Should we change how we compensate our elected officals?
@thegreatdebater (7316)
United States
February 11, 2009 9:30pm CST
While I was listening to the eight CEO's of the banks that took TARP money today, I heard Barney Frank say that he didn't have a problem with people being compensated when they produce a profit, but when they cost the American people money they shouldn't receive excessive compensation. Being a full commission salesman myself, I was thinking maybe we should change the way we pay our elected officals. I think it would be interesting to see how quickly we could balance the budget if our elected officals only were paid if the government made money. I would have no problem seeing my representative making six figures a year if the government was making money instead of spending trillions on waste, and bribes. What do you think?
1 person likes this
6 responses
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
12 Feb 09
I believe that this would hurt people. Here in Florida we've already been subjected to cuts in essential services due to state budget cuts and I'm certain the state will not show a profit. There were cuts to nursing homes, hospice care, schools and emergency road services. So, the elderly, the sick and our children pay the price...those with the smallest voices.
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
12 Feb 09
This is one of the down falls to my idea, but the one solution to this is that these people will be removed from office because they are not balancing the public need, with the governments need. To solve this problem I would say that certain programs could not be cut below a certain level. The hope of my plan is to limit these bribes, and pet spending projects the usually led to jail time for someone. I agree that the government should take care of the elderly, sick, and young children. But, they shouldn't send money to projects that serve no usefull purpose (remember the bridge to nowhere?).
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
12 Feb 09
You know Mike Huckabee had a great plan regarding this. He said that we should end these annual raises congress gets and for each year that they fail to balance the budget they should get a 2% pay cut. I think you'd be amazed how quickly they'd balance the budget when it's THEM losing money. Funny how the media made a big deal about lavish retreats being taken by people who got the bailout yet ignored the lavish retreats taken by our own politicians a short while ago.
1 person likes this
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
12 Feb 09
Mike Huckabee has some good ideas, I just wish he would spend more time talking about them instead of attacking other republicans. That isn't a bad idea, I would like to see someone stand up to Congress and take their power to vote on their own pay. The president of the United States can't even do that. I remember when the department of homeland security had a retreat a year after it was created (I will never be able to get that image of Tom Ridge in a swim suit out of my nightmares). I have heard about recent retreats by both parties, and I think that they both should understand the current economic situation, and tone them down. I do find it hard to compare the retreats that the banks sponsored, and the retreats that both parties have gone on. When you are spending millions of dollars on a weekend, and are complaining that you are broke, something doesn't smell right.
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
12 Feb 09
How about making it true government service. They get paid 2X the average wage as reported by the IRS. They get paid only for the days they are in the chamber or committee room, the start and end of the session would be set by law and per diem would be paid only for those days. They receive a per-diem of the cost of the Super 8 motel room in Washington DC and meals at Perkins. Any money made giving speeches would be turned over to the US Government. They would get mileage for one trip to Washington DC and one trip home at the current IRS rate. IF they travel overseas it is by Military transport, as our soldiers use, and they would stay in military housing in the area. There would be only Social Security for retirement. All committee assignments would be strictly random, you draw a committee and a name. Each committee elects its own chair. All campaign money would be used for campaigning and after the election any money left would be considered personal income and taxed as such the only exception would be if they turned the money into the government. Every bill introduced had to be voted on during that session. The budget had to be passed or they stayed in session until it was passed and any other bills introduced, but no extra per diem will be paid. The government would pay for two staffers, one in Washington, DC and one in their home state.
Lets see how many make it a career to bean elected official and how many new laws get introduced every year. They get a bonus if they can keep spending to below 2% of the Gross National Product. Total Government service (elected and Government jobs) is limited to 20 years, except judges as allowed by the constitution.
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
12 Feb 09
It would be nice to see people spend tax dollars like we spend our own money. If we don't have the money then we either cut our spending in another area, or we go without. It's like these people get to Washington, and forget how to balance a checking account.
@mscott (1923)
• United States
12 Feb 09
Yes it would be interesting if they were paid on performance like they were yelling at these CEOs for. granted many elected officials don't make a ton in salary, however it is all the perks, freebies, speaking engagements, book deals and everything else they get that really makes them the money. Most apparently don't know that they are suppose to pay taxes on this stuff by the way. 

@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
12 Feb 09
It is amazing how much these people cost us a year. I was listening to a report from the GAO, and they estimated that the cost of just current and former congressman, and presidents is over a billion dollars a year. This includes their annual salairy, medical, and protection. I know that our elected officals don't make a ton of money, but when you add in their perks, their free meals, and travel, along with their champaign funds they control millions of dollars, and don't have to spend any of the money they make. It is amazing how many people go to Washington an average person, and leave a millionaire. Makes you wonder if we should pay them a dime, when they are making money other ways. Maybe we should just require them to disclose who is buying their influence, and let those corporations pay them for their votes. This is what they are doing now, we just don't know who is buying them.
@LaurenInLA (2270)
• United States
12 Feb 09
Interesting question. Since you're a commissioned salesperson, you only earn money when you produce. I absolutely agree with you. Perhaps a system based upon balancing a budget; creating solutions to problems and actually attending congressional sessions. Maybe a deduction for all of that "pork" that they manage to shove into every bill that they pass. If they're producing, I don't mind paying.
1 person likes this
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
12 Feb 09
Thanks for your response. I see that you understand what I was thinking when I started this. I am not attacking the good things that our government does, just the pork, and bribes that they can't resist spending billions on. I think that they should personally pay for all of the taxpayer dollars they waste on pet projects, and personal gain.





