First, cut all retirement pay for elected officials. Eliminate it completely. If
they want retirement, go back and get real jobs. These jokers PAID to get their
elected jobs. If they want to serve, fine. But no retirement pay. Then, their
health benefits should be equal to the lowest plan for working Government
employees. These officials are Temps - not permanent workers. They should not
get anything the lowest rung Federal Employee gets.
Quick question repubs, name one productive thing bishop, chaffetz, Stewart, and
lee have done in the past 2 years. Betcha cannot name one single thing.
@procuradorfiscalI don't trust Aaron A. Aaronson since he voted for
Sideshow Bob for mayor.
Re: "I'm all for kicking the bums out of office. Let's start here
in Utah!"Hear, hear!And then, we'll replace
them with the [apologies to Mr. Buckley] first 535 names in the phone book.We couldn't possibly do worse.
"Most of the top 10 welfare states are liberal."DId you read
the report you referred to. For example, New York has one of the highest rates,
not because of welfare, but because it spends the most of any of the other
states on a per pupil basis - over $18,000. A state spending money does not
equate directly to welfare spending. Another case and point, Alaska, a very
solid Red state.Comparing the cost of doing business in a state like
California, to a state like Utah, it isn't an apples to apples
comparison@JoeCapitalist2 = that is what I kind of was referring
to..... just did a poor job of saying it.
Q: ‘Letter: How can Congress in good conscience receive wages for no
work?’A: Because they have NO conscience, that's how.
@RedShirt,I agree the above is certainly bad, but no one politician
can be blamed. The Consitution set the years a term was to be served so
Congress could do the right thing and not have to worry about a recall election
because the people didn't like how they voted. The House term is shorter
because it is to be more closely linked to the will of the People, the Senate is
longer because they are to be more deliberative.If one could be
definitively linked to the above causes, I would support a Recall election, but
such an election is only held by his electors. Because they elected him to
begin with, he probably wouldn't lose his seat.Term limits on
the other hand would eliminate the above problem across the board. No one likes
Congress, but everyone loves their Congressman. Therefore we keep sending the
same people back that made us hate Congress to beging with.
To "Darrel" what would it take for you to consider it an emergency?Would 5 years without a budget be an emergency? How about adding $1
trillion to the budget without new revenue to support it?Would
having the US credit rating downgraded 2 times be considered a financial
emergency?How about 5 years of unemployment rates above 8% with
record low labor participation rates?At what point does the US
finally get to say that a politician should be removed from office? If
politicians only have to wait for the next election cycle, they know that most
voters are poorly informed and only require a few good deeds just before
election day to get the votes. However, if groups started to run recall
elections with little warning, those politicians would have to actually work all
the time to satisfy their supporters.To "JoeCapitalist2" I
like the idea of tying their wealth to the national deficit and not allowing
them to vote on raises for themselves. If the deficit is 0 they get full pay,
for each %GDP the deficit is, they lose 10 times that percent from their pay.
Whosoever is without sin [i.e, NOT voting for someone like Orrin Hatch for
the last 36 years] be the 1st to cast stones.
While it sounds great to tie congressional pay to performance, the last thing we
need is for each person in congress to get paid for every new bill they pass.We already have way too many laws and regulations on the books, it would
be an absolute avalanche if we paid them for every new law.Now if we
did that, but required them to find and repeal two silly laws for every new one
they passed...that might work out.
@RedShirt,While I am not against the idea of a Recall election, they
should only be done in the utmost of emergency.The Constitution
designed the whole House to be elected every two years, so as to be responsive
to the will of the People. The Senate was 6 years so they can do the "right
thing" without as much fear of losing support from their electors.
To "Donald Lee Eastman" didn't you know that what applies to
congress does not apply to you?They have their own pension system
and healthcare for life that are separate from everybody else.Also,
lets not forget that until recently it was legal for Congress to engage in
insider trading.TO "JoeBlow" you are confusing things. Go
look at which states give the most money away through their welfare programs.Read "These Are the 10 States That Give the Most Money &
Benefits to Their Residents" at The Blaze and "The States Doing The Most
(and Least) To Spread The Wealth" and 24/7 Wall St.Most of the
top 10 welfare states are liberal.To "Darrel" better yet is
to have votes of no confidence to remove politicians from office.
@Mountanman"If you ask them to stop their irresponsible spending
behavior they will call you "out of touch", greedy and selfish"!
"I find that a lot of Republicans want to cut their own tax
rates while cutting services to the poor or others who notably are not
themselves. Yes, that is rather greedy (and illogical, tax cuts don't
If we simply had a pay for production scheme in place... x percent of your pay
for every bill passed... another x percent for every law simplified or
removed... things will get done. So long as you can get paid for showing up on
FoxNews or one of the Sunday morning shows, and not have to actually deliver
anything... why would behavior change? To pretend this is a
partisan issue (ok, some people evidently only see the world as partisan and
can't think objectively if their lives depended on it) is a most dishonest
endeavor. One need not have to go much further back than Dick Cheney's
closed door meetings with Oil company execs weeks before the invasion of Iraq,
meetings Cheney refused to discuss and claimed presidential privilege to avoid
responding to request from congress, to find examples from both sides. Greed
and power corrupts equally.Just as in marriage - you can't fix
your spouse. All you can do is address issues within yourself, and create
opporunities for the other to excell. Dems aren't going to fix
republicans, and neither the other way around. Thay all need more mirror time,
and less pointing time.
No, Darrel, it's not that only 535 people are QUALIFIED for office.
It's only 535 who are wealthy enough with enough wealthy friends to be able
SamhillI agree with what you wrote.However, I am
curious. All of the misdeeds you highlight are Democrats.Are you
not aware of those committed by members of the GOP?If you need help.
Let me know. I would be happy to point out that the misdeeds are pretty well
spread across party lines.
The headline asks, "How can Congress in good conscience receive wages for no
work?"I'd love to hear many of the people in both houses of
congress answer that. However, my bet is it would depend a lot on what was used
for the definition of "work".For example, there is a **lot**
of "work" done to raise the funds for periodic campaigning, not to
mention all the "work" of campaigning itself. Of course, there are
those who fraudulently use money intended for campaigning for their own personal
use. Think Jesse Jackson Jr. for one recent example.There is also
the "work" performed in providing (or getting) kickbacks or special
interest attention to some piece of legislature in return for favors of various
sorts. The list is very long, but you can think Sen. Menendez's trips to
Caribbean island rendezvous or very favorable real estate deals for Sen. Reid
and Rep. Pelosi for some more recent examples.Of course, one
mustn't forget all the "work" that goes into establishing the
"relationships" cultivated to reap rewards after one's actual term
of office. Think Al Gore and/or Bill Clinton.Yes, there are many
kinds of "work".
I honestly think the best way to solve the problem is through term limits.
Allow each to seek re-election once.Congress approval is at an all
time low, however most people approve of their congressman, so we keep sending
the same people back. Keeping old blood there stifles ideas, entrenches people
to not work together, or only work with those they have in the past.Term limits will keep new blood flowing, clouts of seniority disappear,
grudges aren't held.I have a hard time believing there are only
535 qualified people in the nation fit for congress.
I'm all for kicking the bums out of office. Let's start here in Utah!
"Actually I have checked on that and California leads all states by a wide
margin where the most government assistance is given out and is definitely NOT a
"R" state, is it?"Ah, yes, but to earn the statement
"leads all states by a wide margin" one must be talking about state
taxes also.When we look at federal taxes paid into the federal
government vs federal $$ flowing back into the state from 1990 to 2009California has paid $336 BILLION more than it received.Utah, by
comparison received almost $38 BILLION more in Federal money than it paid.New York? paid $956 Billion more than it received.State
taxes dont matter. All state taxes are spent in the state so it is 1 for 1.
State spending does not affect anyone outside of your own state. Fed $$ do.These numbers are easily verified.
@Joe Blow. Actually I have checked on that and California leads all states by a
wide margin where the most government assistance is given out and is definitely
NOT a "R" state, is it?
"but voting for Democrats is much easier than working for a living"Have you checked on which states receive the most government
assistance?Sure looks like a lot of them dang freeloaders are
pulling the "R" lever.
But they give themselves AUTOMATIC pay raises every year. (Although they
recently skipped on recently for purely political reasons. Had to fool
voters.)It's very interesting to note that the last seven years
of pay raises added to their salaries an amount equal to the average annual pay
of a Utah school teacher.
Thank you Mr Eastman for not pointing fingers in any one direction.Recent "no pay" proposals were a political ploy aimed at Democrats.In reality, the house can pass anything they want with ZERO Democratic
votes.The Senate cannot pass anything without bi-partisan support.I am OK with that "No budget, no pay" proposal, but it must
include the House and the Senate.It is disingenuous to give a pass
to the House for passing a budget when they make no attempt to garner any
Democratic votes. The house budgets require only 51% to pass. The
senate must get a super majority (60 votes) to pass one.Until these
guys decide to work TOGETHER, blame is useless. Unless it is for purely
I agree with you Mr. Eastman but voting for Democrats is much easier than
working for a living. If Democrat politicians can't tax the people who
actually work enough, they will borrow it from our grandchildren! If you ask
them to stop their irresponsible spending behavior they will call you "out
of touch", greedy and selfish"! They will find some willing
"victims" and parade them around so everyone can see the heartlessness
of anyone who believes we should all work for what we receive! That is what
public servants do these days, that's what those who elected them demand
and if you have a message of self reliance and personal responsibility, you lose
elections as per Mitt Romney!
Donald: I feel your pain. For me, it was picking strawberries and beans. But,
we didn't have anyone standing in our way as we toiled to produce. Unlike
Democrats and Republicans.