Putting the fat cats on a diet

[Hotfoot]

Hope you don't mind Frigid, but I took the liberty of making the thread this time.

Last night, Frigid and I had a little discussion going on AIM concerning the higher levels of our government and some of the issues therein. Brought up were such ideas as imposing term limits on the Senate and House of Representatives, when I, in the spirit of my dear sister suggesting we burn down the tea ships in Boston Harbor, suggested that we additionally force them to stop paying for luxuries with taxpayer money, including, but not limited to:

-Gas other than regular
-Full service at gas stations when Self-Serve is an option
-Anything higher than coach seating on airlines
-Luxury transportation such as stretch limos
-Free vacations with the taxpayer footing the bill

I also suggested that their salaries should be cut down to much more reasonable levels. As of right now, they get paid nearly $170,000 per year, and a 20% pay raise is on the table for next year. All of this so they live the high life and pass laws that we the people don't want, like extending copyright lifetimes and enforcing ridiculous copyright enforcement laws that violate our rights as purchasers.

Clearly, the list of benefits doesn't end there, but I'm trying to limit myself to what we the taxpayers are footing the bill for.

Now, I have what I think is a reasonable solution for the salary issue. I think it is utter insanity for people to get to vote on raises for themselves. The rest of us have to report to our bosses for raises, and I think the same should hold true for those fat cats on capital hill. They are public servants, and damn it all, they should serve me, the guy that hired them, not be living the high life on wages he set himself.

My proposal is that salaries be reduced to reasonable rates of living for the DC area, so that anyone elected can live comfortably with a family while serving the nation as a lawmaker. After that, all raises are to decided by the constituants that voted the particular lawmaker into office, to be reviewed once per year. That way, the only way they'll make tons and tons of money is by (gasp) doing what we want them to do, ensuring that they are beholden to us for more than just getting our initial votes into office, as it should be.

On the other hand, I could be off the deep end, but I also think this would have other benefits. It would call into review the voting system much more often, and encourage people to vote more regularly (it's their tax money on the line).

[B4UTRUST]

Cut their, and the president's, pensions as well.

A president who has served four years in office is in some cases qualified to make about 180k a year in a pension plan...

Congress up to 120k a year.

[Hotfoot]

Another thing to tack on to the list, thank you.

As it stands, most of these bastards are stinking rich and getting richer by the minute. If one of them takes a bribe, you could hardly tell from their quality of life.

[frigidmagi]

While I'm pro term limits, we might want to think carefully about what we cut and why. Most of the actual work does not get done on the Capital buidlings floor.

[Hotfoot]

While I'm pro term limits, we might want to think carefully about what we cut and why. Most of the actual work does not get done on the Capital buidlings floor.

I happen to think that deciding policy at parties is a bad idea, myself. What's the point of having a capitol building if nothing worthwhile is done there?

[frigidmagi]

That's where the bills are written and the votes offically counted. Plus where else we gonna take the tours when the White House is full.

Plus Hotfoot it's that way all around the world. In some governments all the votes are decided and counted the night before and the rest is a show.