• bstix
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    The politicians to make such a law probably have at least 3 residential properties. One regular home in their state, one close their job in Washington and one for recreation.

    Anyway it wouldn’t solve the issue. It would likely just create an illegal market.

      • bstix
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Maybe he just didn’t want to disclose the house where his mistress lived.

    • Cyborganism@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      The one in Washington DC is rented and paid for by taxpayers. It’s part of the perks of being a politician.

      • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Are you sure about that? If that’s true, it’s very new:

        Under the new system, lawmakers can get reimbursed for hotel stays as well as utilities and insurance for property rented or owned in the capital. Members who bought property will not be able to claim reimbursement for principal or interest on their mortgage, but rental costs will be eligible to claim. The daily rate is capped at between $172 and $258, depending on the month.

        https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/07/house-finalizes-expenses-plan-00090806

        • Cyborganism@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          Ah ok. I might be wrong then. Normally politicians get a rental unit to live in near their place of government.