IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
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 wasn’t necessarily on board with all of the Texas governor's plans.
“I don’t anticipate that I’m 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 don’t 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, you’re almost moving to that anyway because it’s 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 ...
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 ?
>> 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. >>
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.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
Perry is saying basically "of course if Congress gets a pay cut so does the President"
It is not only leading by example but it puts pressure on Congress.
They used to say about Larry Bird that he worked and when the rest of the team was done with practice Bird would still be there shooting. It made it hard for the rest of the team to leave when THE MAN was still perfecting his game.
Did you see the latest scandal? Maybe they should make a million a piece then.
The problem is normal citizens get to DC and forget where they came from. Many get perks they should never get, a nice big staff and they feel important.
It's too bad voters don't see the need to go after the culture in Washington.
If you make 80k or 160k and have no integrity you would still be willing to sell your votes for millions.
How can the guy who wins the presidency ask Congress to cut its pay & perks if he won't do it for himself?
And if Congress won't cut its pay & perks how can it ask the federal workforce to accept pay cuts & freezes & less bennies?
And that is something that has to be done.
This is a good move by Perry.
Washington does need a complete overhaul and a change in the culture. Congress forgets where they came from too often.
It's strange but Texas has a part time Congress and does pretty well. If the Governor decides to get out of line, we still manage to stop whatever we don't like and our representatives still do our bidding and very effectively I might add because they see us every day and live and work under the laws they pass.
By the way, worrying about the President becoming a dictator is far more worrisome when Congress is busy sucking the power teet as opposed to hearing daily from their constituency. We just had Obama care shoved down our throats because Congress isn't afraid of the people that put them there. they figure they are insulated most of the time and come election time they can just bullsh!t their way back into office. They should answer immediately after a vote to their own people.
I don’t really care about their salaries, I just want them to have to follow all the laws that the rest of us have to—no insider trading, must have Obamacare like the rest of us and God only knows what taxes that they impose on us that they are exempt from.
So if one disagrees with this Perry proposal, they are Perry "haters"?
Unbelievable.
I agree. The last I heard, House members get about $174K. Half of that would be $87K. Kind of hard to attract good people to such a job when you only offer 87K.
BTW, Perry is still free to cut his salary as governor. The governor, who spends most of his time campaigning for president earns about 150K.
Good point.
And you are right regarding taglines. There is something suspect about someone solely seeking to run down a candidate as opposed to advocate for a candidate.
What particular duties is Perry not performing for Texas right now?
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.
