The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: JC5123 on July 15, 2011, 03:46:15 PM
-
I got this in an email, and agree with most of it.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.
2. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. It may not be used for any other purpose.
3. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.
4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.
6. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/12.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.
If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.
THIS IS HOW YOU FIX CONGRESS!!!!!
-
I'd change #4 (Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%). I never got an automatic pay raise. If the company was doing poorly I got no raise. If I didn't perform up to standard I got no raise (never happened ;D). I think that congressional pay should be tied to the federal budget. If they don't balance the budget they take a cut in pay. If the budget is balanced I'd let #4 apply. Same goes for the Idiot-In-Chief's pay.
It's truly sad to me that #6 (Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people) has to be on the list.
I'd add that if a member of Congress runs for President he has to give up his seat. If he loses and wants his seat back, he has to get himself re-elected. Barry was elected to the Senate and immediately started campaigning for President. We the taxpayers were paying him to run for President. Same thing goes for McCain. After he lost he just went back to his seat as if nothing happened, no consequences. If I went to my boss (if I had one) and said I was going to take the next 2 years off to find a better job, but I still wanted to get paid, and I want you to hold my job for me in case it doesn't work out, I don't think he'd go for that. But we taxpayers seem to be OK with it. Go figure.
-
I'd change #4 (Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%). I never got an automatic pay raise. If the company was doing poorly I got no raise. If I didn't perform up to standard I got no raise (never happened ;D). I think that congressional pay should be tied to the federal budget. If they don't balance the budget they take a cut in pay. If the budget is balanced I'd let #4 apply. Same goes for the Idiot-In-Chief's pay.
It's truly sad to me that #6 (Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people) has to be on the list.
I'd add that if a member of Congress runs for President he has to give up his seat. If he loses and wants his seat back, he has to get himself re-elected. Barry was elected to the Senate and immediately started campaigning for President. We the taxpayers were paying him to run for President. Same thing goes for McCain. After he lost he just went back to his seat as if nothing happened, no consequences. If I went to my boss (if I had one) and said I was going to take the next 2 years off to find a better job, but I still wanted to get paid, and I want you to hold my job for me in case it doesn't work out, I don't think he'd go for that. But we taxpayers seem to be OK with it. Go figure.
+1000
-
The best way to fix Congress is to make the listed rule changes, then shoot all the serving members, half their replacements, and a quarter of their replacements.
That should keep them in their place for a couple of election cycles anyway.
-
The best way to fix Congress is to make the listed rule changes, then shoot all the serving members, half their replacements, and a quarter of their replacements.
That should keep them in their place for a couple of election cycles anyway.
Ammo's expensive......rope & light poles, remember?......Rope & light poles. ;)
-
Any excuse for a day at the range ! ;D
-
About their pay.
If we go over budget, the first thing to be cut is their payday....until things are back in the black.
-
Why not drop a MOAB on them and start over. ;D
-
Why not drop a MOAB on them and start over. ;D
Pay Per View ;D
-
How to fix Congress:
1) Tar
2) Feathers
3) Rope
-
Ammo's expensive......rope & light poles, remember?......Rope & light poles. ;)
Hey, even Mussolini was shot. Ammo ain't that expensive if you really need to use it.
-
Make ammo used that way tax deductible.
Maybe as a charitable contribution or as part of Community Service or an expense of fulfilling your Civic Duty or as contributing to the Common Defense.
-
I say we take off and nuke the whole site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure we get the whole nest. :P
-
The best way to fix Congress is to make the listed rule changes, then shoot all the serving members, half their replacements, and a quarter of their replacements.
That should keep them in their place for a couple of election cycles anyway.
Studying the books of Stalin are we? ;D Somebody round up some Pollocks for Tom! LOL!
-
Studying the books of Stalin are we? ;D Somebody round up some Pollocks for Tom! LOL!
Actually I got this idea from the French Army. As late as WWI if a unit performed poorly they would be decimated, (Every 10th man shot ) "To encourage the others".
-
Actually I got this idea from the French Army. As late as WWI if a unit performed poorly they would be decimated, (Every 10th man shot ) "To encourage the others".
Henry Ford applied a similar encouragement to his sales staff (back at the start). He'd fire the lowest performing sales person each month. Jobs were scarce. Good jobs were even more scarce. It encouraged maximum effort each month.
And, I'd maybe want to throw in another caveat: Anyone who actually WANTS to be elected should be automatically disqualified from running. We should maybe have something like a "draft" where we select several choices and require them to run/serve for a 2 or 4 year period--even if they don't want to. At the end of their national service, they would be manditorily exempt from the draft and would not be allowed to hold other political office.
Even if we managed to select only complete morons in our national draft, we'd be stuck with them for only a short time. (I'm specifically thinking of Barney Frank here, but the House and Senate are rife with examples.)
I don't see how we could end up with less competence than we enjoy under the current system.
-
Henry Ford applied a similar encouragement to his sales staff (back at the start). He'd fire the lowest performing sales person each month. Jobs were scarce. Good jobs were even more scarce. It encouraged maximum effort each month.
And, I'd maybe want to throw in another caveat: Anyone who actually WANTS to be elected should be automatically disqualified from running. We should maybe have something like a "draft" where we select several choices and require them to run/serve for a 2 or 4 year period--even if they don't want to. At the end of their national service, they would be manditorily exempt from the draft and would not be allowed to hold other political office.
Even if we managed to select only complete morons in our national draft, we'd be stuck with them for only a short time. (I'm specifically thinking of Barney Frank here, but the House and Senate are rife with examples.)
I don't see how we could end up with less competence than we enjoy under the current system.
I've often considered that option. If a person is so hungry for power as to go through what it takes to get elected, they are suspect. Some would start from a true desire to make the country better, but the problem is that they will end up feeling that they need to do things to make everything better and that they are the right one to do it. Next thing you know, they are meddling in everything. Good Intentions paving stones.
Only some details to work out to make it work I think.
I believe I read a book that sort of addressed that idea. Might have been named Dark Horse but it was 40 years ago that I read it.