower?

Carter?

Carter wasn't super wealthy but wasn't poor and if you adjust for inflation his net worth in 76 was higher than Clinton's in 92. A lot of his net worth was in land and that is a rather difficult asset to pinpoint. Land is worth so much on the tax rolls and is really valued by what someone is willing to pay.

Gerald Ford was more modest compared to many as well.

Gerald Ford never ran for President, though. Or Vice President.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus, Bernie finally flames out and now we have to deal with these dumbass posts?

What?
I'm not the OP, but have been wondering also if this isn't one of the most highly paid professions.
Consider if you run even for a Congressional seat in a hotly contested district, the campaign contributions will flow in and the candidate, even if he or she loses, gets to keep the leftover money.
The ones who really make out big time are the winners who don't need that much cash to run for re-election. They also get to keep all campaign contributions. It is a very lucrative business for those who can do it successfully.

You clearly don't know anything about campaign finance.

? The bolded statement is correct. They can keep it. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/06/14/unused-campaign-funds-spent-in-unusual-ways/

Just because some douches are spending their excess campaign funds improperly after being ousted, doesn't mean they "can." The money quote is here:
A 1989 law created restrictions on how former lawmakers can spend their leftover funds.

“The general rule is that you cannot use campaign funds to pay for personal expenses,” says Larry Noble, a longtime general counsel with the Federal Election Commission and now an attorney with Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus, Bernie finally flames out and now we have to deal with these dumbass posts?

What?
I'm not the OP, but have been wondering also if this isn't one of the most highly paid professions.
Consider if you run even for a Congressional seat in a hotly contested district, the campaign contributions will flow in and the candidate, even if he or she loses, gets to keep the leftover money.
The ones who really make out big time are the winners who don't need that much cash to run for re-election. They also get to keep all campaign contributions. It is a very lucrative business for those who can do it successfully.

You clearly don't know anything about campaign finance.

? The bolded statement is correct. They can keep it. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2012/06/14/unused-campaign-funds-spent-in-unusual-ways/

Just because some douches are spending their excess campaign funds improperly after being ousted, doesn't mean they "can." The money quote is here:
A 1989 law created restrictions on how former lawmakers can spend their leftover funds.

“The general rule is that you cannot use campaign funds to pay for personal expenses,” says Larry Noble, a longtime general counsel with the Federal Election Commission and now an attorney with Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP.

The can keep any PAC money, it's not covered in the law. And as the article showed, many have figured out ways to keep (and spend) unused campaign committee funds

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's Republicans who keep pushing to allow more corporate money in politics. Yet it's they who are the first ones whining about Hillary giving a $650,000 talk for Goldman Sachs.

Womp, womp.

They created the monster. At some point you'd think they'd be smart enough to try and kill it rather than running around shrieking about it. But maybe not smart enough after all.

Another example of a partisan pointing the finger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm trying to think back - when was the last time that a person who wasn't wealthy ran for president?
Maybe Harry Truman? Dwight Eisenhower?

Carter?

Carter wasn't super wealthy but wasn't poor and if you adjust for inflation his net worth in 76 was higher than Clinton's in 92. A lot of his net worth was in land and that is a rather difficult asset to pinpoint. Land is worth so much on the tax rolls and is really valued by what someone is willing to pay.

Gerald Ford was more modest compared to many as well.

Gerald Ford never ran for President, though. Or Vice President.

He absolutely ran for president and lost to Carter.