1. #1
    Forum Member
    len1582's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    N.J.
    Posts
    1,392

    Default To Bad this Couldn't Be done In Washington D.C.

    "The Proposal"

    When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers must find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would be eliminated as well.

    Wall street, and the media normally congratulate the CEO for making this type of "tough decision", and his board of directors gives him a big bonus.

    Our government should not be immune from similar risks.

    Therefore:

    Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members.

    Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State). Then, reduce their staff by 25%.

    Accomplish this over the next 8 years (two steps/two elections) and of course this would require some redistricting.

    Some Yearly Monetary Gains Include:

    $44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress. (267 members X $165,200 pay/member/ yr.)

    $97,175,000 for elimination of their staff. (estimate $1.3 Million in staff per each member of the House, and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year)

    $240,294 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.

    $7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year. (those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion/yr).

    The remaining representatives would need to work smarter and improve efficiencies. It might even be in their best interests to work together for the good of our country!

    We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of what your representative is doing.

    Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in 1911 when the current number of representatives was established. (telephone, computers, cell phones to name a few)

    Note:
    Congress did not hesitate to head home when it was a holiday, when the nation needed a real fix to the economic problems. Also, we had 3 senators that were not doing their jobs for the 18+ months (on the campaign trail) and still they all have accepted full pay. These facts alone support a reduction in senators & congress.

    Summary of opportunity:
    $ 44,108,400 reduction of congress members.
    $282,100, 000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff.
    $150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff.
    $59,675,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.
    $37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members.
    $7,500,000,000 reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of congress members.
    $8,073,383,400 per year, estimated total savings. (that's 8-BILLION just to start!)

    Big business does these types of cuts all the time.

    If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, tax payers could save a bundle.

    Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.

  2. #2
    Forum Member
    firecat1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Betwixt here and there.
    Posts
    3,484

    Default

    I normally stay out of political threads but.....

    *whistling/cheering/woo-hooing*that is one of the best political proposals I've ever heard!

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Columbia, TN
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Excellent plan.......submit this to FOX news....I'm sure they won't be afraid to run it!!!

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    len1582's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    N.J.
    Posts
    1,392

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by firecat1 View Post
    I normally stay out of political threads but.....
    Same here. I normally stay off to the side when politics and some religion comes up but when this was sent to me I felt I wanted to share it with others.

  5. #5
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,439

    Default

    I only see one problem with this plan:

    Quote Originally Posted by len1582 View Post
    $7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year. (those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion/yr).
    I'm sure the surviving members will find a way to spend the leftover pork
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  6. #6
    Forum Member
    DaSharkie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    4,713

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarcusKspn View Post
    I only see one problem with this plan:



    I'm sure the surviving members will find a way to spend the leftover pork
    Quite true. Politicians do not make monetary/program cuts. And they damned sure do not return the money to its rightful owner - the TAXPAYER. They also lack the brainpower to have the common sense to apply it to the national debt and learn to live within the nation's financial means.
    "Too many people spend money they haven't earned, to buy things they don't want, to impress people they don't like." Will Rogers

    The borrower is slave to the lender. Proverbs 22:7 - Debt free since 10/5/2009.

    "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." - New York Judge Gideon Tucker

    "As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government." - Dave Barry

    www.daveramsey.com www.clarkhoward.com www.heritage.org

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaSharkie View Post
    Quite true. Politicians do not make monetary/program cuts. And they damned sure do not return the money to its rightful owner - the TAXPAYER. They also lack the brainpower to have the common sense to apply it to the national debt and learn to live within the nation's financial means.

    Heck, if we keep on comparing this plan to the private sector we would have to realize that the board of directors never cuts their own positions or sallary. It's always the workers that get hosed.
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  8. #8
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Want to reduce govt. spending.....
    I am sure the bean counter who came up with this plan can come up with one for local fire dept's as well....

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,439

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babcusar5 View Post
    Want to reduce govt. spending.....
    I am sure the bean counter who came up with this plan can come up with one for local fire dept's as well....
    Step one, outsource 911 to India
    "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin

  10. #10
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Anyone that loves our Constitution and our representative democracy(ie. Republic) will not only be totally opposed to this idea, but realize that we need to expand the congress. When the Nation was founded each Representative had 30,000 constituents to serve, now even with a 5 fold increase in members over the last 220 years, each represents 600,000+ constituents! How can you be truely represented when you have but a 1/600000th share in your Member of Congress. The Legislative Branch has a pretty big budget if you compare it to a private business, but it is still smaller than the the Ford Motor Companies operation budger this year. It is smaller than most executive branch agencies' budgets, even some offices with less than 200 employees.
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

  11. #11
    Banned

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DennisTheMenace View Post
    Anyone that loves our Constitution and our representative democracy(ie. Republic) will not only be totally opposed to this idea, but realize that we need to expand the congress. When the Nation was founded each Representative had 30,000 constituents to serve, now even with a 5 fold increase in members over the last 220 years, each represents 600,000+ constituents! How can you be truely represented when you have but a 1/600000th share in your Member of Congress. The Legislative Branch has a pretty big budget if you compare it to a private business, but it is still smaller than the the Ford Motor Companies operation budger this year. It is smaller than most executive branch agencies' budgets, even some offices with less than 200 employees.
    Yes, and that was back in the day when it took some members 3 months to get to DC. Mail took forever. No we move around rather quickly and can correspond without using all of that travel time. But the issue isn't the number of Senators and Congressman, it is all of the staffers and the sucking of dollars form the economy.

  12. #12
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ScareCrow57 View Post
    Yes, and that was back in the day when it took some members 3 months to get to DC. Mail took forever. No we move around rather quickly and can correspond without using all of that travel time. But the issue isn't the number of Senators and Congressman, it is all of the staffers and the sucking of dollars form the economy.
    Once again you prove your ignorance. How is the smallest branch of government, with the smallest per capita pay roll, full of staffers sucking the dollars from the economy? You can hate which bills become laws, and which don't, but if you have any respect for the Constitution and our way of self governance you will know how freaking wrong your opinion is. Do you know the average pay compared to the average hours worked by most Congressional Staffers? You are a disgrace to all true conservatives and republicans, and frankly a disgrace to Americans regardless of which side of the political spectrum you think you are on.
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

  13. #13
    Forum Member
    DennisTheMenace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Washington, DC/Northern Virginia
    Posts
    3,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by len1582 View Post
    "The Proposal"
    If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, tax payers could save a bundle.

    Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.
    This is blatantly false. A Member of Congress has the same retirement requirements and benefits as any other federal worker under FERS. To get any sort of a pension with out prior federal service they need to serve at least five years, so a Senator could get a tiny pension once old enough, but a Representative needs to be re-elected twice, and they will still have an age requirement before they collect anything that they have paid into.

    I am no Democrat and no supporter of their political causes, but we never paid a dime out for Kennedy's pension, and we are making money on Byrd not retireing. Should the old dude ever step down, his pension will actually be a raise!
    Be for Peace, but don't be for the Enemy!
    -Big Russ

    Learn from the mistakes of others; you won't live long enough to make them all yourself.

    Quote Originally Posted by nyckftbl View Post
    LOL....dont you people have anything else to do besides b*tch about our b*tching?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Washington D.C. PM/FF
    By CMCM49 in forum Hiring & Employment Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-31-2007, 02:49 PM
  2. OK, Washington FF what gives
    By BCZimmerman in forum Washington State
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-23-2004, 02:03 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register