An Idea ... Got Any More?

 

 

 

 

"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 must 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. 
Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State). 
Then, reduce their 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 their 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 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: 

Congress did not hesitate to head home when it was a holiday, when the nation needed a real fix to the economic problems.  Also, we have 3 senators that
 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, tax payers could save a bundle. 

Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.  



IF you are happy with how Congress spends our taxes, ignore this. Otherwise, then I assume you know what to do.

Josie06 Josie06
56-60, F
5 Responses Mar 18, 2009

Unfortunately most of the savings are from assuming pork would be cut in half when more likely the remaining members would just pick up the difference for their states.<br />
<br />
It also seems like the proverbial "drop in the bucket", 8 billion out of 3,000 billion. I guess it would be a start.

i've read that AIG backs Congressional pensions. i've also read that they are in secured government accounts ... unlike Social Security and Medicare (as they are in the General Fund).<br />
<br />
Don't know which is true, however i suspect the later.

Good luck to that. They pull the strings. It does not seem to matter who we vote in. It all remains the same.<br />
<br />
Guess who pensions are with AIG?

Congress did this. Congress allowed this. AIG has contracts and contracts have to be followed. Fixing this mess needs to start with clean the house of congress and the white house.

If you're outraged at AIG, well the Congress has deflected you attention from the real issues and root causes of many of these problems.