House Office Expense Study
 Printable Version |
 Email to a friend
2005 House Office Expense Data
- Complete Data Tables [Excel
Spreadsheet]
- Summary Tables
- Member Detail Sorted by State
- Top 50 Mass Mailers
- Top 50 Postage Users
- Top 50 Savers
2004 House Office Expense Data
- Complete Data Tables [Excel
Spreadsheet]
- Summary Tables
- Member Detail Sorted by State
- Top 50 Mass Mailers
- Top 50 Postage Users
- Top 50 Savers
2003 House Office Expense Data
- Complete Data Tables [Excel
Spreadsheet]
- Summary Tables
- Member Detail Sorted by State
- Top 50 Mass Mailers
- Top 50 Postage Users
- Top 50 Savers
2002 House Office Expense Data
- Complete Data Tables [Excel
Spreadsheet]
- Summary Tables
- Member Detail Sorted by State
- Top 50 Mass Mailers
- Top 50 Postage Users
- Top 50 Savers
2001 House Office Expense Data
- Complete Data Tables [Excel Spreadsheet]
- Summary Tables [PDF]
- Member Detail Sorted by State [PDF]
- Top 50 Mass Mailers [PDF]
- Top 50 Postage Users [PDF]
- Top 50 Savers [PDF]
2000 House Office Expense Data
- Complete Data Tables [Excel Spreadsheet]
- Summary Tables [PDF]
- Member Detail Sorted by State [PDF]
- Top 50 Mass Mailers [PDF]
- Top 50 Postage Users [PDF]
- Top 50 Savers [PDF]
1999 House Office Expense Data
- Complete Data Tables [Excel Spreadsheet]
- Summary Tables [PDF]
- Member Detail Sorted by State [PDF]
- Top 50 Mass Mailers [PDF]
- Top 50 Postage Users [PDF]
- Top 50 Savers [PDF]
1997 House Office Expense Data
Keys to Understanding House Office Expense Data
The pages summarize total postage spending and total office spending
for each Member of the House of Representatives in state/alphabetical
order. The following is a column-by-column explanation of how the
figures were calculated:
All Postage Data Section
Total Postage Spending: This column is based on information from
'Statement of Disbursements of the House,' a quarterly report compiled
by the Chief Administrative Officer of the U.S. House of Representatives.
It lists total postage spending for mass- and non-mass-mailings
during the session.
Cost Per Address: NTU divided Total Postage Spending in column
one by the number of addresses for each Congressional district,
based on public information. The result is expressed here in dollars.
All Postage Spending Rank: This column provides a numerical ranking,
from highest to lowest spending, based on Cost Per Address data
in column two. Since district sizes can vary between and within
states, it would be unfair rank members simply on their Total Postage
Spending. District size variation is due to shifts in population,
differing population/address ratios, and rounding required in apportioning
the number of districts to each state.
Total Office Spending Data Section
Total Office Spending: This number includes all spending on office
operations in control of the individual Member, such as staff salaries,
postage, supplies and equipment, communications, district office
rent and utilities, and travel. It does not include the Member's
own salary, pensions or health insurance for the Member or staff,
the cost of office space or furniture in the Washington, DC House
buildings, or the expenses by Committees or other legislative agencies
that serve House Members.
Lowest Office Spending Rank: As with postage, each Member is told
how much he or she can legally spend to operate an office prior
to each year. This 'Member's Representational Allowance' (MRA),
which includes postage, also accounts for differences in district
office rental costs and travel distances from Washington. Again,
in order to provide a proper basis for comparison, this column reflects
a numerical ranking from lowest to highest, based on the percentage
each Member spent of his or her own MRA.
Total Office Spending Rank: This figure simply represents the same
data in the Lowest Office Spending Rank column, only reversed to
reflect a ranking from highest to lowest office spending.
Amount Higher or Lower Than Average: In the interests of fairness,
the figures here are not derived from an arithmetical average of
Total Office Spending. Rather, they represent a hypothetical amount
calculated by multiplying the average portion of the MRA spent for
all Members by the actual MRA for each individual Member. For example,
for Alabama District 1, if Rep. Aderholt had spent 92.79% of his
MRA, he would have spent $822,462. Instead, he actually spent 90.4%
of his MRA, or $801,240. That was $21,242 less than the average,
and is reflected accordingly.
If All Members Spent As Much, Spending Would Change By: This column
answers the simple question posed by many citizens: 'If all Members
of the House spent the same amount of their allowances as my Representative,
would office spending go up or down?' Figures are reflected in dollars;
those in parentheses represent a decrease in overall spending.
% of Member's Representational Allowance Spent: This data is calculated
by dividing Total Office Spending for each Member by his or her
MRA; the results are expressed as a percentage. |
