Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
October 20, 2014, 02:04:37 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Beemaster's official FACEBOOK page
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: What do you think about this  (Read 750 times)
Irwin
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2343


Location: Lakeside OR

howdy all


« on: May 31, 2009, 07:59:28 PM »

"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, delete this message. Otherwise, then I assume you know what to do.
Logged

Fight organized crime!  Re-elect no one.
qa33010
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 912


Location: Arkansas, White County


« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2009, 08:53:43 PM »

    HaHAAAAA!!!

     I like it as does my wife.  Including the 20+ years before drawing 50% of BASE pay NOT TOTAL SALARY.  No extra pay for sitting on committees or the like, it's part of the job.  Remind them they are PUBLIC servants.

     May also want to add reward instead of penalize branches of service who can safely and successfully complete their missions each fiscal year with money left over to help pay down the principal of our national debt.  No penalties if they honestly use it all or need more to safely and successfully accomplish the missions.

    Could reduce the House in about four years and the senate two to six years depending on elections.  Also remind the Supreme Court they are there to INTERPRET, compared to the United States Constitution, not make laws.  Did I go too far?
Logged

Everyone said it couldn't be done. But he with a chuckle replied, "I won't be one to say it is so, until I give it a try."  So he buckled right in with a trace of a grin.  If he had a worry he hid it and he started to sing as he tackled that thing that couldn't be done, and he did it.  (unknown)
Bee Happy
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1656


Location: Between Panama city, Florida and Dothan Al.

that's me - setting a phoenix free


« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2009, 10:14:21 PM »

[...]May also want to add reward instead of penalize branches of service who can safely and successfully complete their missions each fiscal year with money left over to help pay down the principal of our national debt.  No penalties if they honestly use it all or need more to safely and successfully accomplish the missions.[...]

they used to pay managers according to what their annual budget was. and if they didn't spend it all the budget would get a reduction. I don't know if this is still true. But a fair fix would be to tell them they aren't obligated to spend it up (no bonus for saving it because it may encourage them to cut corners unnecessarily) don't spend it all? that's ok same budget next year.
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.
 
I can't help but completely agree with that; or even 1/40th of 100% per year served - definitely NOT full retirement for one term.
Logged

be happy and make others happy.
dragonfly
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 468

Location: 30 mi west of DFW, Tx


« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2009, 10:39:18 PM »

I think those are excellent ideas! Smiley

Also, instead of reducing pork projects, I would eliminate them completely.

Definitely require minimum years in service to collect full retirement, and better yet, term limits and no retirement benefits at all. This would weed out those who are not truly public servants and keep those who want to serve for the country's good.
Oh, and they retire on the usual and customary Social Security benefits (assuming term limits don't come to pass), and have Medicare insurance.

Logged
kathyp
Universal Bee
*******
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 15192


Location: boring, oregon


« Reply #4 on: May 31, 2009, 10:52:57 PM »

great idea  smiley
Logged

.....The greatest changes occur in their country without their cooperation. They are not even aware of precisely what has taken place. They suspect it; they have heard of the event by chance. More than that, they are unconcerned with the fortunes of their village, the safety of their streets, the fate of their church and its vestry. They think that such things have nothing to do with them, that they belong to a powerful stranger called “the government.” They enjoy these goods as tenants, without a sense of ownership, and never give a thought to how they might be improved.....

 Alexis de Tocqueville
SgtMaj
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1464


Location: Corryton, TN


« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2009, 11:45:54 AM »

It's a good idea... but this number doesn't play out:

Quote
$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)

Earmarks wouldn't be reduced, the number requested from each member would simply double. 
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 1.308 seconds with 21 queries.

Google visited last this page October 08, 2014, 02:36:45 PM