Open Secrets

Pete Stark: He is the "poorest" member of the House, Congress, or Government in general, as of 2009. This is because his minimum net worth, in 2009, was at $-24 million, and his maximum net worth was a little over $1 million. Though this has all changed in recent years as he has paid off his debts, as of 2011. For his current position, 2011 to 2012, and next campaign in 2012, he has raised $92,271 and has spent $82,815 of it. As for his "cash on hand" he has around $544,000.

Bob Casey: He is the 84th "richest" in the Senate, with a minimum net worth of $160,020, and a maximum net worth of $578,000, this is as of 2009. In recent years this has changed and Casey has raised over $6.5 million ans spent about $3.1 million from his 2007 to present, all for his candidacy in years to come. The website said that he had $3,746,669 in "cash at hand." It seems to me that has his next election comes closer he has been focusing a little more of his attention on that while also gaining more support from his state.

Why does it matter?

I think that the amount, on a personal level, that a politician make does matter, because their is a possibility of it influencing their decisions within the court. Though there are cases where the politician is not influenced or they do not have an extreme amount of money, like John Kerry, he gained an enormous amount of donations, though he also has gain a lot in his own finances. I feel as though the politicians that are in our government have been re-elected many times based on their amount of money that the have gained because they can use it on their campaign. I think that our government should have representative that have closer ties to the actual people. The whole idea that when our government started it was mainly: male, white, rich, etc. and the fact that it, for the most part, still applies to our government bothers me because the majority of Americas do not fall in to that category.