Posted on 08/03/2011 2:16:34 PM PDT by blam
Report: Disgraced Still-Congressman Wu Can Draw Nearly $900,000 In Pension Benefits
Zeke Miller
Aug. 3, 2011, 4:13 PM
Rep. David Wu (D-OR), the disgraced congressman who pledged to resign after reports surfaced that he had an "unwanted sexual encounter" with the daughter of a campaign donor.
National Journal reports Wu could draw as much as $891,000 in pension benefits from the federal government. Wu was first elected in 1998.
The report, which surfaced last month, was the latest in a string of scandals for the congressman, who was accused of erratic behavior by staffers during his 2010 reelection campaign.
Wu said he would resign after the debt limit was raised, but has yet to submit a formal letter of resignation.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
What about Weiner?
Tar, feathers, pitchforks, and torches.
Heck, he may simply wait for the publicity to die down, then decide he’s not going to quit after all.
Remember Weiner’s claiming his constituents were calling to express their support? Wu may just do some checking and decide he stands a chance of re-election.
That’s why they don’t give a sh*t — they have set themselves up for life.
It is questionable if the next true ‘conservative’ government will change this corrupt practice and have congresscritters fall under the same rules that the common folks have to live by.
Don’t anyone hold his breath.
Doing a quick check on those figures, WU will need to live until 90 years of age to collect it.
It was the republican congress under NEWT, that lower the years of service before retirement from 12 years to the current laughable level. Congress retirement should be done away with
Elected officials should not be entitled to any benefits whatsoever following their leave of office................
The people in Wu’s district are just like him. They act like him and condone everything he does. If that weren’t true they would demand his resignation. California is full of people just like Wu, and he fits right in with our government.
NO RETIREMENT BENEFITS . . PERIOD. END THEM NOW. If these bastards won’t support term limits, mandatory or voluntary, then NO RETIREMENT. NO incentive to make a “Career” out of politics.
C’mon Rush, Hannity, et al Start the trumpets blaring. This needs to be a campaign issue.
Term Limits
“NO RETIREMENT BENEFITS . . PERIOD. END THEM NOW. “
Careful. You’ll upset the RINO trolls on FR who believe that whatever a congresscritter or president steals, they can keep. In fact, they’ll whine that you’re a commie if you try to recover stolen goods.
Here's the problem ~ and I don't care how you think you can deal with it ~ when you have a Representative Republic you will get politicians.
It is known if you don't pay them handsomely they will "take stuff". And even if you do pay them handsomely some of them will "take stuff" anyway ~ but there'll be fewer of them so you can reach out and grab them by the collar and put them in jail.
Who did what and when? 12 years?
Have no ideal, I just know prior to that time retirement was after twelve years, today it is after one full term. And the change was made while republicans ran the congress under newt.
The problem is the number of years you have to have to achieve "vesting". The minimum time for vesting in both systems is still 5 years. That would mean that you would get 1% of your high 3 for each year of service. So, that would be 5 years of service times 1% times your average high 3. You also have to be at least 55 to Qualify for that ~ (with exceptions for RIFs or disability, when the percentage disallowed might be lowered).
So, let's say you have a Congress critter who meets the minimum age requirement, and he has a high 3 of $170,000, and he has 5 years service time ~ so he gets 170,000*5*.01 = $8,500 per year FULL RETIREMENT PAY.
Luxurious eh?
If he can live until he's 82, and he's 56 this year, he gets that for the next 26 years. Not counting COLA, and who gets that anymore, he could get $221,000 and then die.
The big changes from CSRS to FERS occurred in 1985/6/7 under Tip O’Neil and the Democrats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
