It has always seemed to me that there are a surprising number of politicians that are millionaires. I have always wondered how many were millionaires before they took office and how many became millionaires after they got into office.
Does anyone have any idea how many politicians in general are able to turn their election into a personal financial gain.
Here is an article stating that 23 of the 29 members of the coalition government (UK) are worth over 1 million GBP.
However, it is worth noting that this includes assets and many MPs have two houses, one in their constituency and one in London for when they are attending parliament. The cost of two houses would bring them very close to 1 million GBP I would imagine and it looks like the stated wealth includes shared wealth with their spouse.
Still, you can see just how much each is worth and make your own assumption on just how rich they may be. The after dinner speaking circuit can be a big money spinner for former Prime Ministers / Presidents. I seem to recall hearing that William Hague was particularly successful in this regard.
Someone who makes it to president or senator is no Joe the Plumber. Many are very smart and usually have a profession like lawyer. A smart high-qulity lawyer with the schmoozing and organizational technique needed to run a government would probably be a good partner in a major law firm. Not many would choose to be a community organizer instead.
So their income before getting into politics would be pretty good. Then, they get the dinner-speech circuit. Once out of office, even temporarily, they are probably hired by various companies for their connections and name prestige alone. Nixon, IIRC, was a partner in a major NYC law firm between his time as “not kicked around any more” and becoming president.
Bill Clinton’s fee for any speech, IIRC, is now well above $100,000. Even Henry Kissinger could command dinner speech fees close to $100,000. Most politicians publish a book or several during a slow time which rewards them with book royalties when they become interesting newsworthy people. IIRC there’s a limit to what fees congressional member can collect and they have to disclose the numbers, to limit the opportunity for quasi-legitimate payoffs.
Then there’s the story of how Hillary Clinton made a killing in the futures market on one contract, and the speculation that others played the market to give her a plausible payout. People still push money to politicians hrough various legitimate means in hope of favours. Not sure if that was Gingrich-type facts manipulation, but it did sound odd. But smart guys know how to use the stockmarket to get richer, and know enough about the busines world to understand what’s good investment.
Plus, if daddy left you tens of millions, or you finish your first career early in life with a big bundle - some people feel it’s their civic duty to go into politics and give something back. Nothing makes a few months on the campaign trail finacially tolerable like plenty of money to pay the bills anyway.
A lot of politicians (in Canada, at least) are lawyers beforehand, and lawyers usually get paid fairly well. As well, after a politician/lawyer retires from politics, he can usually get a position at a prestige law firm (to capitalize on name recognition and political contacts, for instance).
I think it’s more the case that millionaires become politicians than the reverse.
That’s true. And most wealthy people who become successful politicians did not come from particularly rich families (Kennedys, Rockefellers and Bushes being notable anomalies). Clinton grew up dirt poor in Arkansas. Nixon was the son of a grocer whose farm went bankrupt, etc.
If you have the intelligence and ambition to become very wealthy, chances are you have a lot in common with people who become successful politicians.
I’ve seen figures in the past that showed members of the US Senate and House clearly rose their net worth during their term in office. This effect was most clearly seen in those who were not millionaires when they entered office. Obviously the rich are in a better position to run for office and get elected in the first place, but I can’t see the acceptance of this system where the financial gains are based on conflicts of interest, insider deals, influence peddling, and flat out bribery (hidden under the guise of campaign contributions).
Is it just me? Or do others find this to be a major factor in the failure of our government to serve the best interests of the people. I’m sure the debate would be endless on what those best interests are, but clearly the majority of people in this country don’t feel they’re being served, whatever they are.
I agree with this. In Illinois to run for a senate seat (US Senate) it’s estimated that the candidate will have to raise about 25 million win or lose.
Now of course that means raise, not that you have to have it, but it does show that you have to have some substantial amount just to get started.
You’re also gonna have to take time out of work to run.
But let’s face it a million dollars isn’t what it used to be. I know I worked in hotels in downtown Chicago and the Contollers and Directors of Sales were making $150,0000/year or more.
Now let’s say you have someone making that and married to a man/worman also making that. That’s $300,000 a year. It wouldn’t be too hard to save a million on that salary, if you really tried.
Of course the more you make the more you spend, but you at $300,000/year a million isn’t too far aound the corner.
The Clintons are prime examples…at the end of his 2nd term, Bill and Hillary were worth somewhere around $500K-they are both now double -digit millionaires (book deals, speaking engagements, “consulting”). They don’t pay for anything, and most of their income is pure gravy.
Or Al Gore-he is working the “global warming” scam to his benefit, and stands to make 100’s of millions in “carbon credits”.
The interesting thing…after their careers are over, politicians HATE to go home…the money in DC is so good (lobbying), nobody wants to go back to Podunk.
Take Bob Dole-he is making a fortune…no reason for him to go home.
About the only politician who retired poor was Harry Truman.
You left out ruthlessness. 
The Washington Post reported recently that many lawmakers in Congress have significant investments in industries that their committees regulate.
Are you asking whether or not they became millionaires while they were in office or whether they became millionaires after leaving?
I don’t know that you become rich while serving. However the salary of a member of congress was around $175,000 last I looked. So that’s a nice chunk of change. You might not become a millonaire right away but certainly if you invest that dough you can do very well. And if you serve 20 years then you are talking about decent money.
Also there is the spouse factor. My wife is an engineer for a large company. If I got myself elected to congress, she could probably swing herself a nice promotion to the government relations department which would put more money in the bank. It would be unethical for her to ask for a promotion on the basis that her husband is a congressman and can help the firm. But she doesn’t really have to say that for it to be understood.
Once I leave office, I can score myself a gig at a bank or a lobbying firm and really pocket some cash. I can also keep the remainder of my campaign fund once I retire.
Plus - if you’ve ever met a REAL politician… They have an interesting personality, usually. The really good politicians are the ones people instantly like and want to talk to, they come across as genuinely friendly and can remember thousands of names. They know and rememebr lots of people. They are organized and can arrange lots of details, and direct the underlings who can take care of whatever needs taking care of. Plus, as one commentator on CNN said about Obama - anyone who runs for president or any high office has to have an abnormal amout of self-confidence.
Again, these are the same sort of traits you find in upper management too. They don’t usually promote the good programmers or engineers, they promte the ones who interact with management exactly how they want them to…
And - with one or two exceptions that comes to mind recently - they are very smart. You don’t get too far on your own if people quickly figure out you are clueless. You can fool all of the people some of the time…
It won’t answer your question from a statistical standpoint, but it is quite fascinating to look at the tax returns of political candidates. I’m not sure which positions are required to make the returns public, but I looked over the returns of the Clintons, Obamas and Palins in the last election cycle. McCain and his wife apparently file separately so that she doesn’t have to list just how much she makes.
In any event, none of these people are struggling to get by. Sarah Palin’s return was remarkable largely because she was still using H&R Block and was making an order of magnitude less than the others. But even she was doing very well for herself even before the campaign-financed makeover.
Anyway, one of the things you notice is that most politicians have significant income from speaking fees, book royalties and the like. Even someone without national fame can make a healthy second income doing that.
How about the late Lyndon Johnson? At the end of his first senatorial campaign, Johnson was worth less than $5000. By the time he entered the White House, he was a multimillionaire. By the time he left office, he was filthy rich. He had steered a lot of defense contracts to Texas firms…and was suitably rewarded.
All of this cries out for term limits-once politicians taste the sweet life of campaign “contributions”, they cannot get enough.
If you are going to call the guy on corruption at least take the time to get the facts right about it.
In 1943, Johnson used money from his wife’s inheritance to buy a radio station. Somehow being a Congressman helped grease the wheels with the FCC to push through the sale and the license. When TV came out, Johnson managed to get the sole station in the Austin market and the money started rolling in. Of course, if you advertised on KTBC, you could certainly get help from the Senator’s office. I am certain it didn’t hurt that the station managed to be the only TV station for years in Austin. That probably wasn’t a coincidence.
But since you mentioned it, I am not sure where term limits would necessarily have prevented him from making money off the station. He was in his third term in the House when they bought the station. He was in his first term in the Senate when he got the TV rights. So I suppose if he had been limited to four terms in the house and one term in the Senate, KTBC would have only made shitloads of money instead of fuckloads of money.
I am not saying he wasn’t a bad guy. I am just saying that I know what the hell I am talking about when I say he was a bad guy.
Tony Blair has ‘earned’ £20 million since leaving office. He made himself rich by opposing the majority opinion of his constituents and backing the Bush wars, claiming the UK had a blood debt to the US. His son Ewan however didn’t go off to Afghanistan or Iraq, he went to Yale and just got given a half million pound flat, by a father who earns more every day that British soldiers earn in a year.
Democracy is bought and sold on the futures market.
Sometimes they marry wealthy women (John Kerry, John McCain). Or their wife is capable of making big money too (Liddy Dole, Hillary Clinton). The pay is pretty decent, as are the pensions, medical care and other perks.
I’m not sure how far I trust Richard Nixon in his book “Six Crises”. But I throw this out as to how far things have changed.“After four years in the House, two in the Senate, and eight in the vice presidency, all that Pat and I owned was the equity in our Washington house. We owned no stocks or bonds, and we had just enough cash in the bank to take care of current expenses. My life insurance had been acquired so recently that its cash value was minimal. And as a former Vice President, under the law, I had no allowance for an office staff and no pension-except for the Congressional retirement plan to which I contributed to and for which I would not become eligible until age sixty-two. We had two girls growing up who would soon need funds for college. My problem, in a nutshell, was an acute one-I had to find a job and start saving money.”
Nixon goes on to say he had a number of well-paying job offers and his first year as a lawyer he made twice of what a vice president was paid.
I think it’s also easier to take a decent amount of money and turn it into a large amount legally than it was in the 19th century when you had politicians going broke with land deals and bad investments (US Grant, Thomas Jefferson). There are certainly scam artists and people who get greedy without investigating properly (one thing that caused the Clintons lots of grief was they never investigated the Whitewater investments properly before they bought). But you have to be a real numbnuts like Gary Coleman and his family to turn $19 million intro zilch nowadays.
Moderator Note;;;;
ralph124c. Would you PLEASE, PLEASE, PRETTY PLEASE offer some legitimate cites for your wild-ass claims in General Questions. This is getting tiring.
samclem, Moderator, GQ
[Moderator Note]
ralph124c, this is GQ, not IMHO or GD. Let’s refrain from the political commentary.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator