Posted on 11/23/2010 3:13:29 PM PST by La Enchiladita
It seems like an insurmountable task for GOP candidates to take out the liberal fixtures of Nancy Pelosi, Charlie Rangel, and Barney Frank in congressional elections, but how about making them part-time workers instead? Perhaps that’s one way to minimize the amount of unpopular legislation coming out of Washington these days. Bobby Jindal thinks so. According to him, it’s about time we slice and dice the number of hours lawmakers have in a work day.
“We used to pay farmers not to grow crops, let's make congressman stay out of Washington, D.C.,” the Louisiana Governor said in an exclusive interview with HUMAN EVENTS. “Our liberty, our wallets are safest when the legislature's not in session,” he added, borrowing the line from Mark Twain.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
It will be a full time job getting things undone.
Yes, yes, YES! As Mark Levin says, EVERY DAY CONGRESS MEETS, YOU LOSE A BIT OF YOUR LIBERTIES!!
In fact, I would gladly pay them DOUBLE if they worked HALF as much! I truly like the model of the Texas legislature.
Congress once was a part-time job. The founders never expected the legislative branch to be a full-time effort.
I would add Senators, Governors, and President to that listing.
Get rid of the Gov bloat and other nonsense, and make it part time like it was before. As I recall, Congress only convened about twice a year back in the day.
And let’s pay them minimum wage while we’re at it.
Part time would just give them more out-of-office time to do under-the-table and good-ole-boy deals.
The solution is not to make them part time.
The solution is to make them term limited and add restrictions such as:
they cannot seek another elective office unless they resign any currently held elective office.
Put Congress on their states’ payroll instead of the federal payroll.
Let them remember for whom they work.
What an incredibly simple and excellent idea!
BUMP!!!
Story today in the Bergen Record about state legislators working part time and then also working elsewhere.
http://www.northjersey.com/news/opinions/110060134_A_cry_from_an_unlikely_corner_on_dual_jobs.html
Why not tie congressional pay and their retirement benefits to whether we run a budget surplus or deficit - no surplus, no pay and no benefits. This would have to come with the proviso, however, that defense and other constitutionally-mandated spending must still equal or exceed a certain percentage of GDP (to avoid them slashing such spending to avoid a deficit).
This was a big theme in Senator Tom Coburn’s book, *Breach of Trust.*
It sounds like you want term limits, and ankle bracelets while they ARE serving. Just kiddin’ ya!! Jindal agrees with the term limits.
Here is ewhat made Congress full time:
Air conditioning.
Make air conditioning policy in the federal code such that buildings will not be cooled any lower than 83F when the temperature is higher. Make the very act of being in DC in an office building from May until September a miserable existence.
Better yet, reduce the heat level in federal buildings to 50F in the winter.
Tell the public that the government is saving money and energy and reducing CO2 emissions. Wrap the move in the cloth of envirionmental preening.
Moreover, they are more likely to gain approval -- and don't require a Constitutional Amendment.
Actually, the more appropriate way of handling this is to establish three simple requirements. First, require that all representatives and senators pack up and leave DC on 1 May and re-establish their residency for thirty days back in the home state, with no allowances for international travel or additional time in DC. If you can’t cooperate and stay in your home state for the month of May...then you lose any chance to run in the next election. It might be interesting to force them to get re-introduced to the folks who elected them.
Second...for each election year (every two years) dismiss congress and the senate by 1 July. Require that they leave the capital unless the President calls for an emergency session. This will give all a chance to go and campaign in their home state. If they want to return for a lame-duck session...fine, but there will be no business done unless a simple majority agrees to meet for the session.
Third...a congressman and senator gets a travel budget. He/she reports usage of that account each year to his home state. Every penny used for hotels, meals, and travel...even on Air Force flights...will be subtracted from your budget and reported. If you travel to exotic hotspots like Copenhagen for some global warming conference...then it comes off your travel tab.
The key here isn’t terms...because no one will agree to that but instead...keeping the boys back home in their state, and mandating it if necessary. Then you tie on travel limitations with a budget, and folks to be more accommodating on bills to get them passed in shorter bursts of time...meaning weaker bills for both sides of the coin. I suspect we’d start to forget folks even existed in DC after five years of this.
They already are part-time, that’s why they don’t have time to vote for Obama’s bills before rubberstamping them. Writing legislation is a job best left to unelected, unelectable, unqualified left-wing stooges. Thanks La Enchiladita.
Congress could stay in their home office and conduct business electronically—web conferencing. This would save money on travel, security, housing, etc.
It would also keep them in their districts where they could actually DO the people’s business and they can be more readily accessible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.