Sleeping in your office?

[gekaap]

It's their choice to sleep in their offices and it has absolutely no bearing on your life so why the **** do you care?

Because the OP asked for opinion....

And because I do not trust a Congressperson or Senator to do their job well if they insist on living in their offices while in D.C.

 

[JBeukema]

According to RW logic, its prudent for us to save money by mooching water and electricity from others. I guess its OK if I'm able to run an electric cord from some business or residence to power my house because its not harming anyone...right?

Ask the owner of the place whether they have a problem with it.


Ask my representatives' boss, I'm fine with them fallin' out for a few hours at the office after a long day when they've got to be up in six hours.

But that's probably just 'cause I'm not a heartless bastard who hates anyone who gets paid more than i do

 

[JBeukema]

According to RW logic, its prudent for us to save money by mooching water and electricity from others. I guess its OK if I'm able to run an electric cord from some business or residence to power my house because its not harming anyone...right?

how are they using more water/electricity by sleeping in their office?

You never have to take a piss in the middle of the night?

Or you don't flush?

 

[JBeukema]

So just because you think they can afford it that means they should spend it?

what do you have against someone saving money?

WRONG!!!

That's where you go falling off the cliff...yet again.

It matters not what I think they can or cannot afford.

The fact of the matter is, they should be PERSONALLY and financially responsible enough to have their finances in order to be able to afford their OWN housing and not MOOCH off the government teet by sleeping in Government offices, not to mention breaking the zoning laws.

What do you have against our current laws?

You have yet to prove the zoning laws in DC prohibit sleeping in the Capital Building.

Can't be the case. I remember, a few months back, Maddow was talking about how they literally brought in cots in anticipation of one representative keeping everyone there all night for some stupid reason or another.

 

[gekaap]

why should we build something more when what they already have is adequate

Eh, you're right. We should start letting homeless people come sleep in the Capitol building as well. Imagine all the money that would be saved instead of building and keeping homeless shelters. Fiscal responsibility!

 

[gekaap]

Zoning laws are not the issue. Most people work for someone else and the employer does not want to expose himself to additional liability by allowing employees 24/7 access to his property.

Why should taxpayers be open to the liability? Who made that decision for them?

 

[JBeukema]

why should we build something more when what they already have is adequate

Eh, you're right. We should start letting homeless people come sleep in the Capitol building as well. Imagine all the money that would be saved instead of building and keeping homeless shelters. Fiscal responsibility!

Feasibility becomes an issue with that one- the next time Congress pulls an all-nighter in December, people have to freeze?

That's just a stupid proposal

 

[DiveCon]

why should we build something more when what they already have is adequate

Eh, you're right. We should start letting homeless people come sleep in the Capitol building as well. Imagine all the money that would be saved instead of building and keeping homeless shelters. Fiscal responsibility!

thats ******* stupid
the homeless are not elected

 

[DiveCon]

why should we build something more when what they already have is adequate

Eh, you're right. We should start letting homeless people come sleep in the Capitol building as well. Imagine all the money that would be saved instead of building and keeping homeless shelters. Fiscal responsibility!

Feasibility becomes an issue with that one- the next time Congress pulls an all-nighter in December, people have to freeze?

That's just a stupid proposal

its not "just" stupid, it's "*******" stupid

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I think the expense of maintaining two households can be unnecessarily burdensome, even if you are making 6 figures.

How so? What burden is there when you have such means? I've met people who were Reservists who maintained timeshares for their weekends when they drill. Their Reservist pay just covers the cost of their weekend housing costs. Like I pointed out, even if we over-estimate $2000 a month rent and utilities for their secondary housing, that still leaves them with $150,000 of net yearly income, which still leaves them in the top 4% of income earners. If it's a burden at all, then they are not fit for the responsibilities of their job. Maybe a more unnecessarily burdensome expense if their outrageous salaries. Maybe Congressional pay should be reduced to $50k a year, and then we can talk about paying for their own rent being "unnecessarily burdensome."

Second, if providing for their own housing needs is too burdensome, then they need to do what the rest of Americans have to do when faced with the dilemma of having personal needs conflict with their ability to get to work every day. They need to reevaluate their situation and if necessary find another job that works out better for them.

Wow, they had time shares, and that proves that anyone can afford two houses.

I, on the other hand, know people who have sold their time shares because the maintenance dues got too high. You really need to get your head out of your ass and stop trying to control how other people spend their money. What gives you the right to dictate how anyone else lives?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm very liberal and I see the massive problems with this.

Firstly its against zoning laws.

That should be the end of it.

I always see Conservatives falling on the sword of the law with the bs argument..."well is it legal?"

Well in this case...it isn't.

End of story.

**** zoning laws. Zoning laws are simply another way for the government to take people's property away from them without due process, and should be ruled unconstitutional.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

i think this shows fiscal responsibility and that fact they dont plan to become established in the beltway

I suppose they could always pull a Reid and rent an apartment from corporate lobbyists for a reduced rate.

 

[boedicca]

It's their choice to sleep in their offices and it has absolutely no bearing on your life so why the **** do you care?

Because the OP asked for opinion....

And because I do not trust a Congressperson or Senator to do their job well if they insist on living in their offices while in D.C.

I trust a Congress Person or Senator who sleeps in his or her office more than I do ones who accept free accommodations from lobbyists or jet across the country on government plains while charging hundreds of thousands of dollars of food and alcohol to taxpayers.

Just sayin'.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This argument is just pathetic and a weak attempt to rationalize a position that is unsustainable. There is NOTHING of responsibility, fiscal or otherwise, that is represented by Congresspersons and Senators sleeping in their offices. If they were truly responsible they would have obtained secondary housing. If they were fiscally responsible they would easily manage their finances so that the comparatively small cost of secondary housing became virtually meaningless to their wallet along side their lofty income. It's not like any landlord would make the sign a 10 year lease. So the idea that "they don't plan to become established in the beltway" is hogwash. If I go out of town for the weekend I don't plan to become established in the place I'm visiting, but I still get a motel room. Plans to become established have NOTHING to do with it.

It's just more RW excuses, pablum and claptrap that shows truly how reckless and irresponsible they are at core.

It's sucking off the government teet. The very thing Conservatives always claim to be rabidly against.

Exactly!

It's their choice to sleep in their offices and it has absolutely no bearing on your life so why the **** do you care?

It's also people's choice if they want to enjoy some weed smoke in their own home...it matters not...it's illegal. The Zoning Laws do not permit using your workplace as a place of residence.

Snap out of it!

Please post the zoning laws for Washington DC to prove your point.

Zoning laws are by no means uniform from town to town. If you ever had to deal with zoning, you'd know that.

And it's the very definition of a victimless "crime" so get over it already.

My guess is that the DC zoning laws do not apply to federal property anyway.

 

[JBeukema]

Maybe they can all stay at the C Street House?

 

[DiveCon]

Maybe they can all stay at the C Street House?

maybe not this group

they havent been bought




yet

 

[Ernie S.]

why should we build something more when what they already have is adequate

Eh, you're right. We should start letting homeless people come sleep in the Capitol building as well. Imagine all the money that would be saved instead of building and keeping homeless shelters. Fiscal responsibility!

When we start providing the homeless with private offices in the Capitol building, why not? If in Ryan's case, I worked 18 hours, I would not be using much water or electricity in the 6 remaining hours I slept. There is a gym in the building that all Reps and Senators are free to use and I'd bet that all who use it are free to shower after working out.
Considering that the Reps staying in their offices are not paying a staff driver to take them from home to office and back. I think there is likely a net savings.

 

[rightwinger]

I'm very liberal and I see the massive problems with this.

Firstly its against zoning laws.

That should be the end of it.

I always see Conservatives falling on the sword of the law with the bs argument..."well is it legal?"

Well in this case...it isn't.

End of story.

**** zoning laws. Zoning laws are simply another way for the government to take people's property away from them without due process, and should be ruled unconstitutional.

Sure...everyone wants the Bumpuses moving next to them with thirty dogs and a dozen wrecked cars

 

[uscitizen]

I'm very liberal and I see the massive problems with this.

Firstly its against zoning laws.

That should be the end of it.

I always see Conservatives falling on the sword of the law with the bs argument..."well is it legal?"

Well in this case...it isn't.

End of story.

**** zoning laws. Zoning laws are simply another way for the government to take people's property away from them without due process, and should be ruled unconstitutional.

Yep your neighbor should be able to raise pigs in his back yard or open a junk yard or a bar or porn shop?

 

[MarcATL]

Yep your neighbor should be able to raise pigs in his back yard or open a junk yard or a bar or porn shop?

But of course! Zoning laws are just another way for the government to exact their government control over our lies.

Its UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!

...I said.