View Poll Results: Do you support Luna's Congressional pay raise jury system?

Voters
16. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    11 68.75%
  • No

    5 31.25%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29

Thread: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see post

  1. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    I have to go with "OTHER" on this.....

    Congress should be a PART-TIME JOB for which the individuals serving are not paid from the Federal Treasury to begin with. It's an HONOR to serve in either of those bodies, and it should not be seen as a career but rather as a short-term privilege. If an individual state wants to pay its representatives, let THEM decide what the payment should be and take it from their own coffers.
    Last edited by Tigger; 11-10-11 at 09:19 AM.

  2. #12
    Bring us a shrubbery!
    tessaesque's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Last Seen
    11-09-17 @ 06:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    15,910

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    That would cost millions upon millions of dollars. The simpler action would be to treat raises like a constitutional amendment and put it to the states.
    "Hmmm...Can't decide if I want to watch "Four Houses" or give myself an Icy Hot pee hole enema..." - Blake Shelton


  3. #13
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,066

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    salary : give them the average US salary, and let them purchase their health insurance on the "free" market. once fired, they can COBRA their plan.

    pension : nah. give them some lousy 401k and SS. when they reach the retirement age of 70+ that most of the younger workers are going to have to deal with, that is.

    job security : they should be laid off as tax revenue falls. if it rises again, they can be hired back as independent contractors with no benefits.

    vacation : 13 days (earned over the course of the year). once laid off and hired back as independent contractors, 0 days.




    result of my plan : we would see the first congressional union form.

  4. #14
    200M yrs of experience
    Frolicking Dinosaurs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Southeastern USA
    Last Seen
    05-07-12 @ 12:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,166

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    Treat them as all other federal employees in regard to raises, health insurance and pensions. If they can't stay in office long enough to get vested in the pension plan, then they would not get a pension from the federal system.

  5. #15
    Cynical Optimist
    jambalaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Last Seen
    11-28-12 @ 05:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,481

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    To be honest, I find all the stuff about Congress's salaries to be missing the mark. They don't really care how much they get paid. Virtually all of them were making more money before they came to Congress and every single one of them could get 10 or even 1,000 times as much working somewhere else now that they have been a congress person. They get paid radically less than other people with comparable levels of responsibility. I mean, a senator has more responsibility than anybody outside of government except maybe a couple dozen CEOs and whatnot, but they make like 0.01% as much as those other folks. I think fixating on whether it should be 0.01% as much as their peers in the private sector or 0.0098% as much is just a distraction. And worst case, it could make the situation where the vast majority of politicians have to be rich before they can run for office even worse. IMO our goal should be to pay them enough that they don't really have to worry about their personal finances, but not so much that they would go into it for the money. We don't want the people running our country desperate for money. That just makes them ultra susceptible to corruption and distracts them from what they are supposed to be doing. Seems to be it pretty much hits that mark currently. Also, keep in mind that most of them need to maintain two homes- one in DC and one in their home state- while they're in office. If you take that out, they aren't really making much.
    As these people move up the political ladder they get wealthier and more importantly their influence grows which not only benefits them but their family and extended family. I like the fact that these people could be making much more money doing something else. I wish that would force more of them to leave office sooner. Do you really think all of these career politicians aren't getting greatly enriched by staying in office? I care how much they get paid because it is not only the salaries but they get reimbursed for a lot of expenses. I would love to see a balance sheet of how much it takes to support an average Senator. These guys have lots of privileges. If lower salaries would chase more of them from office then let's do it.

  6. #16
    Sage


    MaggieD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Chicago Area
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    43,243
    Blog Entries
    43

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    Quote Originally Posted by Luna Tick View Post
    Whenever Congress votes itself a raise, it's always a political hot potato. It does seem strange that they can vote themselves their own raises. Imagine at wherever you work if the employees could all get together and vote, "Say aye if you think everyone here deserves a 10 percent raise." I think it would be tough for such a place to stay in business. On the other hand, I won't say that Congress should never get a raise. All professions should have raises available. So here's my proposal.

    Congress will be stripped of its ability to vote itself a pay raise. In its place, we would have a 12-person jury of ordinary citizens pledged to be impartial. Congress will select an advocate, it could be a member of Congress or it could be an attorney, to make the case for the raise and for how much. When Congress is done making its case, a rebuttal case will be put on by a qualified attorney. This attorney will argue that Congress does not deserve a raise and will cite the reasons why. Both the pro and the con advocates will be given rebuttal time to cross examine and put holes in the other person's case.

    When all cases and rebuttals are done, the jury will deliberate. The jury is free to accept the full raise asked for or to reject it outright or to accept a lesser amount. It's acceptable for the jury to decide, "They asked for 10 percent; we're giving them 3 percent." In order for a raise to go into law, 9 of 12 jurors have to vote for it.

    This system would get rid of a political hot potato issue and would empower ordinary citizens while offering Congress the possibility to get raises. What do you think? Vote on whether you think this plan would be better than how we currently do it.
    No. This 12-person committee of ordinary citizens would quickly be beholdin' to various congressmen for one thing or another...just like the people who negotiate on behalf of the taxpayers with public employee unions. Congressmen should be restricted by law to a certain percentage raise within certain timeframes; i.e., COLA every four years with the % given based on COLA change from Year 3 to Year 4. Frankly, with all the perks they get, I think their salaries should be frozen for ten years.
    The devil whispered in my ear, "You cannot withstand the storm." I whispered back, "I am ​the storm."

  7. #17
    Transcend~
    Empirica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Lost at Sea
    Last Seen
    11-24-17 @ 07:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,662

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    On the surface, Tigger's congressional pay plan appears to be a good idea, although I would consider an automatic annual cost of living increase for these sluggs.

    Oh my!.....Did I just refer to congress as "sluggs"?.....Please allow me to rephrase this.....Sluggs, with a few exceptions.(very few)




    The wonderful thing about Tiggers Is Tiggers are wonderful chaps
    They're loaded with vim and vigor They love to leap in your laps
    They're jumpy, bumpy, clumpy, thumpy Fun, fun, fun, fun, fun
    But the most wonderful thing about Tiggers is I'm the only one
    (I think Tiggers are cute)
    When a crime is ignored ~ it becomes flagrant;
    When a crime is rewarded ~ it becomes epidemic:

    No Amnesty No Exception

  8. #18
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,317

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    Quote Originally Posted by Luna Tick View Post
    Whenever Congress votes itself a raise, it's always a political hot potato. It does seem strange that they can vote themselves their own raises. Imagine at wherever you work if the employees could all get together and vote, "Say aye if you think everyone here deserves a 10 percent raise." I think it would be tough for such a place to stay in business. On the other hand, I won't say that Congress should never get a raise. All professions should have raises available. So here's my proposal.

    Congress will be stripped of its ability to vote itself a pay raise. In its place, we would have a 12-person jury of ordinary citizens pledged to be impartial. Congress will select an advocate, it could be a member of Congress or it could be an attorney, to make the case for the raise and for how much. When Congress is done making its case, a rebuttal case will be put on by a qualified attorney. This attorney will argue that Congress does not deserve a raise and will cite the reasons why. Both the pro and the con advocates will be given rebuttal time to cross examine and put holes in the other person's case.

    When all cases and rebuttals are done, the jury will deliberate. The jury is free to accept the full raise asked for or to reject it outright or to accept a lesser amount. It's acceptable for the jury to decide, "They asked for 10 percent; we're giving them 3 percent." In order for a raise to go into law, 9 of 12 jurors have to vote for it.

    This system would get rid of a political hot potato issue and would empower ordinary citizens while offering Congress the possibility to get raises. What do you think? Vote on whether you think this plan would be better than how we currently do it.
    To be correct, Congress does not vote itself a raise. The 27th amendment forbids it. Congress gets COLA raises automatically unless they vote to reject them. They rejected in 10 and 11.

    Congress can only vote the next congress a raise.

  9. #19
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    No. This 12-person committee of ordinary citizens would quickly be beholdin' to various congressmen for one thing or another...just like the people who negotiate on behalf of the taxpayers with public employee unions. Congressmen should be restricted by law to a certain percentage raise within certain timeframes; i.e., COLA every four years with the % given based on COLA change from Year 3 to Year 4. Frankly, with all the perks they get, I think their salaries should be frozen for ten years.
    Since Luna used the term "Jury" I assumed that the people that were in the jury would be selected just like a regular jury is selected. IE same rules apply. That way no hanky panky could be done.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    05-01-14 @ 03:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    12,879

    Re: Should ordinary citizens, not Congress, decide all Congressional pay raises?(see

    Quote Originally Posted by Empirica View Post
    On the surface, Tigger's congressional pay plan appears to be a good idea, although I would consider an automatic annual cost of living increase for these sluggs.
    If that's what the individual state wanted to do, that would be fine by me. My idea is to return the United States Congress to a body that is comprised on AMATEUR legislators, not the professionals that currently occupy the seats. Congressman was never intended to be a career aspiration. It was intended to be something that people were chosen to do because of their qualities for a short period of time.


    Quote Originally Posted by Empirica View Post
    (I think Tiggers are cute)

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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