One study used a statistical estimator to determine that members of Congress were ‘accumulating wealth about 50% faster than expected’ compared with other Americans.
Is that a fair summary of their research? Here is a quote from the abstract of the paper:
We thus conclude that representatives report accumulating wealth at a rate consistent with similar non-representatives, potentially suggesting that corruption in Congress is not widespread.
Schweizer’s claim is strictly true, in that Gabe and Kevin did reporting using a “statistical estimator” that suggested faster-than-expected wealth accumulation. But they also reported that, based on their analysis, it was the wrong estimator; using a better estimator reversed the findings.
I guess Schweizer stopped reading after the fourth sentence of the abstract, so he simply didn’t realize that by the ninth sentence the paper was completely contradicting the argument of his book.