A Bill that will never pass-Senator Budget

**Marshal Murat** · 12-13-2006, 01:43

America, shining beacon of Democracy, failed to approve a fiscal budget (redundant, maybe) for everything BUT Homeland Security and Defense.

Now, this got me thinking (bad Orgah, bad)
Why don't states approve their representatives pay-checks. Why do we allow the pay-masters to decide how much they get? Its kinda like a CEO saying
"Ah, my paycheck isn't big enough. Add a million for hard work" or some such analogy.
How about the states deciding how much money their representatives recieve for their labor?
Why don't we do it? It makes the Representatives accountable for how much work they do. You attend every meeting, vote, don't look at pages the wrong way, no scandals, and you get a full paycheck. You have $90,000 dollars in your freezer (cough Jefferson, corrupt official, other thread cough), you don't get as much?
Any problems??
Now I know this probably won't pass (not everyone is a Cicero or Cincinnatus), but its a good idea.
Or is it? What are your thoughts? Has this been suggested before? Do some states do this?

**Productivity** · 12-13-2006, 14:37

You'll end up paying peanuts because the average guy on the street doesn't know the value of an effective politician/public servant and consequently all the good operators will go to the private sector.

The West Australian state government is slowly finding that out, the pay for being a minister is rubbish (let alone a general MP), so all of the good operators either go federal or private sector and you end up with monkeys running the place.

An independant tribunal setting wages is the way to go IMO and they MUST be compared to equivalent private sector wages. The problem is as you not, there are bad politicians who ride on the back of the good ones - so make the tribunal make a judgement on effectiveness as well.

**yesdachi** · 12-13-2006, 15:06

We vote for them, giving them enough trust to run our country I think we should trust them to approve a fair compensation package for themselves. If we don’t like what they vote for or the things they promote then we shouldn’t vote for them again. Their salaries are piddely compared to the amount of influence they control in the country, I have no issue with them getting paid a high salary, there has to be some benefit to doing their jobs. If the return on their investment was higher maybe we would get better politicians, instead many of the bright and charismatic leaders stay in the private sector and rake in the cash as part of the corporate machine while the gov gets the dee dee dee.

**Kralizec** · 12-13-2006, 17:10

If the return on their investment was higher maybe we would get better politicians, instead many of the bright and charismatic leaders stay in the private sector and rake in the cash as part of the corporate machine while the gov gets the dee dee dee.

I don't know how ex-politicians in America get by, but in most European countries (succesful) politicians can generally count on getting very lucrative jobs in the private sector.

Besides, it's not as if people decide their carreer choices based on money alone.

**yesdachi** · 12-13-2006, 17:22

Originally Posted by Kralizec

I don't know how ex-politicians in America get by, but in most Europeans (succesful) politicians can generally count on getting very lucrative jobs in the private sector.

They go on speaking tours.