• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should congressional salaries be the first thing on the chopping block?

poll


  • Total voters
    29

Slartibartfast

Jesus loves you.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
71,668
Reaction score
58,047
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
If the debt ceiling is not raised, should congressional salaries be the first thing we don't pay?
 
OH helz yeah.

I bet you their pay didn't even skp a beat last time eventhough my husband and I had to jump through hoops not ot have crap auto-pay and bounce like a freaking flubber ball through the bank. Took us one month to get past a mere pay-delay.
 
I agree spiker, this is one bit of populism I could get behind.
 
This is an obvious yes. It won't help anything really, but it will make me feel better.
 
agreed

sadly many of the programs that are not constitutional have created so many addicts that anyone who had the balls to cut said programs would face a hailstorm of entitlement junkies calling for his head

congressional pensions are outrageous-I'd start cutting them big time to start with

presidential staff is another joke-do you know how many staff members the unelected unofficial position of first lady gets?
 
I would not only stop payment on congressional salaries, I would also ensure their only health care option is Obamacare.
 
I mean how great of an idea would it be to let them decide their own salaries?
 
Cut their pay, their healthcare, any pension, and any other tax payer paid benefit.. Failure to do their job should have consequences.. It does for everyone else..
 
Why can't it be if the Budget is not balanced they all are out of office within 2 weeks and the budget goes back to when it was balanced and it's automatic
 
Why can't it be if the Budget is not balanced they all are out of office within 2 weeks and the budget goes back to when it was balanced and it's automatic

Because the People truly do not control Washington. Washington - regardless of which or any or no party you support - is controlled by money. Big money, lobbyists with unlimited freebies for Congress, Congressional staff, Congressional family members call the shots in Washington and big money wants more money.
 
I think this is one thing we can all agree on. They're all rich, they don't need that money. We do!
 
As unpopular as I know this opinion is, I vote no. The salaries are already usually a lot less than they would make in the private sector. Some of them leave jobs making millions a year. All of them could retire and make millions in the private sector easily just because they are former congresspeople. So I don't think cutting the salaries would really affect most of them and it certainly wouldn't save much money on the scale of the deficit. But, I think it might make it harder for non-super-rich people to run for Congress. They need to get a second home in DC, they accumulate a lot of little expenses you wouldn't think of going to like dinners for charities and whatnot and even just buying a ton of expensive suits and whanot. If a regular person decided to run for Congress they would need to blow their entire life savings on the campaign, then they need to get a second house in DC and all that... I dunno. I definitely understand and share the desire to hold them personally responsible for their inability to work this out. But, at the same time, if they cut it now, the salaries will stay cut forever probably and that might exclude normal people from office. IMO the fact that almost everybody in Congress was superwealthy before they got there is a big problem.
 
As unpopular as I know this opinion is, I vote no. The salaries are already usually a lot less than they would make in the private sector. Some of them leave jobs making millions a year. All of them could retire and make millions in the private sector easily just because they are former congresspeople. So I don't think cutting the salaries would really affect most of them and it certainly wouldn't save much money on the scale of the deficit. But, I think it might make it harder for non-super-rich people to run for Congress. They need to get a second home in DC, they accumulate a lot of little expenses you wouldn't think of going to like dinners for charities and whatnot and even just buying a ton of expensive suits and whanot. If a regular person decided to run for Congress they would need to blow their entire life savings on the campaign, then they need to get a second house in DC and all that... I dunno. I definitely understand and share the desire to hold them personally responsible for their inability to work this out. But, at the same time, if they cut it now, the salaries will stay cut forever probably and that might exclude normal people from office. IMO the fact that almost everybody in Congress was superwealthy before they got there is a big problem.

That's actually very sensible.
 
Its public service. Lets treat as such and demand they actually do it as a service, not a job.

Since that won't happen I guess I can live with a cut. *sigh*
 
As unpopular as I know this opinion is, I vote no. The salaries are already usually a lot less than they would make in the private sector. Some of them leave jobs making millions a year. All of them could retire and make millions in the private sector easily just because they are former congresspeople. So I don't think cutting the salaries would really affect most of them and it certainly wouldn't save much money on the scale of the deficit. But, I think it might make it harder for non-super-rich people to run for Congress. They need to get a second home in DC, they accumulate a lot of little expenses you wouldn't think of going to like dinners for charities and whatnot and even just buying a ton of expensive suits and whanot. If a regular person decided to run for Congress they would need to blow their entire life savings on the campaign, then they need to get a second house in DC and all that... I dunno. I definitely understand and share the desire to hold them personally responsible for their inability to work this out. But, at the same time, if they cut it now, the salaries will stay cut forever probably and that might exclude normal people from office. IMO the fact that almost everybody in Congress was superwealthy before they got there is a big problem.

If the problem is just overhead to run lets work on that problem and cut their pay while opening it up to more common people. Lets do ballot reform, lets campaign reform, and then lets cut salaries. Surely if you are really interested(and yes I'm about to make you not interested) you have to take some of the work out of the job so that people can hold a regular paying job.
 
If the debt ceiling is not raised, should congressional salaries be the first thing we don't pay?

I like that idea a lot.

Granted, it may mean that instead they'll just live off the money they get from campaign contributors, putting them even deeper in the pockets of special interests.
 
If the problem is just overhead to run lets work on that problem and cut their pay while opening it up to more common people. Lets do ballot reform, lets campaign reform, and then lets cut salaries. Surely if you are really interested(and yes I'm about to make you not interested) you have to take some of the work out of the job so that people can hold a regular paying job.

Yeah, campaign finance reform is crucial. But, I'm just not that worked up about their salaries. People with comparable levels of responsibility in the private sector make literally 100 times as much.
 
If the debt ceiling is not raised, should congressional salaries be the first thing we don't pay?

Yes it should. Of course we ALL know that it won't happen. Which is why none of them actually care about raising the debt.

And yes I am applying this to BOTH sides equally.

If the Repubs actually cared they would settle with closing loopholes.
If the Dems actually cared they would have settled with not closing the loopholes.

Yeah I know, contradictory. But it only takes one side to settle with the other side.
 
Where's the "Oh Hell Yes!!" Option?
 
Yes it should. Of course we ALL know that it won't happen. Which is why none of them actually care about raising the debt.

And yes I am applying this to BOTH sides equally.

If the Repubs actually cared they would settle with closing loopholes.
If the Dems actually cared they would have settled with not closing the loopholes.

Yeah I know, contradictory. But it only takes one side to settle with the other side.

Why not compromise and close only some of the loopholes instead of all of them? Not good enough for the Repubs? It sounds like a compromise to me .. maybe I'm missing something?
 
Back
Top Bottom