So, does Stevens get to keep his cushy $100,000/yr. Senate pension or not??

[rvablue]

It would be an abyssmal joke on the tax payers if he does.

Here are the rules, but I can't decipher if this means "yes" or "no".

:shrug: :banghead:

Thoughts?

http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/RL30631.pdf
Forfeiture of Annuity
Section 8312 of Title 5 provides that a federal employee, including a Member
of Congress, may not receive a retirement annuity for any period of federal service
if that individual is convicted of certain offenses that were committed during the
period of service when the annuity was earned. In general, the crimes that would lead
to forfeiture of a federal retirement annuity under this provision of law are limited to
acts of treason and/or espionage.
On January 12, 2007, the Senate approved an amendment to S. 1, the Legislative
Transparency and Accountability Act of 2007, by a vote of 87-0. The amendment
would expand the list of offenses under §8312 that would result in forfeiture of a
federal pension by a Member of Congress to include
! bribery of public officials and witnesses,
! conspiracy to commit an offense or to defraud United States, and
! perjury or subornation of perjury committed in relation to such acts.
On January 23, 2007, the House of Representatives passed by a vote of 431-0
H.R. 476, which would amend Title 5 of the U.S. Code to make Members of
Congress who are convicted of certain offenses committed during their period of
service ineligible for a federal retirement annuity based on that period of service.
The bill would exclude from federal service creditable toward a retirement annuity
under either CSRS or FERS any service as a Member of Congress of an individual
convicted of a felony involving (1) bribery of public officials and witnesses; (2)
acting as an agent of a foreign principal while a federal public official; (3) conspiracy
to commit an offense or to defraud the United States; (4) perjury; or (5) subornation
of perjury.

[Blue_In_AK]

1. Yes, he does.

His particular crimes don't fall within the class that requires stripping him of his pension. At least, that's what's being reported here. http://www.adn.com/front/story/595508.html

Despite the conviction, Stevens keeps his pension, which the National Taxpayer's Union calculates at about $122,000 a year. Members of Congress can lose their pensions for being convicted of specified crimes, such as bribery and racketeering, but Stevens' offenses aren't on the list. Senators also have investment retirement accounts.

[rvablue]

4. Un-freakin-believable...this makes me sick

and shake my head in total utter shame at the way our country works sometimes.

Makes me feel like we are all just chump cogs and the joke is on us.....

How completely, totally unfair.

[Saturday]

2. Yes, he gets to keep his pension. nt

[niyad]

3. the bill only applies to those elected after the date of the bill, if I remember correctly, so it

doesn't apply to that little felon.

one person suggested that the possible fine for the seven felony counts be whatever his pension will be, although that would mean the taxpayers would be paying his fine, even if it does go back.

[Blue_In_AK]

6. It's either that

or the crimes were committed before the amendment. There was some technical loophole, in any event. Ted probably won't be long for this world now because being senator was his life, so it probably won't end up costing us TOO too much anyway, although I don't know what the rules are on survival benefits. I think his wife is considerably younger than he is.

[samdogmom]

5. One would think being a "captive" member...would eliminate benefits!

Go figure! If only the regular people could enjoy the same "benefits"! Wow!