Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rep Says Congress Needs Pay Raise

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    There is no way that Representative can pay back his debts on a public officeholder's salary. If he got caught before taking money, he will try to take it again. These kind always keep their hand out. I am old enough to remember Adam Clayton Powell and young enough to remember Charles (Cold Cash) Jefferson. One of the crookedest politicians in Louisiana, Edwin Edwards, was never caught by the Feds who wanted him bad. They caught his son and used that to offer him a plea bargain to help his son.

    We really don't need to give this kind of politician more money.

    Pruitt
    Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

    Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

    by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Hida Akechi View Post
      Why Donald Trump specifically? I don't think anyone should be paid to be in Congress.

      As for Trump specifically, I guess he has the potential to do a better job than most of those already in place. The potential to...
      So then only the rich could be in Congress. Which puts the lie to 'All men are created equal'.

      I'm torn on this issue. I'm no fan of Congress, but the idea that only the rich can hold office does not sit well with me. Yes, most Congressmen are rich, but there's a big difference between most being wealthy, and the rule of law ensuring that only the wealthy may hold the office that does not sit well with me.
      Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

      Comment


      • #48
        I would feel more comfortable with people running for Congress that had another income coming in. People who would propose to live on just the salary are more likely to take bribes and campaign donations that they would have to repay in some way.

        That Congressman who owes all that money? I bet he is doing everything his creditors tell him to do!

        Pruitt
        Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

        Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

        by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
          So then only the rich could be in Congress. Which puts the lie to 'All men are created equal'.

          I'm torn on this issue. I'm no fan of Congress, but the idea that only the rich can hold office does not sit well with me. Yes, most Congressmen are rich, but there's a big difference between most being wealthy, and the rule of law ensuring that only the wealthy may hold the office that does not sit well with me.
          I agree. The wealthy have always seem to have a majority in Congress and even state legislatures. But I also don't believe Congress should "make" one wealthy.
          I do not wish to have the slave emancipated because I love him, but because I hate his master."
          --Salmon P. Chase

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Pruitt View Post
            I would feel more comfortable with people running for Congress that had another income coming in. People who would propose to live on just the salary are more likely to take bribes and campaign donations that they would have to repay in some way.

            That Congressman who owes all that money? I bet he is doing everything his creditors tell him to do!

            Pruitt
            Given the number of wealthy people caught in various forms of financial skullduggery, I don't think wealth is insurance against corruption. Just because you see a person as wealthy does not mean they see themselves as wealthy.

            And do we really want the rule to be 'only the wealthy need to apply' in terms of Congress?
            Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

            Comment


            • #51
              I have not said only the wealthy should run. I have said I would look more seriously at a candidate with other sources of income.

              Pruitt
              Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

              Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

              by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Pruitt View Post
                I have not said only the wealthy should run. I have said I would look more seriously at a candidate with other sources of income.

                Pruitt
                Ok, that is a big difference.

                Still, that's no hedge against corruption. Just because someone has money, doesn't mean they don't want more.
                Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Term limits could put a quick stop to long term corruption.
                  "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                    Term limits could put a quick stop to long term corruption.
                    I agree.
                    Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Congress needs to get real jobs and not live off of the taxpayer.
                      Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                        Term limits could put a quick stop to long term corruption.
                        A lot of old time Congressmen are chairmen of certain committees. Their states don't want to lose that power. Besides, we tried that a while back in Louisiana and it did not get rid of the old power brokers. They just changed house! It never affected Congress or the Senate.

                        Pruitt
                        Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

                        Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

                        by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
                          How do you think violent crime stats have declined while the entire CJ system stays overworked?

                          Never tie results to statistics. Otherwise its the Vietnam body count business all over again.

                          Performance should be evaluated by votes, not pay.

                          I'm no fan of Congress. But if the pay sucks, the only guys taking the job will be guys who are looking to get something out of the position, or who are rich enough to take it for ego's sake.

                          You want honest men, give honest pay.
                          I understand your point, but they GET honest pay and then some. So pay isn't the problem. If they're going to screw us regardless we should at least get screwed on the cheap.
                          A new life awaits you in the off world colonies; the chance to begin again in a golden land of opportunity and adventure!

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Pirateship1982 View Post
                            I understand your point, but they GET honest pay and then some. So pay isn't the problem. If they're going to screw us regardless we should at least get screwed on the cheap.
                            I don't know about honest pay. DC housing is fiendishly high, and most have to fly back and forth between their home district and DC many times a year. Plus criss-cross their district regularly. Reps with their two year terms are constantly campaigning.

                            That's a lot of out-of-pocket expenses.

                            If that's cutting into their standard of living, you know there will be lobbyists with a discounted DC apartment, or the use of a private plane waiting in the wings...

                            I'm no great fan of Congress, but if you make it a rich man only club, you won't see any improvement.

                            Nor is punishing individuals because their 535-person committee is slow and inefficient.

                            I'm not sure what the answer is, but I am sure that cutting their salary will not make them better, now or in the future.
                            Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                              Term limits could put a quick stop to long term corruption.
                              No it just pushes the corruption more onto the civil servants that run the congressional offices.
                              Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedy. -- Ernest Benn

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Nichols View Post
                                Term limits could put a quick stop to long term corruption.
                                Term limits are another way of enabling the un-informed and lazy citizen/voters. Our system was designed for informed and involved citizens doing the voting, and also being part of the grass-roots political choosing and vetting system. If enough citizens were doing their duty, then the citizens/voters will be applying "term limits".

                                Few elected, or running, candidates do so on their own funds. It's usually "the Party" which provides the fund-raising for campaigning. Hence, citizens being involved, starting at respective party precinct level, and upward would be the best way to counter "bad" candidates.

                                Human nature I guess that most would rather bitch about the process and results rather than get involved in and make a difference where such should happen and would be more effective. This is why often it's just a handful of persons, not often fully representative, whom shape the choices and candidates being offered.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X