Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Primary residence of your senator or house representative


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, FairWarning said:

They should have some ties back to it, yes.  How many don't?

My senator had no rental or residence here for several years  He lives in dc with wife and his kids go to school in dc.  He stays with his parents when in state.  He did just purchase a house in state but it will not be his primary residence.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, stlrams said:

My senator had no rental or residence here for several years  He lives in dc with wife and his kids go to school in dc.  He stays with his parents when in state.  He did just purchase a house in state but it will not be his primary residence.  

Maintaining two households is expensive.  DC is incredibly expensive and CT ain't too far behind.  I can see why he/she located in DC.  Do they at least hail from the state, etc.?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sand said:

Maintaining two households is expensive.  DC is incredibly expensive and CT ain't too far behind.  I can see why he/she located in DC.  Do they at least hail from the state, etc.?

Yes originally.  Since Ted Cruz getting a hard time now I thought about the fact my senator doesn’t even live in the state he represents.  Like a reverse carpet bagger. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, stlrams said:

Since Ted Cruz getting a hard time now 

Politics is all about perception.  Ted should have known better.  At least he got right back on a plane - minimized the mistake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sand said:

Politics is all about perception.  Ted should have known better.  At least he got right back on a plane - minimized the mistake.

I agree but we all know the vast majority of politicians think they can do as they please.  But how can you represent without even living in your state or district?

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, stlrams said:

Should they maintain their primary residence in the state or district they represent?

Tough question.  As others stated DC is expensive and it's not like it used to be.  I had a friend whose great grandfather was a US Senator for awhile.  He went to Washington part of the year and came home and ran his farm the rest.  I doubt it's financially feasible in many situations and you add in the travel expense it would be quite costly.  I guess it's up to the voters in each state to ultimately decide that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Sand said:

Maintaining two households is expensive.  DC is incredibly expensive and CT ain't too far behind.  I can see why he/she located in DC.  Do they at least hail from the state, etc.?

Also, I'm assuming this isn't Blumenthal.  That guy can afford a couple houses.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Sand said:

Also, I'm assuming this isn't Blumenthal.  That guy can afford a couple houses.

Correct.  It’s Chris Murphy a lawyer who isn’t hurting financially either.  Let’s face it, politicians have two primary objectives- get re-elected which is an automatic in Connecticut and get rich. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sea Duck said:

Personally, I don't mind if my elected officials move to DC for the duration of their service, as long as I feel like they are looking out for my state.

So you are ok with all elected officials living in dc?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, stlrams said:
9 minutes ago, Sea Duck said:

Personally, I don't mind if my elected officials move to DC for the duration of their service, as long as I feel like they are looking out for my state.

So you are ok with all elected officials living in dc?

Sure, why not? It's not like they need to physically breathe within the borders of the state in order to keep up with the concerns of the constituents.

Besides, would it really be any different if they rented a small apartment and visited once a year?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, stlrams said:

Should they maintain their primary residence in the state or district they represent?

 

Barracks style housing in DC. All those in Congress must have a roommate with a member across the aisle. Rotating room assignments every month. One month, AOC has to live with Ted Cruz. Then Matt Gaetz. Then Jim Jordan. Cocaine Mitch needs to room with Maxine Waters, then Shirley Jackson Lee then Amy Klobuchar.  Force people to learn to "live" with their political rivals. Nothing more humorous to me than Ted Cruz and AOC falling in love and having a baby together. The baby would be called C Square in the media. Then they have to eat only food used in government assistance. That's it.

Back in their home state, their family must, mandatory, live in the poorest district period. Taxpayers dollars mean you get rented a house in that area on the government dime. Whatever minimum wage is that state, that's the cost of living stipend for the family, they cannot exceed that amount.

Thinking about having your wife getting shot in a drive by shooting or your kids beaten to death while walking to school should open some eyes real fast about fixing the problems of that state.

bostonfred volunteers to room with Jen Psaki. Lindsay Graham will keep pounding his fist in the wall shouting at bostonfred to stop screaming "Circle back again, it's my birthday"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shatner! said:

My House rep should reside permanently at home. Seriously, he needs to be replaced like immediately.

My state’s senators should be voted out as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Shula-holic said:

Tough question.  As others stated DC is expensive and it's not like it used to be.  I had a friend whose great grandfather was a US Senator for awhile.  He went to Washington part of the year and came home and ran his farm the rest.  I doubt it's financially feasible in many situations and you add in the travel expense it would be quite costly.  I guess it's up to the voters in each state to ultimately decide that.

Sounds like his grandmother ran the farm. 

Edited by The Z Machine
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Shula-holic said:

Tough question.  As others stated DC is expensive and it's not like it used to be.  I had a friend whose great grandfather was a US Senator for awhile.  He went to Washington part of the year and came home and ran his farm the rest.  I doubt it's financially feasible in many situations and you add in the travel expense it would be quite costly.  I guess it's up to the voters in each state to ultimately decide that.

Wouldn't taxpayers be picking up all travel costs?  I imagine taxpayers would pick up the cost of a rental in DC as well.  That said, the original question is a good one.  I think the real answer is that much of what is done in DC could easily be done remotely with today's technology, and we should encourage representatives to live and spend more time in the districts they represent.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I honestly don't care.  If they do, great.  If not, that's fine too.  

This. As long as they listen too, and act/vote in accordance with their constituents, I honestly don't care if they live in DC full time.

I do believe the should return frequently though. Hold town halls, virtual meetings etc etc. 

Edited by crackattack
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Rich Conway said:

Wouldn't taxpayers be picking up all travel costs?  I imagine taxpayers would pick up the cost of a rental in DC as well.  That said, the original question is a good one.  I think the real answer is that much of what is done in DC could easily be done remotely with today's technology, and we should encourage representatives to live and spend more time in the districts they represent.

Can't disagree with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said:

Agreed.  If the person represents my interests well she can live anywhere she wants.

I believe it might be more difficult to represent your interests if they don’t  live there.  Wouldn’t they get out of touch with what’s important to their constituents over time?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, stlrams said:

I believe it might be more difficult to represent your interests if they don’t  live there.  Wouldn’t they get out of touch with what’s important to their constituents over time?

No more than any other politician I'd imagine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rich Conway said:

Wouldn't taxpayers be picking up all travel costs?  I imagine taxpayers would pick up the cost of a rental in DC as well.  That said, the original question is a good one.  I think the real answer is that much of what is done in DC could easily be done remotely with today's technology, and we should encourage representatives to live and spend more time in the districts they represent.

IIRC members of Congress have to pay for their own housing out of their salaries. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stlrams said:

I believe it might be more difficult to represent your interests if they don’t  live there.  Wouldn’t they get out of touch with what’s important to their constituents over time?

If they get out of touch, their constituents have a remedy.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...