Large Scale Central

Interesting proposal

Not going to happen…

“The Proposal”

When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems
to happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers
need to find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would
be eliminated as well. Wall street, and the media normally congratulate
the CEO for making this type of “tough decision”, and his board of directors
gives him a big bonus.

Our government should not be immune from similar risks.
Therefore: Reduce the House of Representatives from the current
435 members to 218 members and Senate members from 100 to 50
(one per State). Also reduce remaining staff by 25%.
Accomplish this over the next 8 years. (two steps / two elections)
and of course this would require some redistricting.

Some Yearly Monetary Gains Include:
$44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress.
(267 members X $165,200 pay / member / yr.)
$97,175,000 for elimination of the above people’s staff.
(estimate $1.3 Million in staff per each member of the House,
and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year)
$240,294 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.
$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year.
(those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for
total government pork earmarks are at $15 Billion / yr)

The remaining representatives would need to work smarter
and would need to improve efficiencies. It might even be in
their best interests to work together for the good of our country?
We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more
efficient resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep
track of what your representative is doing.

Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in
1911 when the current number of representatives was established.
(telephone, computers, cell phones to name a few)
Note: have not been doing their jobs for the past 18+ months (on the
campaign trail) and still they all have been accepting full pay.
These facts alone support a reduction in senators & congress.

Summary of opportunity:

$ 44,108,400 reduction of congress members.

$282,100, 000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff.

$150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff.

$59,675,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.

$37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members.

$7,500,000,000 reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of congress members.

$8,073,383,400 per year, estimated total savings.

(that’s 8-BILLION just to start!)

Big business does these types of cuts all the time.
If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else)
in order to collect retirement benefits there is no telling how much we would save.
Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.

Quote:
... Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.
Not exactly. Senators, yes, because their terms are 6 years, but they are not eligible to collect until they reach a certain age.

"Members of Congress are not eligible for a pension until they reach the age of 50, but only if they’ve completed 20 years of service. Members are eligible at any age after completing 25 years of service or after they reach the age of 62. Please also note that Member’s of Congress have to serve at least 5 years to even receive a pension.

The amount of a Congressperson’s pension depends on the years of service and the average of the highest 3 years of his or her salary. By law, the starting amount of a Member’s retirement annuity may not exceed 80% of his or her final salary."

Source: http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa031200a.htm

The “starting amount” refers to the starting pension amount when benefits begin to be paid out. This amount is subject to cost-of-living adjustments as time progresses–the same adjustments every federal pensioner receives. Over time, this amount may actually exceed the pensioner’s salary at the time of his/her retirement.

Later,

K

PS - if you think reducing the numbers of congress would result in a proportionate reduction in the amount of pork spending, I’ve got a $20,000 Collector’s Edition New Bright set to sell you. :wink:

Kevin, you are such a spoil sport! :stuck_out_tongue: Since when does the truth have to interfere with a good story?

Is that Kollector’s Edition New Bright Set the one with the burro crane and work caboose? That’s the only one I need to complete my kolection. Are you sure that you want to let it go for a mere $20K?

Nah, this is the “Congressional Special.” Nothing related to “work” included at all! :wink:

And $20K is the your price. Your grand kids will have to pony up $60K over their lifetimes.

Later,

K

I should add–the train does nothing but runs in circles, going nowhere, and frequently derails.

Later,

K

Kevin Strong said:
I should add--the train does nothing but runs in circles, going nowhere, and frequently derails.

Later,

K


WOW, so trains and congress are the same… :slight_smile:

“the train does nothing but runs in circles, going nowhere, and frequently derails.”

"WOW, so trains and congress are the same… "

:wink:

You blokes haven’t factored in the effect on global warming.

Implementation of this plan would result in an [i]enormous[/i] reduction of hot air!

Deleted

Global Warming can only be achieved, when sufficient amounts of beans have been consumed… :slight_smile:

TonyWalsham said:
Dave, How can they? Gloabl warming is (supposedly) not occurring so it cannot be affected by anything mere man does.
Ah Tony, but we all know pollies ain't [b][i]mere[/i][/b] men - just ask 'em!