• 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!

How much should members of the US Congress get paid?

How much should members of the US Congress get paid?

  • Total voters
    27
rathi said:
I would actually suggest increasing congressional pay. Not that they deserve any of it, but because it would probably end up being cheaper to the country as a whole.

One of the things that drastically improved british parliment was the addition of pay. It allowed people who were not independently wealthy to hold office, and reduced the number of people who had to use bribes as their means of income. Even today, in countries where officials get lousy pay, you see them supplementing their income by abusing their office.

Congress handles so much money that any reduction in corruption outweighs minor increase in their pay. Cynically speaking, a congress persons's salary is just a bribe from the taxpayer, and is weighed against the other bribes from other groups. Paying someone 100k more to avoid a $10,000,000 "subsidy" is ultimately worth it in the long run.
Click to expand...

It sounds great but someone else is always willing to pay them more.
They will take your 100k extra and the take the 10,000,000 subsidy too.

RightinNYC said:
Constitution says no to individuated decisions on congressional pay.
Click to expand...

The Constitution hasn't mattered for quite some time.
Why should we let Congress use that as an excuse?
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
The Constitution hasn't mattered for quite some time.
Why should we let Congress use that as an excuse?
Click to expand...

Rhetoric aside, do you really think you're going to get the constitution amended so you can implement a program like that?
 
RightinNYC said:
Rhetoric aside, do you really think you're going to get the constitution amended so you can implement a program like that?
Click to expand...

Nah, I'm just complaining. ;)

There isn't a pay solution thats going to fix anything.

The only way to get a better Congress is to not re-elect incumbents.
 
Redress said:
Vote em out if you are unhappy with the job they are doing. Employing some one you don't consider worthwhile is foolish. If you don't got the votes to do so, tough.
Click to expand...

But what if they suck during a non-election year? Can't do much about that.

It's a trivial issue, I doubt most members of Congress really care what they make, they get other compensations.
Click to expand...

You do have a point there.
 
jamesrage said:
States have ballot issues all the time,so having ballot issues on whether or not to increase,decrease or keep the pay the same should not be the issue seeing how they can be intergrated with other poll issues.

In the end in should be up to the tax payers seeing how they are the employers of the politicians. .Do you disagree with this notion?
Click to expand...

Only that I wasn't aware that states set the pay of their Congress members. To enact either your idea or mine, we'd need to take the power away from the federal government and enshrine it with the states in a way that Congress has to jump through flaming hoops and over piranha pits to claw back.
 
Oops, I clicked the wrong option. I meant to choose more than $175,000. They are entrusted with a lot of responsibility and are grossly underpaid relative to their job description.

Part of the reason that we have such a dearth of talent in Congress is because the best and the brightest take high-paying jobs in the private sector and avoid public service like a plague. You'll always get what you pay for. If we paid them a reasonable amount, we'd get smarter, more talented people.
 
FlappyTheKinkajou said:
Let's direct our energies toward politicians, and not toward each other.
Click to expand...

That was not a directed insult towards any one. That was a reply to his question. If you don't like a politician after you elected him(hypothetical situation), then you showed poor judgment in electing him.
 
Redress said:
That was not a directed insult towards any one. That was a reply to his question. If you don't like a politician after you elected him(hypothetical situation), then you showed poor judgment in electing him.
Click to expand...

That was not a directed allegation of directed insults towards anyone towards you.

We need to direct our energies at politicians.
 
Redress said:
That was not a directed insult towards any one. That was a reply to his question. If you don't like a politician after you elected him(hypothetical situation), then you showed poor judgment in electing him.
Click to expand...
Actually, the poor judgment is shown when the politician is re-elected.

By that standard most Americans have abysmal judgment.

As the saying goes: "fool me once, shame on you. fool me twice, shame on me."
 
obvious Child said:
How much should members of the US Congress get paid?

Also, numbers are currently not including benefits such as retirement, staff salaries, housing allowance, etc.
Click to expand...

I voted up to $100,00.00 and that's being generous. Cops should get paid more than congress members.
 
They should be paid absolutely nothing if they're not willing to open their books to an independent public auditor.

If their books are clean, they can be paid the median white collar wage of DC non-government workers of similar years of service.
 
celticlord said:
Actually, the poor judgment is shown when the politician is re-elected.

By that standard most Americans have abysmal judgment.

As the saying goes: "fool me once, shame on you. fool me twice, shame on me."
Click to expand...


That was not exactly my point, but a direct corollary of it, yes.
 
Kandahar said:
Oops, I clicked the wrong option. I meant to choose more than $175,000. They are entrusted with a lot of responsibility and are grossly underpaid relative to their job description.

Part of the reason that we have such a dearth of talent in Congress is because the best and the brightest take high-paying jobs in the private sector and avoid public service like a plague.
Click to expand...

Politicians are not supposed to be high paid salary men,they are civil servants just like police, military, fire men, school teachers, city council members, and other civil servants. Should all those people make high salaries because some of them actually put their lives in the line of duty,some of these people dedicate long hours and some of these people sacrifice certian freedoms.

You'll always get what you pay for. If we paid them a reasonable amount, we'd get smarter, more talented people.
Click to expand...

Those people you suggested would merely be more smarter and talented at screwing tax payers that the current people we have in office. Considering the fact a lot of these politicians graduated from prestigious universities your argument that those in office are brainless twits doesn't hold water.
 
RightinNYC said:
I think around $200-225k is a fair amount for the hours they work, the experience they bring, the costs they're required to incur, and the lack of job security.
Click to expand...
There should be no job security with political offices.






Constitution says no to individuated decisions on congressional pay.
Click to expand...
Then an amendment should be created to void that amendment. Politicians are employees of the tax payers, therefore tax payers should decide their pay not the employees themselves. Isn't this the argument many people who are against minimum wage and unions use? If you told your boss that your getting a raise he would probably fire you or laugh his off at you.
 
The House and Senate are a bit different in composition. Most Senators are quite well off financially in private life and invariably sit on numerous corporate boards after they leave Congress. Perpetual silver spoons.
 
Congressmen should not so much get paid as they should get hit upside of the head with a shovel until they get it right.
 
jamesrage said:
There should be no job security with political offices.
Click to expand...

I didn't say they should be. I said that because they have no job security, they should be paid more.

Then an amendment should be created to void that amendment. Politicians are employees of the tax payers, therefore tax payers should decide their pay not the employees themselves. Isn't this the argument many people who are against minimum wage and unions use? If you told your boss that your getting a raise he would probably fire you or laugh his off at you.
Click to expand...

It's not an amendment, it's the text of the constitution itself. And you do get a chance to influence the pay of legislators, by only voting for legislators who promise to affect pay the way you choose.

The House and Senate are a bit different in composition. Most Senators are quite well off financially in private life and invariably sit on numerous corporate boards after they leave Congress. Perpetual silver spoons.
Click to expand...

Senators also manage staffs of 50+ compared to Congresspeople who manage staffs of 12-18.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom