• 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 pensions be cut or eliminated?

Should congressional pensions be cut or eliminated?


  • Total voters
    22
Should congressional pensions be cut or eliminated?

I believe they should get.Politics is a public service job. They shouldn't get hefty retirements, benefits and other ****.


Chris Cuomo's Give Me A Break: Congressional Perks - ABC News

1) They should be reduced.
2) Congressmen should have to pay more of their own money into it.
3) Senators and Congressmen are under the same rules against insider trading as their staffs are.

Remember, Congressmen only get these pensions if they do 20 years of public service. That's a lot of years to devote, and they should get some kind of plan for it. After all, not every member of Congress is a millionaire.

However, members of Congress are not under rules against insider trading. While making laws regarding that kind of stuff, they are still allowed to use it when buying or selling stocks.

However, their staff members who have access to the same information aren't. Which gives members of Congress an incredibly undue advantage regarding the stock market.

So I'd rather Congressmen have pensions than allow them to do insider trading.
 
Congressmen should have a negative wage. This would attract more honorable people to run.
 
Congressmen should have a negative wage. This would attract more honorable people to run.
Oh, so if they made laws that benefited their businesses or the people they really worked for it would be OK?
 
I think what they have needs eliminated and something more fair to the American people be put in place. Let their constituents act as stock holders; let them decide what their bonuses and pensions are.
 
I think what they have needs eliminated and something more fair to the American people be put in place. Let their constituents act as stock holders; let them decide what their bonuses and pensions are.
In a sense we already do. They set-up the current system, we know about it, and we keep re-electing them.
 
Congressmen should have a negative wage. This would attract more honorable people to run.


So instead of it being difficult for a middle-class Joe to run for office, as it is now, you'd make it impossible...
 
I think they should def get paid but not the 174k they start out on. 90k I think sounds much more reasonable and will save around 45 million a year in tax payer dollars every single year.
 
Eliminate them they are unconstitutional and a ponzai scheme....

they should be eliminated, but claiming they are unconstitutional is ridiculous.
 
I would prefer a standard 401k for them. I'd be ok with matching funds, but the same percentages and rules and such that I get.
 
their wages, benefits, and job security should be tied to the national average.

make congress a "right to work" zone, in other words.
 
I think they should just get Social Security retirements from their Congressional jobs. If they want to buy separate pension plans, that's fine. They should also be covered by the same health insurance as you and I, their constituents. How can they actually represent us unless they live in the same fishbowl that we do. Also they should recieve the same average National wage as the average constituent. Build dormitories so they can live away from home. Can the perks and move into mainstream life, same as us.
 
I think they should just get Social Security retirements from their Congressional jobs. If they want to buy separate pension plans, that's fine. They should also be covered by the same health insurance as you and I, their constituents. How can they actually represent us unless they live in the same fishbowl that we do. Also they should recieve the same average National wage as the average constituent. Build dormitories so they can live away from home. Can the perks and move into mainstream life, same as us.
I don't begrudge them the salaries they make. In spite of the perks they set for themselves, it is still a very stressful and difficult job that the average person would be unable to do. I just think the perks should be lessened and/or eliminated.

The dormitory suggestion is one I have thought of before and I am all for that. First, they should be traveling to Washington as a temporary visitor, not living there. Second, it takes away the excuse for some of the perks they get. And, if someone wants to live elsewhere on their own dime, that's fine.
 
1) They should be reduced.
2) Congressmen should have to pay more of their own money into it.
3) Senators and Congressmen are under the same rules against insider trading as their staffs are.

Remember, Congressmen only get these pensions if they do 20 years of public service. That's a lot of years to devote, and they should get some kind of plan for it. After all, not every member of Congress is a millionaire.

However, members of Congress are not under rules against insider trading. While making laws regarding that kind of stuff, they are still allowed to use it when buying or selling stocks.

However, their staff members who have access to the same information aren't. Which gives members of Congress an incredibly undue advantage regarding the stock market.

So I'd rather Congressmen have pensions than allow them to do insider trading.

Here's a brief description of congressional pension. Personally, I don't want ANY elected official in office after 8 years. Period. Pension should be of little concern for those of you who don't want a professional governing class. I no longer vote for the incumbent. It only encourages them. Vote the bastards out. Unfortunately most of America is too partisan to affect any real change in government.

Congressional pension is a pension made available to members of the United States Congress. Members who participated in the congressional pension system are vested after five (5) years of service. A full pension is available to Members 62 years of age with 5 years of service; 50 years or older with 20 years of service; or 25 years of service at any age. A reduced pension is available depending upon which of several different age/service options is chosen. If Members leave Congress before reaching retirement age, they may leave their contributions behind and receive a deferred pension later.
 
to OP:

That's why people run for office. Once their in, they know they are set for life.
 
^^

Quiz: Which two congressmen don't participate in congressional pension?
 
to OP:

That's why people run for office. Once their in, they know they are set for life.
I'm cynical, but I'm not that cynical. I believe that the vast majority of people who get into politics originally get in because they actually do care deeply and think that they can make positive change. I think they are corrupted after they are in, and that it happens slow enough that they don't even realize it, while others on the outside looking in can see the transformation.

I also think that most politicians are corrupted more by the power than they are the money, though the money is a nice little secondary benefit also.
 
congressional benefits and wages are one of the things I think should be left for the public, by vote, to decide.

some generations would be willing to hand out generous benefits for congress, other may not be so generous...
I'm not big on allowing public servants to dictate their benefits to those whom are paying for them.
 
congressional benefits and wages are one of the things I think should be left for the public, by vote, to decide.

some generations would be willing to hand out generous benefits for congress, other may not be so generous...
I'm not big on allowing public servants to dictate their benefits to those whom are paying for them.
I agree. I can not go to my boss and tell him this is my pay and benefits from now nor can most other employees.Elected officials should be no different. They like all other employees on the face of the planet should have to ask their bosses IE we the tax payers for raises and benefits.
 
I think Congressional EXPENSES should be cut. At least in half. At present by their own figures, it costs over 2 million per year per congressman to keep them in office. Cutting this by half would be a start, both in reducing government cost, and establishing the seriousness of Congress to tackle the budget problem.

In today's world, there is no real reason why congress needs to fly in on Monday and fly out on Friday. A simple laptop and a stay at home congressman could accomplish the same thing. There are other perks to this system. Citizens would have easier access to their representatives, and lobbyists and special interest groups access would be more difficult.

To the original post, I would include pension expenses in congressional expenses.
 
I think Congressional EXPENSES should be cut. At least in half. At present by their own figures, it costs over 2 million per year per congressman to keep them in office. Cutting this by half would be a start, both in reducing government cost, and establishing the seriousness of Congress to tackle the budget problem.

In today's world, there is no real reason why congress needs to fly in on Monday and fly out on Friday. A simple laptop and a stay at home congressman could accomplish the same thing. There are other perks to this system. Citizens would have easier access to their representatives, and lobbyists and special interest groups access would be more difficult.

To the original post, I would include pension expenses in congressional expenses.
I tend to agree with this. I'd even take it a bit further.

1. Sessions would be shortened. Three, maybe four months, max. Split into two equal time frames twice a year. The rest they do in their home districts via computer. They should be spending time in their home districts anyway. They are "citizen legislators", aren't they?

2. Relating to #1, they get FOUR plane tickets (Coach) per year. Two to Washington, two home. Obviously, for the start and end of each session. Any extra trips are out of their own pockets.

As far as having constituents decide pay and benefits? That's one of those things that looks good on paper, but would be way too unwieldy to be practical. Plus, if we can get them back to being more like citizen legislators again, they should get some kind of stability.
 
I want to pay them at least twice much as I was paid in my high level positions; also, a decent pension of some type. However, I want their income from other sources limited. It’s not what the government pays them that is the issue, it’s things like K street that disturb me. Right now we are watching misleading ads paid for by a bridge owner supporting state congress men that were able to prevent democratic action on a second bridge, supported by a Republican Governor. The money that congressmen can get (directly and indirectly) from private firms causes more problems that their pay and pensions. If we reduce their pay where do you think their money will come from?
 
I tend to agree with this. I'd even take it a bit further.

1. Sessions would be shortened. Three, maybe four months, max. Split into two equal time frames twice a year. The rest they do in their home districts via computer. They should be spending time in their home districts anyway. They are "citizen legislators", aren't they?

2. Relating to #1, they get FOUR plane tickets (Coach) per year. Two to Washington, two home. Obviously, for the start and end of each session. Any extra trips are out of their own pockets.

As far as having constituents decide pay and benefits? That's one of those things that looks good on paper, but would be way too unwieldy to be practical. Plus, if we can get them back to being more like citizen legislators again, they should get some kind of stability.

I don't think my post addressed the issue of who pays for flight, but I am not aware of the 4 ticket rule. No saying you're wrong, just that I don't know. I would be interested in knowing where that rule is found.

I don't see how the constituents deciding pay and benefits would be that complicated. I'll propose the following legislation:

"Each congressman shall be given the sum of $750,000 (or some other figure) to use as they see fit to conduct congressional business. All expenses, including salaries, pensions, office expenses, travel, and any other expenses shall be paid from that fund."
 
I don't think my post addressed the issue of who pays for flight, but I am not aware of the 4 ticket rule. No saying you're wrong, just that I don't know. I would be interested in knowing where that rule is found.

I don't see how the constituents deciding pay and benefits would be that complicated. I'll propose the following legislation:

"Each congressman shall be given the sum of $750,000 (or some other figure) to use as they see fit to conduct congressional business. All expenses, including salaries, pensions, office expenses, travel, and any other expenses shall be paid from that fund."
The four ticket rule is my idea of how it should be. It's not actually a rule now.
 
Back
Top Bottom