Quantcast
Skip to main content



This site works best in IE9 and up and in other modern web browsers

Congressman Chaffetz Says Congress Should Cut Obama’s Pension Over $400,000 Speech

Last week, America learned that Barack Obama’s post-presidency will be filled with a lavish book deal worth a whopping $60 million and now he’s raking in $400,000 to give a speech to Wall Street.

Obama’s pay day was rightly mocked, as he routinely railed against so-called “fat cat” bankers on Wall Street, but now that he is out of the White House he’s perfectly content cozying up to them.

Now Congressman Jason Chaffetz is firing back, saying that Congress could go after Obama’s pension after news of the $400,000 speech was made public.

Chaffetz, who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, says he plans to introduce a bill that would cap presidential pensions at $200,000, with another $200,000 for expenses, but the payments would be reduced once their outside income exceeds $400,000.

Chaffetz calls Obama’s hypocrisy on the issue “revealing” given that Obama vetoed a bill that would have curbed pensions earned by former presidents if they took outside income of at least $400,000. The Congressman called Obama’s veto “very self-serving,” explaining that any president shouldn’t receive an annual pension if he is going to rake in millions of dollars in speaking fees each year:

The basic premise here is, if they want to go fishing in Utah for the rest of their lives, they can do that. They will be well compensated for the rest of their lives. If they’re going to make millions of dollars, the taxpayers shouldn’t have to subsidize them.

Interestingly, the bill that Obama vetoed was totally non-partisan and unanimous, as it passed both the House and the Senate with no vocal opposition, and lawmakers were caught off-guard by the surprise veto. At the time, Obama justified his veto by citing supposed “unintended consequences” and how the bill would “impose onerous and unreasonable burdens” on past presidents, when in reality, Obama wanted to still receive a government check while receiving millions in additional income.

If Barack Obama, or any former president for that matter, is set to make several millions of dollars each year in book deals and speaking engagements then they do not need additional money from hardworking taxpayers who won’t make as much in a decade that Obama makes in one hour pandering to bankers.

It appears obvious that Obama’s opposition to the bill was clearly for selfish reasons, as he knew he would earn big bucks after leaving the White House.

Do you support Congressman Chaffetz’s bill? Should past presidents receive a pension if they make more than $400,000 a year? Share your thoughts below! 

Advertisement