79 Members Of Congress Have Been In Office For At Least 20 Years

http://www.pakalertpress.com/79-members-of-congress-have-been-in-office-for-at-least-20-years/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+pakalert+%28Pak+Alert+Press%29

5-18-2015 8-51-01 AM

 By Michael Snyder

No wonder Washington never changes – 79 members of Congress have been there since Bill Clinton’s first term in the White House.  This list includes names such as Reid, Feinstein, McConnell, McCain, Pelosi, Boehner, Rangel and Boxer.

In this article, I am going to share with you a complete list of the members of Congress that have been “serving” us for at least 20 years.  They believe that they are “serving” us well, but without a doubt most Americans very much wish that true “change” would come to Washington.  In fact, right now Congress has a 15 percent approval rating with the American people, and that approval rating has been consistently below 20 percent since mid-2011.

So of course we took advantage of the 2014 mid-term election to dump as many of those Congress critters out of office as we possibly could, right?  Wrong.  Sadly, incumbents were re-elected at a 95 percent rate in 2014.  This just shows how broken and how corrupt our system has become.  The American people absolutely hate the job that Congress is doing, and yet the same clowns just keep getting sent back to Washington again and again.

Our founders never intended for service in Congress to become a career, but that is precisely what it has become for many of our “public servants”.  As of this moment, there are 79 members of Congress that have been in office for at least 20 years, and there are 16 members of Congress that have been in office for at least 30 years.

No wonder so many Americans are advocating term limits these days.  When there are dozens of members of Congress that know that they are going to be sent back to Washington over and over again no matter how the American people feel about things, that can cause them to become extremely callous toward the will of the people.  Instead, often these politicians become increasingly responsive to the needs of their big donors, because it takes big money to win campaign after campaign.  I am sure that if George Washington, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson were running around today, they would be absolutely disgusted by how our system has evolved.

The following is a list from rollcall.com of the Republicans in the U.S. Senate that have served for at least 20 years and the dates when they first took office…

Orrin G. Hatch, Utah Jan. 4, 1977
Thad Cochran, Miss. Dec. 27, 1978
Charles E. Grassley, Iowa Jan. 5, 1981
Mitch McConnell, Ky. Jan. 3, 1985
Richard C. Shelby, Ala. Jan. 6, 1987
John McCain, Ariz. Jan. 6, 1987
James M. Inhofe, Okla. Nov. 30, 1994

The following is a list from rollcall.com of the Democrats in the U.S. Senate that have served for at least 20 years and the dates when they first took office…

Patrick J. Leahy, Vt. Jan. 14, 1975
Barbara A. Mikulski, Md. Jan. 6, 1987
Harry Reid, Nev. Jan. 6, 1987
Dianne Feinstein, Calif. Nov. 4, 1992
Barbara Boxer, Calif. Jan. 5, 1993
Patty Murray, Wash. Jan. 5, 1993

The following is a list from rollcall.com of the Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives that have served for at least 20 years and the dates when they first took office…

Don Young, Alaska March 6, 1973
Jim Sensenbrenner, Wis. Jan. 15, 1979
Harold Rogers, Ky. Jan. 5, 1981
Christopher H. Smith, N.J. Jan. 5, 1981
Joe L. Barton, Texas Jan. 3, 1985
Lamar Smith, Texas Jan. 6, 1987
Fred Upton, Mich. Jan. 6, 1987
John J. Duncan Jr., Tenn. Nov. 8, 1988
Dana Rohrabacher, Calif. Jan. 3, 1989
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Fla. Aug. 29, 1989
John A. Boehner, Ohio Jan. 3, 1991
Sam Johnson, Texas May 18, 1991
Ken Calvert, Calif. Jan. 5, 1993
Robert W. Goodlatte, Va. Jan. 5, 1993
Peter T. King, N.Y. Jan. 5, 1993
John L. Mica, Fla. Jan. 5, 1993
Ed Royce, Calif. Jan. 5, 1993
Frank D. Lucas, Okla. May 10, 1994
Rodney Frelinghuysen, N.J. Jan. 4, 1995
Walter B. Jones, N.C. Jan. 4, 1995
Frank A. LoBiondo, N.J. Jan. 4, 1995
Mac Thornberry, Texas Jan. 4, 1995
Edward Whitfield, Ky. Jan. 4, 1995

The following is a list from rollcall.com of the Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives that have served for at least 20 years and the dates when they first took office…

John Conyers Jr., Mich. Jan. 4, 1965
Charles B. Rangel, N.Y. Jan. 21, 1971
Steny H. Hoyer, Md. May 19, 1981
Marcy Kaptur, Ohio Jan. 3, 1983
Sander M. Levin, Mich. Jan. 3, 1983
Peter J. Visclosky, Ind. Jan. 3, 1985
Peter A. DeFazio, Ore. Jan. 6, 1987
John Lewis, Ga. Jan. 6, 1987
Louise M. Slaughter, N.Y. Jan. 6, 1987
Nancy Pelosi, Calif. June 2, 1987
Frank Pallone Jr., N.J. Nov. 8, 1988
Eliot L. Engel, N.Y. Jan. 3, 1989
Nita M. Lowey, N.Y. Jan. 3, 1989
Jim McDermott, Wash. Jan. 3, 1989
Richard E. Neal, Mass. Jan. 3, 1989
José E. Serrano, N.Y. March 20, 1990
David E. Price, N.C. Jan. 7, 1997 Also served 1987-95
Rosa DeLauro, Conn. Jan. 3, 1991
Collin C. Peterson, Minn. Jan. 3, 1991
Maxine Waters, Calif. Jan. 3, 1991
Jerrold Nadler, N.Y. Nov. 3, 1992
Jim Cooper, Tenn. Jan. 7, 2003 Also served 1983-95
Xavier Becerra, Calif. Jan. 5, 1993
Sanford D. Bishop Jr., Ga. Jan. 5, 1993
Corrine Brown, Fla. Jan. 5, 1993
James E. Clyburn, S.C. Jan. 5, 1993
Anna G. Eshoo, Calif. Jan. 5, 1993
Gene Green, Texas Jan. 5, 1993
Luis V. Gutierrez, Ill. Jan. 5, 1993
Alcee L. Hastings, Fla. Jan. 5, 1993
Eddie Bernice Johnson, Texas Jan. 5, 1993
Carolyn B. Maloney, N.Y. Jan. 5, 1993
Lucille Roybal-Allard, Calif. Jan. 5, 1993
Bobby L. Rush, Ill. Jan. 5, 1993
Robert C. Scott, Va. Jan. 5, 1993
Nydia M. Velázquez, N.Y. Jan. 5, 1993
Bennie Thompson, Miss. April 13, 1993
Sam Farr, Calif. June 8, 1993
Lloyd Doggett, Texas Jan. 4, 1995
Mike Doyle, Pa. Jan. 4, 1995
Chaka Fattah, Pa. Jan. 4, 1995
Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas Jan. 4, 1995
Zoe Lofgren, Calif. Jan. 4, 1995

As you looked over those lists, you probably noticed that they contain many of the members of Congress that Americans complain about the most.

Unfortunately, because the vast majority of these individuals come from states or congressional districts that are basically a lock to vote a certain way, there is very little hope of ever removing them.  That means that most of these Congress critters are going to get to keep coming back for as long as they want.

No matter which political party you prefer, this should greatly disturb you.

Our founders certainly never intended for a permanent class of elitists to rule over us.

But that is what we have.

We are supposed to have a government of the people, by the people and for the people, but instead we have a government of the elite, by the elite and for the elite.  Most people do not realize this, but today most members of Congress are actually millionaires.  The disconnect between members of Congress and average Americans has never been greater than it is right now, and I think that is a very troubling sign for the future of this nation.

 So is there a solution to this problem?

OLDDOGS COMMENTS

No Nation can survive with an ignorant population!

KEEP READING

New Military Spending Bill Expands Empire But Forbids Debate on War

http://www.thedailybell.com/editorials/36298/Ron-Paul-Military-Industrial-Congressional-Complex-No-Debate-Allowed/?uuid=6F80FACC-5056-9627-3C224900D5600C65

5-18-2015 11-11-58 AM

By Ron Paul

On Friday the House passed a massive National Defense Authorization for 2016 that will guarantee US involvement in more wars and overseas interventions for years to come. The Republican majority resorted to trickery to evade the meager spending limitations imposed by the 2011 budget control act – limitations that did not, as often reported, cut military spending but only slowed its growth.

But not even slower growth is enough when you have an empire to maintain worldwide, so the House majority slipped into the military spending bill an extra $89 billion for an emergency war fund. Such “emergency” spending is not addressed in the growth caps placed on the military under the 2011 budget control act. It is a loophole filled by Congress with Fed-printed money.

Ironically, a good deal of this “emergency” money will go to President Obama’s war on ISIS even though neither the House nor the Senate has debated – let alone authorized – that war! Although House leadership allowed 135 amendments to the defense bill – with many on minor issues like regulations on fire hoses – an effort by a small group of Representatives to introduce an amendment to debate the current US war in Iraq and Syria was rejected.

While squashing debate on ongoing but unauthorized wars, the bill also pushed the administration toward new conflicts. Despite the president’s unwise decision to send hundreds of US military trainers to Ukraine, a move that threatens the current shaky ceasefire, Congress wants even more US involvement in Ukraine’s internal affairs. The military spending bill included $300 million to directly arm the Ukrainian government even as Ukrainian leaders threaten to again attack the breakaway regions in the east. Does Congress really think US-supplied weapons killing ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine is a good idea?

The defense authorization bill also seeks to send yet more weapons into Iraq. This time the House wants to send weapons directly to the Kurds in northern Iraq without the approval of the Iraqi government. Although these weapons are supposed to be used to fight ISIS, we know from too many prior examples that they often find their way into the hands of the very people we are fighting. Also, arming an ethnic group seeking to break away from Baghdad and form a new state is an unwise infringement of the sovereignty of Iraq. It is one thing to endorse the idea of secession as a way to reduce the possibility of violence, but it is quite something else to arm one side and implicitly back its demands.

While the neocons keep pushing the lie that the military budget is shrinking under the Obama Administration, the opposite is true. As the CATO Institute pointed out recently, President George W. Bush’s average defense budget was $601 billion, while during the Obama administration the average has been $687 billion. This bill is just another example of this unhealthy trend.

Next year’s military spending plan keeps the US on track toward destruction of its economy at home while provoking new resentment over US interventionism overseas. It is a recipe for disaster. Let’s hope for either a presidential veto, or that on final passage Congress rejects this bad bill.

This article provided courtesy of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity. On this week’s Ron Paul Liberty Report, Dr. Paul and Daniel McAdams discuss the recent article by Seymour Hirsh in “Bin Laden Killing: Who’s Teling the Truth.” 

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: