[Article] Congress wants a raise

[Askthepizzaguy]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/members-congress-paid-enough-165641960.html

Everyone complains about their job now and then, and members of Congress are no exception.

A few lawmakers have suggested in recent months that despite a $174,000 annual salary, generous health care and pensions, and perks for things like travel and mail, being one of the elite 435 ain't always what it's cracked up to be. And when you calculate the hours they put in, the pay isn't stellar either, they say.

The Florida Capital News reported last week on a speech Steve Southerland, a Republican representative, gave to a retirement community in Tallahassee in which he complained about some of the parts of his new job:

"He said his $174,000 salary is not so much, considering the hours a member of the House puts in, and that he had to sever ties with his family business in Panama City. Southerland also said there are no instant pensions or free health insurance, as some of his constituents often ask him about in Congress.

"'And by the way, did I mention? They're shooting at us. There is law-enforcement security in this room right now, and why is that?" Southerland told about 125 people in an auditorium at the Westminster Oaks retirement community. "If you think this job pays too much, with those kinds of risks and cutting me off from my family business, I'll just tell you: This job don't mean that much to me. I had a good life in Panama City.'

"...He added that 'if you took the hours that I work and divided it into my pay,' the $174,000 salary would not seem so high."

Southerland, a freshman, ran a family funeral home business in Panama City and earned about $90,000 before joining Congress in January.

His sentiments were not unlike those expressed by Sean Duffy, a Republican representative from Wisconsin, when he said in March it was a "struggle" to pay his mortgage and student loans with his congressional salary. "At this point, I'm not living high on the hog," Duffy, a father of six, said. (Compared to his colleagues, Duffy is one of the least wealthy members of Congress.)

At the height of the debate over a possible government shutdown last spring, Linda Sánchez, a Democratic representative from California, said during an MSNBC interview that she was living "paycheck to paycheck" on her congressional salary. And she wasn't the only one. Renee Ellmers, a Republican representative from North Carolina, was asked if she would forgo her pay in the case of a shutdown. Ellmers declined, saying, "I need my paycheck."

Are times really so tough that even members of Congress are struggling to get by? The numbers suggest otherwise. A recent analysis of congressional pay found that members of Congress earn about 3.4 times the salary of the average American worker. Using that standard, members of Congress are among the highest paid legislators in the developed world.

This talk probably won't help Congress' approval rating. The federal government is the worst-rated industry in the country, viewed favorably by only 17 percent of Americans, according to a new Gallup survey.



Everyone complains about their job now and then, and members of Congress are no exception.

A few lawmakers have suggested in recent months that despite a $174,000 annual salary, generous health care and pensions, and perks for things like travel and mail, being one of the elite 435 ain't always what it's cracked up to be. And when you calculate the hours they put in, the pay isn't stellar either, they say.

Oh re-he-he-he-he-he-eally?

That sounds rather.... duuuuubious. :yes:


The Florida Capital News reported last week on a speech Steve Southerland, a Republican representative, gave to a retirement community in Tallahassee in which he complained about some of the parts of his new job:

"He said his $174,000 salary is not so much, considering the hours a member of the House puts in, and that he had to sever ties with his family business in Panama City. Southerland also said there are no instant pensions or free health insurance, as some of his constituents often ask him about in Congress.

I've worked jobs for $5 an hour, 40-50 hours a week.
I've worked jobs for $4 an hour, even after the standard minimum wage was over $7, and gotten :daisy: for tipped income.

What's a pension?
What's health insurance?
What's dental?
What's vacation time?
What's free travel?

These things are all foreign to me, as they are to many folks in this economy.


"'And by the way, did I mention? They're shooting at us. There is law-enforcement security in this room right now, and why is that?" Southerland told about 125 people in an auditorium at the Westminster Oaks retirement community. "If you think this job pays too much, with those kinds of risks and cutting me off from my family business, I'll just tell you: This job don't mean that much to me. I had a good life in Panama City.'

Pizza delivery is the third most dangerous civilian job in America. We are shot, beaten up, kidnapped, and it happens all the time.

I'm not allowed to conceal/carry.

I don't have a security team watching out for me.

Oh and btw-

You don't serve public office FOR THE MONEY, you rich dirtbag. :stare:

You're already wealthy from your family business and decided to serve the public, well good for you. Then you have the nerve to :daisy: and whine that 174k plus those benefits is too small, in this economy?


"...He added that 'if you took the hours that I work and divided it into my pay,' the $174,000 salary would not seem so high."

Show me the numbers. If I remember correctly, Congress is in recess most of the time. Show me the numbers.

Let's divide it up into hourly, I wanna know!


Southerland, a freshman, ran a family funeral home business in Panama City and earned about $90,000 before joining Congress in January.

His sentiments were not unlike those expressed by Sean Duffy, a Republican representative from Wisconsin, when he said in March it was a "struggle" to pay his mortgage and student loans with his congressional salary. "At this point, I'm not living high on the hog," Duffy, a father of six, said. (Compared to his colleagues, Duffy is one of the least wealthy members of Congress.)

So, he's getting paid MORE now, and it's not enough compared to what he was making, which was significantly less? :dizzy2:


At the height of the debate over a possible government shutdown last spring, Linda Sánchez, a Democratic representative from California, said during an MSNBC interview that she was living "paycheck to paycheck" on her congressional salary. And she wasn't the only one. Renee Ellmers, a Republican representative from North Carolina, was asked if she would forgo her pay in the case of a shutdown. Ellmers declined, saying, "I need my paycheck."

Surely you do; but a raise?

Do you deserve a raise?


Are times really so tough that even members of Congress are struggling to get by? The numbers suggest otherwise. A recent analysis of congressional pay found that members of Congress earn about 3.4 times the salary of the average American worker. Using that standard, members of Congress are among the highest paid legislators in the developed world.

And how good a job are they doing? How about that recent spat over the nearly automatic debt ceiling increase just to make sure the super-rich don't have to pay any more in taxes?

What else have they done? How about that healthcare bill which was a total godawful mess? How about that funding for 9/11 rescue workers which didn't include anything for cancer?

Yeah, good job. Have another bonus, ya s.


This talk probably won't help Congress' approval rating. The federal government is the worst-rated industry in the country, viewed favorably by only 17 percent of Americans, according to a new Gallup survey.


Askthepizzaguy walks into an office.

"Hey, what did you need to see me about, mister Pizzaguy?"

[B]Askthepizzaguy: "Yes, I just wanted to tell you that this job sucks horribly and I want a raise. I can't make ends meet."

"Oh? I'm sorry to hear that. What did you make before you got this job?"

Askthepizzaguy: "Considerably less, or, I'm independently wealthy anyway"

"I see. And what's wrong with the job?"

Askthepizzaguy: "The gold-plated benefits I'm getting which are among the best in the country aren't meeting my demands."

"Well okay, let's look at your job performance lately."

Askthepizzaguy: "Sure! I've done an awesome job, and I deserve a raise."

"Well, it seems you've been rated as our very worst employee by all of your supervisors."

Askthepizzaguy: "Yes. But that's all Obama's fault somehow. He should have fixed everything."

"It also says that your customers think you're doing a terrible job and complain about you constantly. Many no longer even bother coming to our place of business and filling out customer surveys anymore, because they're concerned their complaints are being ignored."

Askthepizzaguy: "Those are poor people anyway. We don't need their money."

"A business is interested in getting money from everyone, not just the rich. Your attitude is appalling."

Askthepizzaguy: "So can I have that raise now, at the customer's expense?"

"Well, what do you think? Our crazy system puts you in charge of that decision."

Askthepizzaguy: "Oh heck yes!"





The end.




Anyone want to write the epilogue?

[Montmorency]

Don't they already leave most of the drawing-up of legislation to aides and interns?

[Askthepizzaguy]

Don't they already leave most of the drawing-up of legislation to aides and interns?

Oh you mean the actual work? :laugh4:

Hmmm.... how much do those interns get paid I WONDER! :beam:

[Monk]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Oh god. That was hilarious.

Oh wait they're serious? Let me laugh even harder.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Click for accompanying music (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnHmskwqCCQ)


http://thehappyhospitalist.blogspot.com/2010/08/how-many-weeks-of-vacation-does.html


At the height of the worst recession and soon to be depression in 75 years, how many weeks of vacation did our Congress grant themselves this year? 23 1/2 weeks of vacation. But they don't call it vacation. They call it non-legislative periods. They call their time off "work periods" for meeting their constituents and raising campaign funds.

Here's a thought. If you want to meet your constituents, consider that a cost of doing business. Americans should not be paying Congressmen and women to hang out in their home state shaking hands any more than I should get paid for waving at homeless men at the Walmart stoplight.

How much will Congressmen and women make in salary for 2010? The salary for rank and file members of Congress is about $174,000 a year. The Majority Party Leader and Minority Party Leader make about $193,400 a year. The Speaker of the House makes $223,500 a year. All get a cost of living adjustment automatically implemented unless Congress votes to decline it.

While the rest of our country is going jobless and bankrupt, how much money do the rank and file members of Congress pay themselves per week of work? With 23 1/2 weeks of vacation, the $174,000 a year is divided over just 28 1/2 weeks of legislative work. That means your Congressmen and women are paying themselves an average of $6,105.26 for every week of work. That's the equivalent of $317,460 for full time production. How much is Nancy Pelosi paying herself? She earns $7,842.10 a week for 28.5 weeks of work. Imagine if she'd worked all 52 weeks like many physicians. She'd be paying herself $407,789 a year. That puts Nancy in the top 1% income bracket.

And they think doctors make too much? Where is the outrage? Shouldn't we have a Congressional Compensation Czar making things right for the American people?

Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeee

[drone]

Are these guys whiners, or are they just not taking bribes? :inquisitive:

[Askthepizzaguy]

Yakety Sax makes it all better though.

[Veho Nex]

No they are still taking the bribes, its just that 100k to support company x no longer pays for their 5th mansion in timbuktu.

[Hosakawa Tito]

We're not just paying for 435 of them. They receive 100% of their salary with COLA and free healthcare for life. We're paying for every ex-Congressmen & ex-Senator, at the current payrate, that is still upright & breathing. Nice work if you can get it. How much of their salaries do they pay toward the pension & healthcare? Probably zero.

[Adrian II]

You don't serve public office FOR THE MONEY, you rich dirtbag. :stare:

Well, don't vote for a rich dirtbag then :shrug:

AII

[Montmorency]

How do you know that he voted for a rich dirtbag?

[Papewaio]

They get full pay for life?

Surely they should only get the same lifetime benefits as any other public servant... and even then it should be based on the aggregate not the pick of the best of each benefit.

This isn't public service its robbery.

[HoreTore]

This is as silly as when the footballers went on strike in may/june....

[Greyblades]

Anyone want to write the epilogue?

Two weeks later the conversation was leaked to the media, the next day a new election had to be conducted to replace the senator as he was found with his fat ass jammed upside down in a Ron Pearlman's U-bend.

Howzat?

[Major Robert Dump]

I think they deserve more money, these guys work really hard and risk their lives every day communitng in Wahsington DC.

[Askthepizzaguy]

I think they deserve more money, these guys work really hard and risk their lives every day communitng in Wahsington DC.

I hadn't really considered that.

I take it all back. They're good people.

[Tratorix]

Well, don't vote for a rich dirtbag then :shrug:

AII

I fail to see how not voting will get anything done.

[Fisherking]

I guess they think they are worth more but their actual compensation with other allowances is something over $280,000 per year with travel allowances as high as $1,000,000.00 for some members. Committee memberships and leadership positions also pay more.

They also receive an allowance for housing, office operations, and to hire up to 18 full time and 4 part-time staff. (they are essentially contractors who work for the congressman and not the government)

All these allowances mean that, less salaries, Congressmen have allowances amounting to between $1.3 to $4.5 million just to run their offices.

They can also earn money outside their government job amounting to 15% of their pay and who knows how their personal expense accounts work. I think those were raised by $93,000 each a year or so ago.

http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=%270E%2C*PL[%3D%23P%20%20%0A

The good news is that their pay raises can’t be more than the % of any other federal employee, so I guess they need to vote a big raise for everyone. (Good news if you are a federal worker anyway)

[Adrian II]

I fail to see how not voting will get anything done.

Vote for someone good or become a Mr Smith yourself. :2thumbsup:

Just stop complaining, it's un-American :stare:

AII

[a completely inoffensive name]

Idk, this all seems like a big red herring. It's not really an impact on the federal budget as a whole (if we are just talking about members of congress, not all federal employees) and going over the motions of denouncing this seems like a less than useful discussion over the principle of the subject.

[Ironside]

Idk, this all seems like a big red herring. It's not really an impact on the federal budget as a whole (if we are just talking about members of congress, not all federal employees) and going over the motions of denouncing this seems like a less than useful discussion over the principle of the subject.

It's rather the principle of things. Most of the US population is poorer today than they were 1999.

And they talk about being poor and overburden with work, while having wastly better conditions than the average American.

[a completely inoffensive name]

It's rather the principle of things. Most of the US population is poorer today than they were 1999.

And they talk about being poor and overburden with work, while having wastly better conditions than the average American.

Yes, they are liars, but I don't see why this is to be a topic in itself. Politicians that are corrupt will always lie to paint themselves to be what they are not. Not to sound cynical here, but it is the way it always is. Instead of all collectively agreeing about how absurd the politicians are it would be best to talk about how we go about reversing our downward trend towards poverty.

That is...unless everyone here just wants to vent their frustrations by talking about this particular point. Then by all means go ahead and vent.

EDIT: For example here is a question. If all the politicians (by which I am assuming both parties are included) talk about being poor with a ~$170,000 wage, than why do some politicians argue for removing the minimum wage and revoking the power of unions. These are the biggest factors in having American wages even close to that of the politicians. Why isn't this a talking point when a politician opens his mouth and starts spewing this crap?

[Major Robert Dump]

Congress should get paid by the hour and have to punch a time clock like 80% of the rest of the country. If I was president I would make my first executive order such

[Banquo's Ghost]

I've long thought that legislatures ought to be made up of ordinary citizens serving for a year as part of their citizenship requirements. Like jury service or national military service, but with no exceptions except for people who read the Sun or the Daily Mail. No vote seeking, that would be done by the executive branch which the legislature is supposed to hold to account.

They'd be paid national average wage. In fact, even our existing systems ought to mandate the politicians to receive the national average wage so they do their best to enhance it for everyone. (Obviously, in this utopia, no external interests are allowed during the term of office, no-one having a net worth more than double the national average allowed to stand, and corruption would be punished by forfeiture of all assets and by hands, noses and ears being cut off in public with a soup spoon).

[Veho Nex]

Guys, Im only making 200k a year to sit around and complain about problems but never actually talking about solutions and quick to point faults in other people. I live 4,000 square foot mansion and I go to Hawaii and Europe every weekend to relax from my overly complicated job. I'm really worried that one day I won't be able to afford live in my mansion or goto Hawaii or Europe every weekend so... I want a raise, cause, you know, I just have a really hard job and its hard as crackers to live off 4k a week.

[Kralizec]

I've long thought that legislatures ought to be made up of ordinary citizens serving for a year as part of their citizenship requirements. Like jury service or national military service, but with no exceptions except for people who read the Sun or the Daily Mail. No vote seeking, that would be done by the executive branch which the legislature is supposed to hold to account.

They'd be paid national average wage. In fact, even our existing systems ought to mandate the politicians to receive the national average wage so they do their best to enhance it for everyone. (Obviously, in this utopia, no external interests are allowed during the term of office, no-one having a net worth more than double the national average allowed to stand, and corruption would be punished by forfeiture of all assets and by hands, noses and ears being cut off in public with a soup spoon).

Like a demarchy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demarchy)?

On the first sight it sounds like an idea worth pondering. On second though, I expect it would only empower the professional bureaucracy* because random civilians are even more helpless against them than regular politicians- resulting in a system that's closer to an oligarchy than what we have today.

*unless you invent some way of getting rid of those, too.

[Subotan]

Goddamn it ATPG why are you still a pizza delivery guy and not a writer for the New Yorker

[drone]

I guess they think they are worth more but their actual compensation with other allowances is something over $280,000 per year with travel allowances as high as $1,000,000.00 for some members. Committee memberships and leadership positions also pay more.

They also receive an allowance for housing, office operations, and to hire up to 18 full time and 4 part-time staff. (they are essentially contractors who work for the congressman and not the government)

All these allowances mean that, less salaries, Congressmen have allowances amounting to between $1.3 to $4.5 million just to run their offices.

They can also earn money outside their government job amounting to 15% of their pay and who knows how their personal expense accounts work. I think those were raised by $93,000 each a year or so ago.
In all fairness, hookers, blow, and hush funds aren't cheap!

[Askthepizzaguy]

Goddamn it ATPG why are you still a pizza delivery guy and not a writer for the New Yorker

No one has hired me for my writing ability yet.

I still maintain that there are far better writers out there; I just vent at a blank page until something amusing comes out of my fingers, and I try to end on a high note, or when I'm doing irony, a low note.

[Major Robert Dump]

In all fairness, hookers, blow, and hush funds aren't cheap!

Actually, in a recession the first two are pretty cheap.

[classical_hero]

Click for accompanying music (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnHmskwqCCQ)


http://thehappyhospitalist.blogspot.com/2010/08/how-many-weeks-of-vacation-does.html



WheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeThis thread just makes me laugh, not the request, but the responses to it. None of you guys really knows what it is like to be a politician. It is not like they don't just do nothing when they are not legislating, it is pretty much a full time job even when they are not in Washington. I am willing to bet that if anyone tried to be in politics for year, they would give up due to exhaustion. I don't speak of this from experience, but as part of a winning a quiz night I was able to have dinner at the state parliament's dinner room with a local MP, and that is only a relatively small state state, compared to America, so I am sure that even tougher in the Congress of the US, since we have see all the difficulties they have passing simple legislation.

[a completely inoffensive name]

This thread just makes me laugh, not the request, but the responses to it. None of you guys really knows what it is like to be a politician. It is not like they don't just do nothing when they are not legislating, it is pretty much a full time job even when they are not in Washington. I am willing to bet that if anyone tried to be in politics for year, they would give up due to exhaustion. I don't speak of this from experience, but as part of a winning a quiz night I was able to have dinner at the state parliament's dinner room with a local MP, and that is only a relatively small state state, compared to America, so I am sure that even tougher in the Congress of the US, since we have see all the difficulties they have passing simple legislation.

This is true. Politicians are always working. There is always someone they haven't called in a while that they need to appease for money. They literally work 24/7/365.

[Askthepizzaguy]

Mmmm I see some of my comments are being misinterpreted.

My issue is not with how hard they work; obviously being a politician is more than voting while the congress is in session.

My issue is with the arrogance and ignorance displayed when they complain about their lot in life, a career they volunteered for, which has far better pay and benefits than most careers, and they're so completely out of touch with the struggles of everyday Americans that they believe we would actually have sympathy for the hangnails of only having gold-plated healthcare instead of NEVER being able to afford seeing a doctor for anything more serious than a routine checkup.

[Major Robert Dump]

This thread just makes me laugh, not the request, but the responses to it. None of you guys really knows what it is like to be a politician. It is not like they don't just do nothing when they are not legislating, it is pretty much a full time job even when they are not in Washington. I am willing to bet that if anyone tried to be in politics for year, they would give up due to exhaustion. I don't speak of this from experience, but as part of a winning a quiz night I was able to have dinner at the state parliament's dinner room with a local MP, and that is only a relatively small state state, compared to America, so I am sure that even tougher in the Congress of the US, since we have see all the difficulties they have passing simple legislation.

100% crap

[a completely inoffensive name]

Mmmm I see some of my comments are being misinterpreted.

My issue is not with how hard they work; obviously being a politician is more than voting while the congress is in session.

My issue is with the arrogance and ignorance displayed when they complain about their lot in life, a career they volunteered for, which has far better pay and benefits than most careers, and they're so completely out of touch with the struggles of everyday Americans that they believe we would actually have sympathy for the hangnails of only having gold-plated healthcare instead of NEVER being able to afford seeing a doctor for anything more serious than a routine checkup.
They are not out of touch, they are lying to fool the idiots. People are idiots and it doesn't take more than to simply say something to fool them.

Check this out ok. I was listening to NPR today on the radio and they were interviewing Republicans somewhere that Rick Perry was speaking. They asked this one guy who heard Perry speak, well who do you prefer, Perry or Romney. And this dude starts talking about how he likes Perry because he has "better character" and Romney's plans are "confusing". he said that Romney seems like a career politician while Perry wasn't. Here is the funny part, Perry has been in government for I think 10 years more than Romney has. Also, Perry was once a staunch Democrat who quickly switched sides when the Reagan Revolution started hitting the makeup of congress in the late 80s, early 90s.

Who again is the career politician? But Perry lies about himself and people believe him. Politicians don't actually think half the stuff they say, they just say it because people will believe that they believe it.


100% crap

Disagree. To most people with jobs, networking isn't really work, but they are spending all of their free time networking for money so they can win the next election. Even on "vacations" they are chilling with people they are asking for money, trying to woo them desperately. They are salesmen, selling themselves.

[Fisherking]

These people are paid 3.4 times the national average. With additional subsidies to their income it is more than 5 times the pay of the average wage earner.

Even without those subsidies they are in the top 5% for pay and we have not touched on their retirement benefits.

Then there is the issue of the 22 employees, office expenses, travel allowances, and on and on.

For this money we get representatives who represent the special interests and businesses who contribute to their campaigns, rather than the people who actually elected them. In the past, they often made laws that applied to everyone but themselves and their current legislation is not much to be proud of.

But while most Americans are suffering in an economic recession with large segments of the population unemployed, these people don’t think they can make ends meet.

Well, if that is how it is, then my advice would be to quit that job and go back to the one you had when you actually worked for a living. No one forced you to take it and you volunteered for it. Now it doesn’t pay as well as you like so let someone with a little better economic sense take the position.

[Major Robert Dump]

Yes, ACIN, they are worth every penny. I'm sure the difficulties of said job (like begging for cash in the bahamas) is not at all offset by the fact they make very healthy salaries w/ permamnent benefits and are involved in legislation that affects their investments because they do not have to follow insider trading laws.

The net worth of Congress has gone up 100s of percents since the recession started.

And yes, they are liars, but they are also out of touch, because they have lived sheltered lives and the majority of the ones over the age of 50 still do not understand the power of the internet. Look at Weiner. Look at Dead Ted Stevens. Look at George MAccaca. In Gore's presidential campaign he told lies about his voting record that took exactly 2 minutes to discount via the internet. Suprisingly few of these people have had to work their way up.

What scares me are the young politicians in their 20s and 30s who do understand the internet, and will not harness this power for good but for evil.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Yes, ACIN, they are worth every penny. I'm sure the difficulties of said job (like begging for cash in the bahamas) is not at all offset by the fact they make very healthy salaries w/ permamnent benefits and are involved in legislation that affects their investments because they do not have to follow insider trading laws.
I never said they are worth their paycheck, I am just saying they are always working at continuing to be a politician after the next election.

The insider trading laws imo, should be applied to them.



And yes, they are liars, but they are also out of touch, because they have lived sheltered lives and the majority of the ones over the age of 50 still do not understand the power of the internet. Look at Weiner. Look at Dead Ted Stevens. Look at George MAccaca. In Gore's presidential campaign he told lies about his voting record that took exactly 2 minutes to discount via the internet. Suprisingly few of these people have had to work their way up.
That's because for the most part the "power" of the internet still depends on the mainstream media to relay the information in order for it to have any effect. When the media doesn't pick up the bad stuff politicians do, it gets trapped into the echo chambers that both sides have created for themselves. Stuff that makes conservatives look bad don't reach beyond HuffPo and vice versa with Drudge Report.

Fact is, most people use the internet for entertainment, not information.



What scares me are the young politicians in their 20s and 30s who do understand the internet, and will not harness this power for good but for evil.
Agreed. As with any open forum, misinformation becomes more rampant than actual information.

[Subotan]

No one has hired me for my writing ability yet.

I still maintain that there are far better writers out there; I just vent at a blank page until something amusing comes out of my fingers, and I try to end on a high note, or when I'm doing irony, a low note.
I disagree. I have an eye for editing and understanding whether a piece of writing is good or bad, and your results have consistently been in the former category. Have you applied for jobs to use your writing skillz?


What scares me are the young politicians in their 20s and 30s who do understand the internet, and will not harness this power for good but for evil.
Mwahahahaha.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I disagree. I have an eye for editing and understanding whether a piece of writing is good or bad, and your results have consistently been in the former category. Have you applied for jobs to use your writing skillz?

Concur with Subo. Your skills may not be there as yet, but you do have the flare for it. Most of my writing takes me too long to accomplish what you often do "on the fly" in the gameroom.

[drone]

This thread just makes me laugh, not the request, but the responses to it. None of you guys really knows what it is like to be a politician. It is not like they don't just do nothing when they are not legislating, it is pretty much a full time job even when they are not in Washington. I am willing to bet that if anyone tried to be in politics for year, they would give up due to exhaustion. I don't speak of this from experience, but as part of a winning a quiz night I was able to have dinner at the state parliament's dinner room with a local MP, and that is only a relatively small state state, compared to America, so I am sure that even tougher in the Congress of the US, since we have see all the difficulties they have passing simple legislation.
We aren't paying them to get re-elected, we are paying them to run the country. They can try to get re-elected on their own time and their own dime. Since we are talking House representatives here, with 2 year terms, most are running for re-election as soon as they get elected.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The original conception of all of the positions did not hold with ANY of the legislative positions being full time jobs.

The supremes and the President would be, and their compensation reflects this.

Congress was supposed to be half time, in part to encourage LESS legislation and in part to keep representatives returning to their communities after service in government. Of course, the executive was supposed to execute laws more than make them as well...

[Major Robert Dump]

One of the best laws that could be implemented in this country is that you cannot run for office while holding another office. Resign and GTFO if you want to run. The idea that a Senator can run for President and Senator at the same time is as appalling as the thought that the son of a president can be elected president a few years later.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

One of the best laws that could be implemented in this country is that you cannot run for office while holding another office. Resign and GTFO if you want to run. The idea that a Senator can run for President and Senator at the same time is as appalling as the thought that the son of a president can be elected president a few years later.

I like some variation on this term idea. Mine was that you may serve no more than two consecutive terms in any office and, prior to running for office, must have spent time in the private sector equal to one term in the office you seek.

[a completely inoffensive name]

We aren't paying them to get re-elected, we are paying them to run the country. They can try to get re-elected on their own time and their own dime. Since we are talking House representatives here, with 2 year terms, most are running for re-election as soon as they get elected.


The original conception of all of the positions did not hold with ANY of the legislative positions being full time jobs.

The supremes and the President would be, and their compensation reflects this.

Congress was supposed to be half time, in part to encourage LESS legislation and in part to keep representatives returning to their communities after service in government. Of course, the executive was supposed to execute laws more than make them as well...


One of the best laws that could be implemented in this country is that you cannot run for office while holding another office. Resign and GTFO if you want to run. The idea that a Senator can run for President and Senator at the same time is as appalling as the thought that the son of a president can be elected president a few years later.


I like some variation on this term idea. Mine was that you may serve no more than two consecutive terms in any office and, prior to running for office, must have spent time in the private sector equal to one term in the office you seek.


Or maybe we can just cut the crap with these novelty ideas and tell it like it is. They spend all of this time getting money, so implement publicly funded elections and suddenly they have nothing else to do but be in session.

You can't run for two different positions at once. If a Senator decides to run for President, then they can't run for re-election as a Senator at the same time if their term is up. If their term isn't up, then they are not running for two positions in the first place and just like Biden, they resign their old position as soon as they win the new position.

And as for the second idea, there is nothing about being in the "private sector" that makes you any more worth a damn. It isn't some magical common sense fairy that teaches people all about responsibility when they work in it. 99% of the people that politicians appoint to regulatory agencies are all straight from the Boards of private sector businesses. Is the CEO of Goldman Sachs really going to be a better choice than someone who has been say a Federal employee all his life? Not really. It's a dumb idea.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

You can't run for two different positions at once. If a Senator decides to run for President, then they can't run for re-election as a Senator at the same time if their term is up. If their term isn't up, then they are not running for two positions in the first place and just like Biden, they resign their old position as soon as they win the new position.

Not always true. While most states prohibit you from running for two different federal offices at the same time, not all do so. For example, both LBJ in 1960 and Lloyd Bentsen in 1988 ran for the Senate and the Vice Presidency at the same time. Texas law specifically permits this.

On the other hand, federal law prohibits HOLDING two federal offices at the same time, so if elected to both, one would have to be declined.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I support decent wages for demanding government jobs. Else you get monkeys, the wealthy and those on the take governing you.

But now is not an appropriate time to be increasing wages. That is a pr disaster. You need to raise salaries during boom times, when nobody is paying attention, and too busy grabbing what they can for themselves anyway.



Louis - one man's taxes are another man's fine lunches...

[a completely inoffensive name]

Not always true. While most states prohibit you from running for two different federal offices at the same time, not all do so. For example, both LBJ in 1960 and Lloyd Bentsen in 1988 ran for the Senate and the Vice Presidency at the same time. Texas law specifically permits this.

On the other hand, federal law prohibits HOLDING two federal offices at the same time, so if elected to both, one would have to be declined.

Ahh, I stand corrected.

[Major Robert Dump]

ACIN: Then please explain to me what exactly Lieberman did the year he ran for vice president, and why it is okay.

You can't run for two different positions at once. If a Senator decides to run for President, then they can't run for re-election as a Senator at the same time if their term is up. If their term isn't up, then they are not running for two positions in the first place and just like Biden, they resign their old position as soon as they win the new position

Biden gave up his seat because he won. Had he lost he would have still had a job because he also ran for re-election to his seat. Wow those are great odds. Not scummy of him at all.

[Ironside]

I support decent wages for demanding government jobs. Else you get monkeys, the wealthy and those on the take governing you.

But now is not an appropriate time to be increasing wages. That is a pr disaster. You need to raise salaries during boom times, when nobody is paying attention, and too busy grabbing what they can for themselves anyway.

Louis - one man's taxes are another man's fine lunches...

It helps slightly with saying that you're payed less than an equivalent position in the private sector (if true that is, if you earn more as a goverment employe it makes you sound extremely greedy). It still makes you sound greedy, but at least you sound to be more in touch with reality.

[a completely inoffensive name]

ACIN: Then please explain to me what exactly Lieberman did the year he ran for vice president, and why it is okay.

You can't run for two different positions at once. If a Senator decides to run for President, then they can't run for re-election as a Senator at the same time if their term is up. If their term isn't up, then they are not running for two positions in the first place and just like Biden, they resign their old position as soon as they win the new position

Biden gave up his seat because he won. Had he lost he would have still had a job because he also ran for re-election to his seat. Wow those are great odds. Not scummy of him at all.

A. I already admitted I was mistaken on that point about running for two different positions. It depends on the state you are from according to SF.

B. Never said it was okay. I am just cutting to the chase here and actually addressing the problem, not the symptom. Term limits, limits on what you can and can't run for if you are already in Congress, mandatory private sector experience are all reactions to the symptom of politicians using tons of their time wheeling and dealing, instead of acting according to the original extent of their positions, AKA write and pass laws for a few months, then go home. The problem is that they do all of this for money. The money corrupts. The money ruins the process. The money diverts their attention from the constituents to special interest groups. Yet the SCOTUS sits and tells us that because money=free speech we should be lucky that we have the freedom to contribute $5,000 to a candidate who is getting $5,000,000 from Goldman Sachs in order for another no strings attached bailout bill. Oh my god, I can taste the freedom as all our money is taken from our hands and put into the bankers.