Congress To Go After Obama’s Pension

USA Today reports:

Last year, then-president Barack Obama vetoed a bill that would have curbed the pensions of former presidents if they took outside income of $400,000 or more. So now that former president Barack Obama has decided to accept $400,000 for an upcoming Wall Street speech, the sponsors of that bill say they’ll reintroduce that bill in hopes that President Trump will sign it.

“The Obama hypocrisy on this issue is revealing,” said Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and sponsor of the 2016 bill. “His veto was very self-serving.”

Chaffetz and Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, the sponsor of the companion Senate bill, say they will re-introduce the Presidential Allowance Modernization Act this month. The bill would cap presidential pensions at $200,000, with another $200,000 for expenses. But those payments would be reduced dollar-for-dollar once their outside income exceeds $400,000.

  • DreadPikathulhu

    There is nothing too vindictive for these people. We’ve become a nation run by toddlers.

    • Yalma Cuder-Zicci

      The petty and vindictive toddler politicians do what they do because it pleases the petty and vindictive toddlers who elect them. Creative ideas are lost on the toddler electorate, but sticking it to Obama is a sweet treat for the kiddies back home.

    • Xiao Ai: The Social Gadfly

      What do they have to lose?

    • BlindBill

      It is just a game of diversion and re-direct …..do not think about Russia”s hacking of the US election with the help of 45

      • Nowhereman

        ..and don’t look into the Trump family’s conflicts of interest…

    • northern_neighbour

      Indeed that is the case. Pure hateful spite with a huge topping of white racist ignorant hypocrisy and “God’s gentle people”. /snark … these virtuous gracious GOP “Christians” so-called.

      The Obamas have just committed 2 million dollars to youth development programming in Chicago, and obviously they can raise a lot of money for many good initiatives in America, because Obama and his wife comported themselves with grace and intelligence for 8 long years during which these GOP racist low-life bastards constantly mocked and pilloried them.

      And now this kick in the groin to a truly great and patriotic American former Commander-in chief, a couple who fought for hope and decency and ethical treatment, not to mention the Golden Rule.

      Obama would never say it, but we all say FUCK THESE IGNORANT FASCIST LOW LIFE CON ARTISTS, and FUCK U 2 Jason Chaffetz and Joni Ernst. You are both WHITE TRASH and beyond DESPICABLE.

    • “Obama’s back, and so are the haters,” said Trevor Noah on Thursday’s Daily Show. Well, it seems as though these haters don’t want our former president to get a piece of the speech-money pie. But no one had a problem when previous presidents did. God forbid a black man is paid his worth.

      Noah had a few words for Obama’s haters, who perpetually show why they’re really hating without outright saying it.

      “Obama’s getting $400,000 to be a keynote speaker,” he said. “He’s probably going to give a very important policy speech entitled ‘The Four Boats I’m Going to Buy.’ Now, look, I know that people may say that it weakens public trust when politicians cash in immediately after leaving office, but at least Obama waited until he left office, unlike [President Trump], who’s using the White House like an ATM machine. And yeah, don’t get me wrong—I agree that the system must change, but it doesn’t change with Obama. People are like, ‘Why doesn’t he not accept the money?’ No, f—k that!”and FUCK YOU

      • HozillaSmallpox

        ” perpetually show why they’re really hating without outright saying it.”
        Sometimes they do outright say it especially in my neck of the woods

    • Dear Congress,

      Bill Clinton has been widely criticized for milking his presidency for tens of millions of dollars, and former first lady Hillary Clinton, who is running for president in 2016, has been attacked for using her time in the White House to boost her income, partly through book sales and speeches.

      It turns out that former President George W. Bush has been doing much the same thing. Politico reports that since he left office in 2009, “Bush has given at least 200 paid speeches and probably many more, typically pocketing $100,000 to $175,000 per appearance. The part-time work, which rarely requires more than an hour on stage, has earned him tens of millions of dollars. Relative to the Clintons, though, he has attracted considerably less attention, almost always doing his paid public speaking in private, in convention centers and hotel ballrooms, resorts and casinos, from Canada to Asia, from New York to Miami, from all over Texas to Las Vegas a bunch, playing his part in what has become a lucrative staple of the modern post-presidency.”

      http://33.media.tumblr.com/d427704e96e05c0fcbc6119c579ed77a/tumblr_n9vj3b4RbO1smcbm7o1_400.gif

      • Erikadmason

        Google is paying 97$ per hour! Work for few hours and have longer with friends & family! !mj206:
        On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
        !mj206:
        ➽➽
        ➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash206HomeViewGetPay$97Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!mj206:….,……

  • Tawreos

    They think Trump is going to sign something that will mean less money for himself? The only way that will happen is if it specifically says that it is for presidents after the current one.

    • Joe in PA

      pffft, they’ll change the law just before he leaves. Not a problem.

      • Steverino

        They will change it to apply only to presidents who served in office between 12:00pm January 20, 2009 and 12:00pm January 20, 2017.

  • netxtown

    take that uppity black man down!

    fucking racist pigs.

  • Michael R

    Will I be notified when millions of Americans march
    on the White House and physically remove these idiots ?
    I want to be up in front .

    • netxtown

      I’m ready as well.
      Pitchfork? check
      Torch? check
      Rope / duct tape? check
      Size 10 steel toed boot? check
      Rubber gloves? check

    • My nightmare scenario is what happens if Trump is Impeached but NOT removed by the Senate? I fear it will only embolden him to lay waste this country.

  • Michael R
    • netxtown

      trump opened up his kimono to Jason…..and Jason liked it!

    • Librarykid

      so he’s proven himself to be a low-down, lying, dirty rotten pig fucker who would not know truth or honor if they had him in the missionary position. I hope the fake emergency foot surgery is painfully and slowly fatal, you skid mark on humanity.

      • Nowhereman

        I think he already had the surgery and had to come high-tailing it back to congress to throw out more smoke and rearrange the mirrors. I was hoping he wouldn’t come back at all.

    • Nowhereman

      It’s amazing what they can say with a straight face. Chaffetz makes me sick.

  • Rex

    Need any more proof that the Republicans are hateful and bigoted?

  • JCF

    Off-topic: I’ve really been backed up here a few days, but wanted to see how Joe covered the whole (FAKE NEWS) ” #FireHomophobicColbert” thing.

    I see by giving this NON-story the obscurity it deserves!

    HomoCONS really need to get lives (beyond this, and making fun of transgender women that is).

  • Rex

    Leave Obama alone!

  • bmoore4026

    That’s…unconstitutional, isn’t it?

  • Skokieguy [Larry]

    Will the legislation include a provision that exempts income from watermelon sales and minstrel shows? The Republicans want to show American that they are compassionate and totally not racist.

    • Librarykid

      They will never be able to do that because they are, Blanche, they are.

  • j.martindale

    They project that in eight years, tRump’s vacation costs will total 691 MILLION DOLLARS. For 8 years, Obama’s expenses were 20 million. And these motherf*ckers are worried about Obama’s pension???? F*cking hypocrites!

    • Todd20036

      Yup. It’s racism and Obama is a democrat and he left a legacy that even a Nazi Congress cannot seem to repeal

  • Randy Left Brooklyn

    I am not aware of any other pension that gets reduced because of income one earns form outside sources, except for Social Security, which is an insurance program and not a pension. Are they proposing the same for congressmen? Will these louses lose their pensions dollar for dollar when they go to work as lobbyist?

    • Tawreos

      Costing other people money is the way to do things, they will never allow their own to be touched. This is probably why Obama vetoed it.

    • Bad Tom

      If you are on social security, as opposed to disability, your payments are NOT reduced if you work.

      • jmax

        Once you reach full retirement age.

        • Bad Tom

          Exactly!

      • Randy Left Brooklyn

        Social Security kind of gets reduced too, because starting at something like 32k yearly of other income, the SSI changes from being tax free to taxable, and the amount that is taxable goes up as your income goes up.

        • Bad Tom

          It does not get reduced. Becoming taxable isn’t the same.

          Suppose you turn 66. You intend to keep working. Should you apply for SS benefits?

          Yes, the extra income will be taxed. Will you have more money than if you didn’t get the benefits? Do the math.

        • Phillip in L.A.

          Are you sure you mean “SSI”? That is not the same as “regular” Social Security or Social Security Disability (Title II=’SSD’); it is supplemental income for people with VERY low income (could be wages, SS, SSD, etc.) Haven’t looked it up lately, but it used to be in the neighborhood of ‘poverty level.’ My point: if your income (from any source) > $32K/year, you are NOT getting SSI

      • Jerry

        Two different things here: Until you turn 66, if you earn over (2017 limit) $16920, then you pay back $1 for every $2 you go over the limit. That’s from wages or self-employment only, not retirement or investment income. That’s regular social security…there are different requirements if it’s disability.
        Second is whether social security is taxable or not. Regardless of age or type of social security benefit, if 1/2 of your social security plus all other income is over $25,000 ($32,000 if married), then part of your social security will be taxable.

        • Bad Tom

          Until you turn 66. The rules are different after you reach retirement age.
          Taxable isn’t the same as you don’t get it.

          My husband and his sister are in this situation.

          • Jerry

            Yes…if you’re still working, it’s often better to not draw SS or you end up paying most of it back.

          • Bad Tom

            One should really do a spreadsheet for one’s own situation. Both my husband and his sister (who is a VP at a large credit card company,) found it worth it to have SS, and to keep working.

      • McSwagg

        Try telling that to all the teachers out there who have had their social security reduced or even eliminated because they worked for “the state” and earned a “state funded pension” all courtesy of the vile Tom DeLay. Teachers certainly aren’t getting rich through their public service.

        • Bad Tom

          Having an alternate pension isn’t the same as working while receiving social security.

        • Bad Tom

          Happens to folks who work for railroads, too.

  • grada3784

    God, they really hate the man.

    • TexasBoy

      No, they hate his skin tone.

  • olandp

    What the FUCK! Like Don the Con isn’t going to make more than $400,000 once he is out of office. Right.

    As I recall St. Ronald Reagan was paid $2million for a speech.

    • popebuck1

      He’s already skimmed off a hundred times that, just by taking all his vacations at his own properties.

    • Michael White

      He was white. It makes a difference for the rethugs

  • Ninja0980

    Just another example of how much hatred these folks have for Obama.
    And yet the pundits will still lay the blame on him for not reaching out to people who have made it clear again and again they despise him for daring to be a black Democrat who was able to get elected to the White House twice.

  • Michael R

    Is this more ” LOOK A SQUIRREL ” bullshit and nothing else ?

    • Todd20036

      At this point, I don’t expect anything better.

    • geoffalnutt

      Sally Yates testifies!!!

  • Ernest Endevor

    I see, 400,000 is the magic number. Another dodge to embarrass Democrats with the Working Folk. How about when our reps are convicted of felonies they lose their pensions?

  • TexasBoy

    If they pass it, it should apply to congress, too.

    • Gustav2

      Especially if after leaving congress they become lobbyists.

    • Sebastian

      if it applied to ALL elected officials Id support it 100% but they will never pass a bill like that

      • Todd20036

        Oh please. A bill that would restrict Trump’s income? Please!

    • Uncle Mark

      It should apply to sitting fake-presidents then, too…if only we could see the lying weasel’s income tax to insure this.

    • caphillprof

      Absolutely!

    • David Walker

      It never applies to the honorable members of congress. Nothing they pass has to apply to them. They exempt themselves from the laws the make. Truly honorable public servants.

      • Librarykid

        If it applies to Obama, it should apply to all former presidents now and into the future.

    • Gerry Fisher

      Absolutely, this!

  • Skokieguy [Larry]

    Let’s see, if the Republicans want to continue with their shock and awe outrage campaign to deflect from Russian collaboration, Trump’s blatant enrichment in violation of the Constitution and all the other horrors of his administration (where’s the investigation into the Yemen raid and the other civilians and American military killed under Trump), then this is a good announcement.

    Perhaps on the day Sally Yates testifies, they will announce legislation to remove Secret Service protection for ex Presidents and their families 90 days after the term ends. Because of the massive costs of protecting Trump’s brood, this will certainly suck up all the media attention and remove the focus from where it should be.

  • thom

    As a liberal Obama supporter, I have no issue with this. I imagine Obama doesn’t either.

    • yeah, i doubt he cares much at all. 400K per speech? he’s set for life, regardless of the status of his presidential pension.

      • thom

        Right? And its a bill he wanted passed.
        It is vindictive for sure, but he still gets what he wants. Lol

        • stuckinthewoods

          Chaffetz sponsored the same bill in 2016. Last July after consulting with all living presidents President Obama vetoed it.

          • thom

            You are right. Thank you. I completely misread the article.

          • stuckinthewoods

            I’d also have thought Mr. Obama would agree that the founders didn’t envision former citizen-statesmen being supported for life by the state they were designing. With staff…and security, and.., and, and…….

          • Bad Tom

            The founders did not envision a Secret Service, either.
            Perhaps we should disband it.

          • stuckinthewoods

            Disbanding it is not the same as making it perpetual. In 1994 Congress limited protection to 10 years but in 2013 Obama restored it to lifetime for presidents and their wives. We’ll pay security for trump until he dies… as well as for his (current) wife. They’re easily capable of paying for it themselves. If the Society of the Cincinnati blew Washington’s and Jefferson’s frocks up, this would have really knocked their wigs askew.

      • thom

        Right? And its a bill he wanted passed.
        It is vindictive for sure, but he still gets what he wants. Lol

      • popebuck1

        I imagine at this point he’s just bemused by the whole thing. It’s like finding out your ex from years ago is STILL obsessed with you, and making himself miserable lashing out at you, when you moved on ages ago.

    • BobSF_94117

      I have an issue with anybody’s pension being retroactively altered by a malevolent former employer.

    • Skeptical_Inquirer

      It’s not that Obama would be hurting for cash. It’s the fact that the bill is very pointedly being written against him. It’s like “Jeebus, he’s out of office and you got your rotten marmalade weirdo in power. Give it a damn rest especially when the GOPers still gobble at the trough.”

      • thom

        Its literally Obamas bill. The language wouldnt be different than the one he proposed.
        Obama supports this bill.
        Edit. I apologize, i cant read. Ignore this post. I got ALL the facts wrong

  • Skokieguy [Larry]

    So how’s your recovery from your emergency foot surgery coming?

    • Dreaming Vertebrate

      Still firmly lodged in mouth, but the good news? – no bone spurs!!

  • Buford

    I actually don’t have a big problem with this. It allows an ex-president to earn $600K in a given year before the law impacts their pension payout… that’s plenty good money.

    • netxtown

      I will have a problem if they make it retro.

    • netxtown

      I will have a problem if they make it retro.

    • BobSF_94117

      I think you misread it. The one-for-one reduction applies to half the pension and begins when the outside income reaches $400,000.01.

      • Buford

        I don’t misread it. If an ex-prez earns $400K on top of their $200K pension, that’s $600K. If they earn $405K, their pension drops to $195K… still $600K. If they earn $700K, they get no pension… but they still earned $700K.

        I’m OK with that model.

        • BobSF_94117

          Actually the description:

          The bill would cap presidential pensions at $200,000, with another
          $200,000 for expenses. But those payments* would be reduced dollar-for-dollar once their outside income exceeds $400,000.

          means we’re both wrong. * BOTH payments would be reduced as earned income rose.

          Any earned income above $400K would be deducted from the pension/expense fund.

          • Buford

            Distinction without a difference as far as my stance goes… I’m OK with reducing the taxpayer-funded pension/expense payouts if the ex-prez earns more than $400K in a year. If the govt sees that they have so much earning potential, it’s OK to for the govt to save taxpayer funds by reducing these payouts.

            Again, to me it’s no different than the historical 80-90% top marginal tax rate. That, too, was the govt codifying an income ‘limit’ beyond which the excess income needs to come back into taxpayer coffers.

          • BobSF_94117

            Of course it’s different. It punished public servants while private industry administrators continue to rake in the bucks.

    • band

      What other workers should have the pension they’ve earned reduced due to other earnings? Cops who work other jobs after they retire? Teachers?

      • Buford

        What other workers earn a taxpayer-funded pension that immediately places them in the top 2.5% of US incomes…?

        If an ex-president can earn more than $400K/yr, I’m OK with their pension being reduced. That’s not unreasonable to me.

        • band

          Doesn’t seem reasonable to me to take away something that someone has worked to earn. If a Post Office employee wins the lottery, should we reduce or eliminate her pension? It would save taxpayers money.

          • Buford

            Hypothetically, if someone proposed a law that said lottery winners needed to forego taxpayer-funded pensions, I’d be OK with that, too. To me it’s no different than the post-war top marginal tax rates of 80-90%… it’s long-standing legal precedent for the govt saying, eventually, ‘You’ve earned enough, so anything above a certain point is excess and needs to be given back’.

            If an ex-prez earns $700K/yr, they can forego that pension.

            Perfectly reasonable.

          • band

            Not reasonable. Former presidents are all subject to income tax, so the more they earn the more they pay.

            How about these 100 federal employees who all had salaries in excess of $375,00 in 2015? Would you also dock their pensions if their future income exceeds a certain amount in any given year?
            https://www.federalpay.org/employees/top-100

          • band

            And BTW, I’d be delighted if we raised marginal tax rates for top earners. That is a reasonable way to make the fortunate and successful pay more. Clawing back pensions is not a practice that should ever be endorsed, regardless of the employer.

          • Buford

            You know my stance… yes. It’s perfectly reasonable for the govt to say that, beyond a certain level of wealth, you no longer receive a taxpayer-funded pension and/or you can pay 80-90% of that excess income as taxes.

          • band

            Well I do appreciate your consistency with the rule.

            So you would undermine the very concept of “pension” in order to save taxpayers a couple nickels? And in the process, further discourage top professionals from working in government?

          • Buford

            Stop asking me questions.

          • band

            Certainly. I wouldn’t want to cause you (or anyone else) to question a policy position they’ve taken—and shared. What good could possibly come of that?

          • Buford

            You can’t learn from my clear and consistent responses, so I’m not wasting any more energy on you. Go pester someone else who disagrees with you.

      • McSwagg

        Teachers already have their social security benefits reduced or eliminated simply because the earned a state pension. It was pushed through by Tom DeLay in the 90s.

        • band

          Do you have a link that explains that? I hadn’t heard of that legislation, and the only things I see online are the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) and the Government Pension Offset (GPO), which reduce or eliminate Social Security benefits for public sector employees who earned pensions and did NOT pay into Social Security (due to laws in their states).

          • McSwagg

            There are very few teachers who have NEVER worked in the private sector. Nearly all have worked jobs where they DID pay into social security at some point in their lives. In order to receive social security benefits, you have to accumulate enough “quarters” (i. e. 3 month employment periods where you DO pay into social security) to qualify. If the teacher meets these employment qualifications, why should their benefits be arbitrarily reduced or blocked? What about someone who works 20 years in the private sector and earns social security benefits, then teaches for 20 years and earns a teachers’ pension? That person gets a reduced teachers’ pension because they only taught for 20 years, but they are also denied the social security benefits they earned for the 20 years they worked in the private sector and PAYED into the system. Why should they forgo something they earned just because Tom DeLay and his GOP cadre had animus toward the teaching profession. I can guarantee you that no one gets rich teaching and retired teachers are not living in any kind of excessive luxury.

          • band

            I think you misinterpreted my question. I’m not taking a position on whether teacher’s pensions should be reduced. I’m asking whether the law you referred to—the one you said DeLay pushed through—is something other than the WEP or GPO that I mentioned above. Is it?

            I’m trying to clarify your statement so that I can understand the situation. It should be pretty clear from my other comments in this thread that I generally feel pensions should NOT be fucked with.

          • McSwagg

            Thanks for your clarification. I don’t know exactly what legal code it falls under, but I am personally affected as one of those 20/20 split career people I described above.

          • band

            I never would have guessed you’re personally affected. ; )

  • unsavedheathen

    I’m curious as to the sum total of benefits paid to members of Congress after their “service” ends. How much will Chaffetz get when he slithers off in 2018? When that number is multiplied by 538, doesn’t it come to a tad more than $400K?

    • popebuck1

      Their “Cadillac” Congressional health insurance package is also for life.

      • Skeptical_Inquirer

        Maybe that’s something that should be up for debate. THAT needs to be raised as an issue as they carved out an exception for themselves when it came to the cruel effects of Dumpcare.

      • band

        Since 2014, members of Congress (and their staffers) have gotten their health insurance via the small business exchanges set up under Obamacare.

  • Dreaming Vertebrate

    Because there is a limit to how much a black man can earn??

    • thom

      Lol. Its literally a bill Obama proposed

    • thom

      Lol. Its literally a bill Obama proposed

    • Nowhereman

      Yes. I think it’s $7.50 per hour, no bennies.

  • DaddyRay

    Trump will just have them pay his Trump Foundation

  • DaddyRay

    Trump will just have them pay his Trump Foundation

  • sSS

    Yet we pay an unlimited amount for security for a 1st Lady who doesn’t appear to want to live with her husband. We pay an unlimited amount for security for Trump’s adult children to do business all over the world.

    • DonnaLee

      And for 45 to take vacations every week.

    • Nowhereman

      We probably pay for him to rent his room at his maralago hotel when he goes down there, along with the cost to put up the SS agents and feed them and any visiting dignitaries. It’s as if he ran for president just to make a fortune off of us and change the tax laws to make himself even richer. And not one effing complaint from the right–unless it’s to claim that Trump’s policies aren’t mean enough to poor people and minorities. People who voted for Trump need to be sent to education camps. Not RE-education camps–it’s obvious they never got an education to begin with.

  • sSS

    Yet we pay an unlimited amount for security for a 1st Lady who doesn’t appear to want to live with her husband. We pay an unlimited amount for security for Trump’s adult children to do business all over the world.

  • andrew

    If Chaffetz and Ernst don’t want their proposed bill to look like an attack on Mr. Obama, which it clearly is, they should broaden the proposal to include all Federal Government employees of the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Branches of government.

    • Todd20036

      Why should they worry about people realizing it’s an attack on Obama?

    • Nowhereman

      Oh hells no! Can’t have that!

  • andrew

    If Chaffetz and Ernst don’t want their proposed bill to look like an attack on Mr. Obama, which it clearly is, they should broaden the proposal to include all Federal Government employees of the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Branches of government.

  • Gigi

    Good idea. Congress should give up their free health care as well.

    • Adam King

      How about any member of Congress worth over $5 million or so doesn’t get any bennies. And no pension if you make oodles lobbying or pulling some board-member sinecure afterwards.

    • band

      They don’t have free health care. They get their heath insurance through the Obamacare exchanges (small business), and they pay toward the premiums. The federal government pays about 72% of the premium, so the employer support is generous, but Congress members do NOT get free health care.

      • Gigi

        I stand corrected. While doing some reasearch I discovered one of the main reasons Republicans hate the ACA — no more free health care. “…if the Affordable Care Act is repealed, members of Congress would be able to return to the federal plan that they, like millions of federal employees, were so fond of. Twenty million other Americans won’t.”

        http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/on-health-care-well-have-what-congress-is-having/amp

        • band

          Thank you for graciously acknowledging the correction, Gigi. Congressional salaries and benefits is a subject on which there is WAY too much crazy circulating on the Interwebs.

        • Librarykid

          but mainly, it will eliminate that medical device tax on the rich.

  • Gigi

    Good idea. Congress should give up their free health care as well.

  • skyweaver

    Be sure and sh** all over the most popular president in living memory. Good plan.

    • Adam King

      While claiming all the patriotism for your party only.

  • skyweaver

    Be sure and sh** all over the most popular president in living memory. Good plan.

  • Moderate Liberal

    What a bunch of schmucks. The man gave us eight good years he has the right to earn a living.

    • Librarykid

      The thing is that the Obamas are good and brilliant people. They will never have trouble earning a living as they make life better for humanity. If they succeed in taking his pension away, I hope he takes the gloves off when speaking about Republicans and shames them to whale shit at every opportunity.

      • Nowhereman

        He should do that last bit no matter what. Honeymoon’s over.

  • bsinps

    Yeah let Trump sign it, it’s not like he won’t be making ton of money after he’s out of office.

    • Adam King

      I hear making license plates is very lucrative.

  • Snownova

    Can some intrepid journalist please draw up a list of former Republican presidents who took more than 400k in income after their presidencies? I’m pretty sure it’s all of them in the last 30 years.

    • MaryJOGrady

      If memory serves, even the last sane and moderate one, Gerald R. Ford, did.

  • dogdadny

    they really think that 🍊Is gonna pass that! He’d be cutting his own pay which he said he’d donate but hasn’t.

  • Mark Née Fuzz

    If they pass the bill, will Trump sign it? Assuming he doesn’t get fired for cause, i.e., impeached, he stands to lose as well.

    • Skeptical_Inquirer

      I think his spitefulness will overrule that consideration. Then when he’s about to lose his job, he’ll say “Nooooooooooo, make an exception for your holiness!”

  • Henry Auvil

    Maybe they can take away Sasha and Malia’s health insurance while they’re at it.

    • Bad Tom

      They are voting on that today.

      • Nowhereman

        I sure hope that goes down in flames again.

  • liondon#iamnotatraitor

    They’re not leaders they’re still the opposition party. The only thing they can agree on is their hatred of blacks… I mean Obama.

    • Nowhereman

      I know, right? They have no effing idea how to govern. Trump thinks he’s a king now and can just make it so with a wave of his sharpie pen. He’s still reliving his “victory” and running against Hillary at the same time. Congressional republicans are voting down their own bills and blaming it on the democrats who are in the majority. And their hypocrisy is beyond the pale, even for them.

  • Daveed_WOW

    Open racism always pays off.

  • HKDaniel

    I’m pretty sure Obama doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the 200k pension, it’s just republicans doing their only job – being petty and mean.

    Are they also restricting the pensions of former Congress people and Senators who go on to earn millions working as lobbyists?

    I think not.

  • BobSF_94117

    “His veto was very self-serving.”

    Totally not like the bill itself, proposed by the GOP, voted for by the GOP, aimed directly at the president who was about to retire. Mere coincidence, of course.

    I wonder if Trump realizes they’re trying to stick it to him!

  • Tulle Christensen

    So only Jimmy Carter would get any pension then

    • Todd20036

      Funny that.

    • Nowhereman

      He’s also our least vacationing president. Obama is our second least.

  • AusJox

    I’m beyond words now … all I can say is “WHAT ARSEHOLES” …

  • Rebecca Gardner
    • Jason “Small Rodent” Chaffetz, who just hurried off to have surgery for a pre-existing condition under his taxpayer provided health coverage before he leaves Congress.

      Why am I not surprised?

      • Nowhereman

        I really do hope that he’s taken down with the Russia scandal. Chaffetz is a very special little petty autocrat. He needs a good time out. I’d love to see him in the gray bar hotel for awhile.

  • Blake Mason

    Just fucking leave already,Jason.

  • Xiao Ai: The Social Gadfly

    Civil War. It’s the only thing they’ll accept.

    • geoffalnutt

      It’s what Putin wants so badly!! Sally Yates testifies on the 8th. It’s all related.

  • kelven

    Total showboating and distraction from Russiagate and Chaffetz’s hand in it. There is no way in hell Republicans are going to restrict their own gift bags just to spite the black man who was everything Jason will never be.

  • Skeptical_Inquirer

    OHhhhhhh, yeah, this is such a great idea that the law should be expanded to claw back pension money from all these asshole ex-Congressmen lobbying for banks, Big Pharma, and all those creepy “think tanks” for the past many decades. I’d love to see a Dem try to amend that bill so it showcases that when it comes to their own & their tribal members’ wallets, the GOP will act like the seagulls from Finding Nemo. Yeah, if it’s so wonderbar, they need to apply it to themselves!

  • sacrob

    Obama would be grandfathered, methinks. Most legislation can’t be retroactive, but only going forward. That said, it’s bullshit for politicos to take so much money for speeches.

    • JD

      not always true – they’re motivated

  • Can someone attach an amendment to the bill which bans ALL lobbying by anyone who has served in Congress? or Taxes any earnings of former members of congress engaged in lobbying at a flat rate of 75%? Watch how fast the GOP Cockroaches scurry to protect their gravy train!

  • Michael

    So Dishonest Donald can advertise his properties, businesses and work to create huge tax breaks/profits for Trump, Inc., but Obama’s pension must be taken away?

    • Skeptical_Inquirer

      They always were “one set of rules for me and another much harder for thee.” It’s why they get along sooooooooooo well with the fundajelical who eats pork & shrimp, cuts the corner of his face (shaving), divorces multiple times because of multiple adulterous affairs yet bitches non-stop about the single line of Leviticus they care about and fetuses they don’t give a damn about once they’re born.

    • Nowhereman

      Right–you got it.

  • Chris Gardner

    Good luck to congress in getting Trump to sign a bill which would curtail his potential money-making after office. LOL

    • The_Wretched

      Someone would have to explain that to Donald. If they tell him it’ll hurt Obama, he’ll sign it.

    • Bad Tom

      He doesn’t read or understand what he signs, so they’re in the clear.

  • I seem to remember something in the Constitution that bans ex post facto laws — like this one.

    • MaryJOGrady

      They’ll word it prettily and then swear up and down they just passed it on general principles, to prevent any bad old profiteering by former presidents. The stench of hypocrisy and plain lying will be tremendous.

  • Uncle Mark

    I know this is supposed to be a giant FU to former President Obama, but does anyone honestly expect cheap-ass, fake-president Drumpf to sign it if this gets to his desk? ($400,000 can rent a lot of Russian hookers)

    • Halou

      The Republicans will just change it again the day Trump leaves office.

      • MaryJOGrady

        Only if we let them stay in power.
        2018 will be here soon. Let’s translate our frankly righteous rage into a lot of hard work to elect Democrats at every level of government.

  • David L. Caster

    Time to go after Congress.

  • sadoldguy

    Don’t bet on a trump veto because it might affect him in the future. This will immediately affect Obama and B Clinton. It isn’t just pension, it is also Secret Service coverage and management, and if unchanged from the version Obama vetoed, requires cutbacks to happen right away.

  • Richard B

    Jason Chaffetz is very sick with a terrible republican mental disease called Obama Derangement Syndrome. It is usually found in southern states, but is sometimes found as far north as Utah. This disease can be overwhelmingly debilitating and sometimes fatal if not untreated through provisions provided through the Affordable Care Act. Medical Cannabis sometimes helps, but regular visits to western blue states like California in combination with medical Cannabis can be effective, especially when treated regularly with long stays on a California nude beach.
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/b800b36bf6fcf39ec20655712861aec7701107c5724a38c7810d5713713bca96.jpg

  • Halou

    Perhaps Congress can approve another law at the same time, to penalize a president who is on the take while in office.

    I expect after Trump leaves office the Republicans will say that a president is entitled to make as much money as they can ever want or need by riding off the back of their political career, as short or long as it may be.

  • Matt

    So, punish the black guy for the same thing all the previous white guys have done. Sure. Who sponsored this bill – the KKK? Seriously. Jason Cheezitz is a boil on the butt of humanity. Scratch that, ALL republicans are.

  • Tread

    This is just so fucking racist. We HAVE to start mobilizing for 2018. These Republican fucks have to be out of office.

  • Tiger Quinn

    I confess to some naivete about exactly HOW much they hated Obama.

  • MaryJOGrady

    Didn’t *Nixon* still get his pension, for the love of heaven?

  • Paula

    They are not going to be happy until Barack and Michelle are hanging from a railroad bridge someplace in Alabama!

    • Ross

      I want to think you are joking…

      …but suspect you are exactly correct.

    • Nowhereman

      True that. They really really disgust me. And the hypocrisy! Remember the flak they gave Michelle for wearing a (GASP!) sleeveless dress? Now we have a first lady who has posed nude and nearly nude, and even posed in fake girl-on-girl soft porno.

  • SDG

    Nothing to low… NOTHING!

  • Stephen Elliot Phillips

    In 100 days of power this is the first and last effort we will see that takes money from the rich. And this attempt is merely for revenge and nullification.
    Nothing that has been done so far and nada in the future will help the economy and the working classes.

    • Nowhereman

      Pretty much all that Trump and the republicans have done since the election is to try to erase the entire presidency of the black man. I’m surprised that they haven’t ripped out Michelle’s garden and put in a putting green with a 19th hole…

  • CandyDarling
  • rockymtranger
    • The_Wretched

      It’s like it’s possible to do good things with wealth and not just spend it on gold leaf.

  • Robert Flanagan

    Let’s go a little further and curb the pensions for congress whose members cand serve on term and suck off the taxpayer’s teat for the rest ogf their lives.

    • Bj Lincoln

      That is a great idea! Shame the Dems are not smart enough or too chicken to pull it off.

    • band

      I’m afraid you’re spreading a bit if Interwebs nonsense there.

      Reps in Congress do NOT qualify for pensions after just one term. There pension plan works like most people’s pension or 401K: There’s a vesting period (so, if you don’t serve 5 years, you get nothing) AND the starting pension amount is determined by length of service.

  • Ross
  • Ross

    And just when I think the GOP cannot sink to any lower depths of evil and depravity…

  • Mike Rasor

    These people have no problem allowing Trump to use the presidency to make money while he’s in office, but, God forbid, a black man makes money after being president. That’s just too much for them to handle.

  • Baltimatt

    I didn’t see the text of the vetoed bill, but I was wondering if it exempted current and prior presidents. If so, Obama would have been excluded from he bill he vetoed, but a new bill would not exclude him.

  • Bad Tom

    Will this bill apply to ALL former Presidents, including both Bushes, and eventually, Trump?

    Or does it specifically target only the black President?
    ——-
    Given how hard being President is, their pensions are generally well earned.

  • David Walker

    So Chaffetz’ foot surgery wasn’t successful…it still keeps popping into his mouth.

    • Nowhereman

      He should go back and have the doctor sew his lips shut.

  • Bj Lincoln

    “The Obama hypocrisy on this issue is revealing,” Please explain how.

  • SFBruce

    Being an ex-president can be very profitable, as Ronald Reagan proved when he was paid 2 million for 2 speeches in Japan. I’m not wild about exploiting being an ex-president, but apart from Carter’s stellar example, everyone does it to some degree. But Obama’s book deal and his $400,000 speech don’t bother me nearly as much as the orange one, who claims to be worth 10 billion, and is a walking conflict of interest, who plans to give big tax breaks to himself and his rich pals.

  • Gerry Fisher

    Jeez, douche nozzles, the black guy is *gone* already. Would you please, PLEASE stop trying to “get” him. It’s so tedious, pathetic, and counter productive.

  • Galvestonian

    REPUBLICANS – mean spirited, bigoted & racist, vindictive, thuggish, ignorant, screwed up, stupid and dumb, ultra hypocritical and not quite human.

  • Nowhereman

    What a pathetic, pissy little man. And when will he be going after the Trump Crime Family’s conflicts of interest?

  • boobert

    We’ve gone to a whole new level of making money from political office with the present administration and staff. But let’s start with going after the black guy, lol.

  • 2patricius2

    They think that #45, the grifter, will sign a bill that would cut him out of more money from the government? Rofl!

  • sword

    Congress needs to cut any funds for Presidential vacations to any place other than Camp David. If a President wants to vacation in, say, Florida or Hawaii, the President needs to pay for any travel expenses, not including Secret Service costs.

    • Tomcat

      A vacation is just that and as long as there is only one a year who cares where they vacation. After all congress is always on vacation and by god I am sure we pay dearly for every day they live.

      • Yeah but Mar A Lago is way too expensive to go to every fucking week and Trump is making us pay for it– and the money goes to his pockets!

  • octobercountry

    Honestly, a president’s pension is just pocket change compared to the money they make for speaking engagements. Plus—the GOP’s restriction would penalize any former Republican president just as much as it penalizes Democrats. So, no, I really don’t care if this passes.

  • kareemachan

    To quote an ad: “That’s not how this works. “

  • charemor

    Help stamp out Jason Chaffez and Joni Ernst.

  • Tomcat

    Alright Obama tell them you will speak for 399,999.99.

  • EweTaw

    If anyone is familiar with hypocrisy, Chaffetz is your guy. It’s time his foot surgery became septic?

  • It’s not hypocrisy, he vetoed the bill the last time.

  • Jean-Marc in Canada
    • MassageBear

      Shouldn’t the same apply to ex-Congresspersons and their speaking fees?

  • glass

    Republicans are anti-American terrorists. They are THE hate machine. What a racists bunch of fucks.

  • MassageBear

    So does a president still get Secret Service protection in prison? I know the law was changed (by Bush, Jr.) which limits the number of years of Secret Service protection offered (to only ten years after leaving office, instead for life…recognizing the fact that ex-presidents now can earn so much in speaking fees that they can well afford their own security protection). That kicks in 2027 for Mr. Obama. Can’t recall if Shrub is affected or not.

  • Greg in Oz

    How petty

  • ted-

    Fucking a-holes. Do your fucking job and impeach the orange anus.