141 Staffers Make $100K at White House
...Not counting Obama
By Tim Karan, Newser Staff
Posted Jul 1, 2011 5:11 PM CDT
More than 140 White House employees make six-figure salaries, according to its annual report.   (Getty Images)

(Newser) – Budget crisis or not, it pays to work at the White House. Of the 454 employees who work at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, 141 bring home six-figure salaries, according to the annual report released by the White House. Twenty-one make the top salary of $172,200, reports the National Journal. They include spokesman Jay Carney, speechwriter Jon Favreau, adviser Valerie Jarrett, and chief of staff Bill Daley. President Obama is not included in the document since it only spotlights employees, but he earns $400,000 annually. Check out what everyone else makes here.

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
More Than 100 Make 100K at the White House is...
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Showing 3 of 96 comments
Jul 5, 2011 2:32 AM CDT
Shall we now see how many in congress follow this same pattern? There are those that believe only THEIR preferred political party should have staff that is exempt from being over-paid. Every time you hear some tea-bagger in congress preach about fiscal responsibility, remember they make approx $175,000.00 a year. They have better healthcare than you will EVER have, and they will retire much better than you ever will. They have also yet to vote down a pay raise for themselves. Interesting, eh?
Jul 3, 2011 1:19 PM CDT
It's interesting, I guess, to recall that when the financial companies we bailed out (so expensively) paid their officers huge bonuses that year, with our tax money, conservatives passionately argued that it was a "contractual obligation" and they had no choice but to pay because it was in the officers' contracts. That was a year or so before the newly-elected conservatives across the nation began unilaterally vacating union contracts with teachers and fire fighters and public employees in general ... on the basis of "fiscal reform." It was also those self-same conservatives, during the time we were watching our taxes being hauled away in wheelbarrows inscribed "Bonus" that argued that you HAVE to pay those HUGE salaries to the officers and managers because you MUST continue to retain the "best and brightest" (Despite the fact that it was those VERY people who drove the cart into the ditch to begin with.). Do we not need the "best and brightest" in our government ... as teachers ... as firefighters ... as law enforcement officers? Should we not use, then, the same formula for paying THEM that the "private sector" uses to pay ITS CEO's and COO's and CFO's ... even when (similarly to what conservatives say has happened in the "public" sector) they drove their companies into the ditch?
Jul 2, 2011 4:22 PM CDT
I would point out that this article was not condemnatory, it was just noting who makes what in the white house. Pure data, nothing more. And as far as I am concerned, pretty benign data all around. Hell, any white collar professional makes in that ballpark.