stlrams 633 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 Should they maintain their primary residence in the state or district they represent? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
FairWarning 1,065 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 They should have some ties back to it, yes. How many don't? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stlrams 633 Posted February 19 Author Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sand 6,140 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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.? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stlrams 633 Posted February 19 Author Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sand 6,140 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Drunken Cowboy 1,522 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 You are required to be in DC most of the time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stlrams 633 Posted February 19 Author Share Posted February 19 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? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sand 6,140 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 minute ago, stlrams said: But how can you represent without even living in your state or district? It's a fair question. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shula-holic 2,499 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sand 6,140 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stlrams 633 Posted February 19 Author Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sea Duck 1,474 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stlrams 633 Posted February 19 Author Share Posted February 19 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? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sea Duck 1,474 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
GordonGekko 478 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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" 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shatner! 541 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 My House rep should reside permanently at home. Seriously, he needs to be replaced like immediately. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kal El 3,937 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
IvanKaramazov 22,596 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 11 hours ago, stlrams said: Should they maintain their primary residence in the state or district they represent? I honestly don't care. If they do, great. If not, that's fine too. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
The Z Machine 5,332 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) 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 February 19 by The Z Machine Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rich Conway 3,968 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fatguyinalittlecoat 12,006 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 54 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said: I honestly don't care. If they do, great. If not, that's fine too. Agreed. If the person represents my interests well she can live anywhere she wants. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
dawgtrails 1,157 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 1 minute ago, fatguyinalittlecoat said: Agreed. If the person represents my interests well she can live anywhere she wants. Yoou would probbaly be fine with them living in Moscow you commie Quote Link to post Share on other sites
crackattack 139 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 (edited) 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 February 19 by crackattack Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Shula-holic 2,499 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stlrams 633 Posted February 19 Author Share Posted February 19 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? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
fatguyinalittlecoat 12,006 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dinsy Ejotuz 13,301 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tommyGunZ 4,732 Posted February 19 Share Posted February 19 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. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.