0 votes

Reduce members of Congress by 50%

Just recieved this via email, and I think it is a great idea. What do you think Paulers??

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"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:
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 there is no telling how much we would save. Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term.

IF you are happy how the Congress spends our taxes, then just delete this message. IF you are NOT at all happy, then I assume you know what to do.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

More Representatives. Who

More Representatives. Who pays their diet? Well, we've had money bombs. Money bombs can go on beyond political campaigns.

It's a cute idea...

but it wouldn't be in our best interests. What we need, is MORE Representatives in congress --something along the lines of one Rep for every 30,000 Americans-- so that political ideologies other than 'Republican' and 'Democrat' can make some headway. Plus it would increase the number of Palms that 'Big Business' would have to grease in order to push legislation through.

Thanks for pointing this

Thanks for pointing this out.I never crunched the numbers for this but 1 for every 30,000 equals 10,166 members in the house.The states with smaller populations would have less representation but in the senate all states would have equal suffrage.
"We" were never intended to vote for representation at the federal level.That is what the state legislature is to do.

------------------------------------------
The government throws the people bones while keeping the treasures of this country.

13 No servant can serve two masters; for either he shall hate the one, and love the other, or else he shall lean to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and riches. - Luke 16

Delete

delete

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" Bugs Bunny
"Scwewy Wabbit!" Elmer Fudd

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" B.Bunny "Scwewy Wabbit!"E. Fudd
People's Awareness Coalition: Deprogramming Sequence

I like the original idea....

..the orginial Constitutional arrangement, that is. 1 house seat for every 30,000 in population. I also believe that Senators should be appointed by the States and not elected by Popular vote. I believe it was 1917 when this all changed. Since then representation in the House has been frozen at it 435 member status. That number was based on the nations population in the 1910 census. Floridas' pop. has exploded over the last 100 years and we are terribly under represented in the House of Reps. This about it, since 1917 the larger States of that time have maintained thier lions share of representation while many expanding States have been under represented. I guess it's easier to rig the game if you can fix the rules. These original rules are what made us more of a Republic and much less of a Democracy. Remember, Democracy is 2 Wolves and a Lamb voting on what's for dinner!

More congressmen!

Along with this it would be

Along with this it would be wise also to repeal the 17th Amendment.

Trust in God, but tie your camel tight.

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/user/BeaReady/
http://www.ohiofreedom.com/subd/

Trust in God, but tie your camel tight.

"Socialism needs two legs on which to stand; a right and a left. While appearing to be in complete opposition to one another,they both march in the same direction." - Paul Proctor

Cutting the staffers and bureaucracy wayyy back

would be good.

Relegating much of the federal activites back to the states, as per 9th and 10th amendments would be good.

Distribution of decision-making power to a much broader scale, makes it harder and more expensive for corrupting influences to get their way.

Fewer decision makers IS NOT better.

Outlaw AC in DC

...and restrict congressional sessions to summer.
The Freedom Formula: Au + Ag + Cu + Pb

dynamite anthrax supreme court white house tea party jihad
======================================
West of 89
a novel of another america
https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/161155#longdescr

More congress people - but less pay less retirement

_________________________________

My liberty-minded home base of thought:

www.ponderthis.net

_________________________________

Freedom - Peace - Prosperity

We need more congressmen

So that we can have better representation, we should take off the limits that were not there in the original constitution.

They could do most of there work from home via secure internet.

more representatives

We need more representatives to better represent their district voters instead of representing the lobbyists.

Think of it this way - if there would be 5000 in the house of representatives, each would have less power and the sheer number would make it more difficult for lobbyists to buy off all of them.

From original post:
"Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members ..."

We need many, many, many more representatives. Thousands upon thousands of representatives!

Another one that doesn't get it

What you believe to be a "great idea" is very unconstitutional and against the cause of liberty and freedom.

There's this book called "The Revolution: A Manifesto"... You may want to read it!

A better idea would be to

have members telecommute from their home district. Working from a public forum where their constituents could see every thing they do would solve a lot of problems including minimizing the effect of lobbyists.

No- increase their salary to $1 million tax free...

....give them huge houses with 100 acres, servants, law care, free limitless healthcare, free daycare, 10 cars, free fuel, free energy, free clothes, free food, free utilities, etc.....

....and send them home. That way they won't be making any laws the mess everything up.

How about just reducing the

How about just reducing the length of the sessions to two sessions of two months each. That should cut costs and radically reduce the amount of damage they can do.

Pat

BOHICA!!

Pat

BOHICA!!

Great idea

I forget which radio program or podcast I was listening to but they talked about how the founders wanted to force congress to show up at least once a year, and how they were never intended to be there as often as they are now. Their job was never to pump out laws like an assembly line, they should have real jobs.

"The credit expansion boom is built on the sands of banknotes and deposits. It must collapse.", www.mises.org

"Endless money forms the sinews of war." - Cicero, www.freedomshift.blogspot.com

Reducing congressmen is

Reducing congressmen is unconstitutional.The government doesn't follow the constitution and reducing members is also not following it.
There's the whole problem.
What they have done is take a part time job and turned it into a full time one.
The people need to hold them to the constitution.Which is hard to do when they only give you two choices of the same evil,or so they want us to think.
They are drunk with "power" and feel they need to do everything.
The solution is simple,follow the constitution and congress would work part time,thus cutting salaries and all the regulations/spending.

------------------------------------------
The government throws the people bones while keeping the treasures of this country.

13 No servant can serve two masters; for either he shall hate the one, and love the other, or else he shall lean to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and riches. - Luke 16

You got it

agree 100% maybe more

h-daddy

+1

Me too.

+2 "When governments fear

+2

"When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny."
-Thomas Jefferson

I am more concerned about the return of my money than the return on my money. --Mark Twain

Generally when a Company is

Generally when a Company is bankrupt beyond reconcilliation, it is disassembled and dissolved.

Reduce congress by 100%

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" Bugs Bunny
"Scwewy Wabbit!" Elmer Fudd

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" B.Bunny "Scwewy Wabbit!"E. Fudd
People's Awareness Coalition: Deprogramming Sequence

Whom do you suggest for

Whom do you suggest for dictator?

More representatives will allow for better representation. Less/no representatives will allow for more dictator-like actions.

We the people, we each

We the people, we each become Dictator over our own lives, and no one elses

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" Bugs Bunny
"Scwewy Wabbit!" Elmer Fudd

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" B.Bunny "Scwewy Wabbit!"E. Fudd
People's Awareness Coalition: Deprogramming Sequence

Eliminating Congress would

Eliminating Congress would create a dictatorial Executive branch of federal government.

How will "Reduce congress by 100%" promote freedom and liberty so you can run your own life?

If you read the post I made

If you read the post I made that you originally replied to, you'd see that I'm in favor of elimination of the Executive and Judicial also. Dissolve.

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" Bugs Bunny
"Scwewy Wabbit!" Elmer Fudd

----------------------------------------------------------
"Ehhh, What's ups Doc?" B.Bunny "Scwewy Wabbit!"E. Fudd
People's Awareness Coalition: Deprogramming Sequence