Skip to comments.Perry's congressional supporters wary of plan to cut lawmaker pay
Posted on 11/20/2011 3:17:23 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Lawmakers who've endorsed Rick Perry for president reacted warily to his plan for a part-time Congress and expressed concern about his proposal to cut their salaries in half.
In response to inquiries from The Hill, the lawmakers disagreed with some aspects of the plan but said they liked other parts, such as the idea of spending more time in their districts.
Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) vowed to continue to stand by Perry, although he wasnt necessarily on board with all of the Texas governor's plans.
I dont anticipate that Im going to agree with everything he says, Inhofe said.
At issue was halving lawmaker pay, which according to Inhofe, could lead to an independently wealthy Congress run by Rockefellers and people like that, many of whom dont really have the sensitivities to the real world.
According to Perry supporter Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), we might already be there.
With campaign finance reform laws being the way they are now, with McCain-Feingold, youre almost moving to that anyway because its so hard to raise money that you almost have moved to a situation where there is a political class that runs, he said....
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Nov. 13, 2011: Pelosi fires back at 60 Minutes report on soft corruption
Pelosi and her husband participated in an initial public offering of Visa in 2008, according to CBS. They bought 5,000 shares at the initial price of $44; two days later, shares were trading at $64, CBS said........... Source
November 16, 2011
Dear Leader Pelosi,
After reading about House Minority Whip Steny Hoyers outburst over my Overhauling Washington plan, I wonder if his obstructionism reflects your own opposition and that of the Democratic Caucus to urgent reforms the American people so vehemently demand.
After increasing the debt by $4 trillion in less than three years, no one can believe that Americans are satisfied with business as usual, and that a permanent political class in Washington can get us out of the mess you and your colleagues have created.
A part-time Congress with half the pay would still make $38,000 a year more than the average American family. Do you truly oppose lawmakers spending more time in their districts? Is it so important for the Washington power brokers to build their fiefdoms of influence, including providing bailouts to Wall Street while businesses on Main Street are being boarded up every day?
Here is the fundamental question: do you believe Washington is broken? Before answering that question, consider these facts:
1) the Washington Metro area is now the most affluent metropolitan area in the country because lobbyists, contractors, elected officials and bureaucrats have been insulated from the economic ruin prevalent in the private sector;
2) Congressional office budgets have doubled since 2000 while employers all across America are laying off workers;
3) Our nations total debt is nearing the size of our nations economy, increasing our dependence on competitors like China;
4) The number of Americans out of work has increased by more than two million since January 2009, despite the massive stimulus package Democratic leaders promised would revive the economy, and;
5) on top of the job-killing spending policies of the previous Congress, employers are faced with a staggering $1.1 trillion in costs related to federal regulatory compliance.
Do you truly believe the answer to massive debt, over-regulation and bloated big-government policies is to continue to protect the status quo, which enriches and empowers Washington insiders at the expense of the American People?
My plan would overhaul Washington, eliminating certain agencies and reducing the size and scope of others. It will force Congress to make the tough decisions to balance the budget or require a further reduction in their pay. It would end lifetime appointments to future appointees to the federal bench. I dont want to tinker around the edges when the American People demand a complete overhaul of Washington.
Let me conclude with an invitation: I am in Washington Monday and would love to engage you in a public debate about my Overhaul Washington plan versus the congressional status quo. I think it would be a tremendous service to the American public to see a public airing of these differences. Let the people decide. If Monday doesnt work, perhaps we could find a time in Iowa over the course of the next month to discuss these issues in front of the people of Americas heartland.
Should you choose not to respond or engage in such a healthy discussion, I will take it to mean you will continue your obstructionist ways in the face of much needed Washington reform.
Governor of Texas
Hannitys 3rd Freedom Concert - Perry on America heroes! 7 minute video
Nov. 11, 2011 VIDEO: Rick Perry interview Nov 11, 2011 in Columbia 25 minute video starting around 4:00 12:00 Perry speaks at length about Iran, allies and national defense.
The President says Americans are Lazy [:31]
The only problem I have here is Discount Rick saying he’ll work for half the price.
That comes across with the same credibility as fringe candidates who say the same thing.
I hope you read the article. Most who were interviewed or gave a quote were supportive of the idea.
Does that make them fringe?
I like his plan. Texas does fine with a part-time legislature. Congress just meddles in our lives too much. I can understand why that upsets the politicians.
And we need terms limits on them, too.
Cutting pay is ridiculous gimmickry and doesn’t solve the real issues.
Unless you’re prepared to put term limits on staffers, you’ll end up leaving them as the power behind the throne.
I did read the article and what they support is not spending a lot of time in Washington, not the cut in pay.
The issue with the cut in pay is that, it can make people more vulnerable to corruption.
That isn’t to say that congressmen are under paid.
It isn't if they do half the damage and head home to their districts to work at least half of the year.
You can pick each thing apart but when taken as a whole, the picture is clear.
Gov Perry's 3-Part Agenda:
Smart, limited government works for Texas:
Right now they do a lot of damage and over-regulate every detail of our lives. Congresscritters have an overinflated sense of their own place in the grand scheme of things. They need to be brought down to size.
Perry says he'll cut his salary in half.
Gov. Rick Perry: ...........Im going to support the Republican nominee. That isnt even a question, said Perry. Our country is on the precipice of a huge economic disaster and foreign policy wise none of our allies know where America is going to be on any given day. Weve got huge issues facing this country today and [Obamas] in Burma talking about relations with a country that Ill be real honest with you I dont know what Americas interest is there.
He also criticized the president for delaying a decision on the 1,700-mile pipeline from Alberta to Texas until after the 2012 election so a study can be carried out with respect to its impact on an environmentally sensitive area of Nebraska.
That Canadian oil is going to go one of two ways, said Perry. Its either going to go west to China or its going to go south to the United States. Thats not even a question about where that ought to be going. Our national security is in jeopardy with this president........... Perry Pledges to Take Only Half Salary
I want to know who intends to limit the power of an increasingly dictatorial office of president.
So now you want us to believe congress critters? Yea, right. That will go over like a fart in a diving bell.
Right now I believe four of the Republicans, the four that voted against that awful “balanced on our backs” budget amendment. They stripped out all of the points like cap and balance that would have kept them from just raising taxes to cover their spending. It was tailor made for the Democrats and they were not smart enough to have taken it. Thank God most of them only read the title before voting for it.
The “congress critters” didn’t bring this up, Gov. Rick Perry did and some stepped up to agree with Perry that Congress is in D.C. WAY too much.
Hard to say those aren’t correct sentiments. But you called them farts in a diving bell. Why should they bother then? You get the government you deserve.
What Perry wants to do is reduce the need to go to Washington. What this means, in practical terms, is downloading more responsibility to the states, where it should have always been.
It may also mean, in practical terms, is that while Washington shrinks, state legislatures grow. But, because states are closer to the people, it’s less likely that they would become as corrupt as Washington.
I think Perry is your best bet, in that regard.
His record indicates an honest interest in reducing government and making it abide by its constitutional limits.
We know Romney won’t and Newt has had plenty of opportunity to put pressure on the House and Senate to do that and Cain, I think, is too inexperienced to know necessarily how to do that.
The pay a Congress critter makes is not that important to them anyway.
That is not where the real perks come in.
They real deal comes from Insider trading, Lobbyists who give them free stuff under the table, trips around the world on our dime. Deals here and a gifts there.A staff of people to kiss their ass daily, free rides, the perks are amazing, they live like kings at our expense.
Some of the new members probably need the salary for a while , but for some reason those who have been there a while say 25 to 30 years appear to do very well with that salary.The salary and the treasure chest campaign slush funds they build up.
The fact that he talks about making congress do anything is unconstitutional at best.
That’s why getting them out of Washington and back to the people is so critical.
I think a worthy idea, if somebody could be so kind to forward it to Rick Perry is to have each congress person, when they vote, to have to vote in their district.
Kinda hard to vote to fill their purse strings when their vote are televised and watched by their constituents. Don’t allow them to vote when they are in Washington, when they have some amount of cover.
he is also saying everyone in WDC should be doing the same - I agree with him
Going part time and spending more time in their districts and not rooting themselves in DC is enticing however.
I question how much a POTUS can do to make it happen but it is a good idea IMO.
Staffers in Congress and in the Federal agencies flourish in the rat-holes of influence.
They are overpaid, stay too long - and by necessity are ‘big government’ advocates.
Won’t be La Raza Rick, especially since he set himself up as Dictator-for-Life of Tejas.
What Perry WANTS is to get elected President. That’s it.
Ron Paul is the only one I've heard so far.
Cutting salaries exclusively of Congressmembers will only ensure that nothing but millionaires serve. Those folks of modest means (more likely OUR people) won’t be able to afford to do so. It’s the bureaucracy that needs to be cut down.
They all want to be elected president.
It is just a question of how much you believe they’ll attempt to follow through on their promises.
And Perry has a record of downloading responsibility unto the people and away from government.
Yup. And they’re like a cancer that keeps spreading, larger gubmint begatting larger gubmint until the costs bankrupt us, and we’ve reached critical mass. I’m in favor of getting rid of civil service... they are overrun by leftists permanently ensconced regardless of whom is in power in the Exec/Congress/SCOTUS. Let it go back to the 19th century standards of filling it with your people for 2/4/8 years and out you go for the next administration. At least we know who those hacks will be loyal to.
Coming from a man who is an opportunistic career politician who refuses to relinquish the Governorship after a reasonable period of time, his claims to support “limited Government” is highly laughable. Watch what politicians DO, not just what they say.
Because a president is only one branch of co equal branches of government. A president can’t dictate when the legislative branch works or how much they’re paid. He can only ask.
I’m not sure if, as long as he’s doing his job to the satisfaction of his constituents, if it’s necessary for him to resign his position.
Most people don’t resign their jobs, if they are applying for work elsewhere or preparing for new careers. You’d have to make the case to me the necessity of a politician resigning, if he’s still able to do his job in a responsible manner.
I didn't see anything in the article that indicates a "dictation" to Congress. I see a man with a "plan proposed" and seeking Congressional supporters. Has he mentioned in maybe other speeches about this topic of using an "Executive Order" to accomplish this? I am not aware of any but maybe you have. If so, could you direct me to that info?
If anything needs to be cut, it is their $multi-million in perks.
The cut in pay was the headline, but not the main thrust of Perry’s reforms. While I would agree the paycut is mostly a gimmick, there is more substance here than that.
And after all, it’s not congressional pay that is anyone’s problem. It’s congressional action. And cutting THAT - which Perry is also for - is a winner IMO.
They take in more via self dealing and other larceny. Why are they worried ?
>> Im in favor of getting rid of civil service... they are overrun by leftists permanently ensconced regardless of whom is in power in the Exec/Congress/SCOTUS. Let it go back to the 19th century standards of filling it with your people for 2/4/8 years and out you go for the next administration. At least we know who those hacks will be loyal to. >>
You are correct about that, though government is so doggoned big now that you could never even finish your hiring process in 8 years. But your concept is dead on and it is THIS permanent political class - MORE THAN CONGRESS itself - which might be the problem.
Perry is the poster boy for term limits in Texas (ditto for KBH).
Quite a part large of the civil service is civilian support for the military. Everything from pay clerks to equipment re-builders. Several years ago, some states reserve and national guard had test programs using contractors to repair and service equipment. That was a colossal failure. Most of the civil service has to also be a military member.
Actually you have it backwards. We have millionaires serving now, almost exclusively. A low salary, coupled with laws which would eliminate most of the perks of a legislature member, would mean more ordinary citizens would serve and it would help to eliminate the permanent politicians. The fact is, even with their pay cut in half, they would still be earning much more than the average wage earner in this country.
Along with the pay cuts and perks elimination we would have to make sure their health plans and their retirements were done away with and make them have to draw SS. We would see some action on SS if that happens, I can guarantee it.
Yes, all those trips over seas to study other countries economies, etc when we are self destructing here in our country. One involved 10 members of Congress and their wives who went to Italy for 10 days to see how Italy’s economy worked.
I think term limits and for the House of Reps to write a bill stating that they are no longer immune from insider trading is the ticket. I wish the Repubs would have the balls to write a bill changing that rule regarding insider trading issue. That would win over lot of folks.
Again, in your zeal, you missed entirely what I said.
Why, when it suits your agenda, should we start to believe in what people in congress say to us. I want to clean the entire cesspool out, even the ones who pander to what they think are our agendas. Most of us only have one and it starts with 1791.
Until you get past that, you are just flatulence in the wind.
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.