MyFox
 

A Dawg's eye view

by DDawg from Richardson

Last Post 18 days, 8 hours Ago


Just some thoughts, what are your points of view on this?

  • Congress can vote themselves raises- they should not be able to do this without the public's input
  • There are no term limits- there should be term limits of 8 years, like the president
  • They continue to collect their salary after retirement-should be a percentage equal to what is common in any business. If term limits are set this would not be an issue.
  • Their spouse continues to collect their salary after their death-an even smaller percentage of what the retirement would be if this was changed. If term limits set this would not be an issue.

These are just a few of the items I think we should think about reforming, if not just to save tax dollars to at least have some fresh voices voted in as our society changes and progresses so should the congress that is supposed to represent them.

Of course they have to vote on these changes themselves which is one more thing I think should be changed.

6 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 6
Page 1 of 1
KellerKowboy read my blog view my photos
Mar 13, 2008 | 12:22 PM

With perhaps some STRONGER restrictions, I'd support each and every one of those suggestions. What we now have is over 500 professional politicians, whose primary job is re-election. Most of them are lawyers who have never actually worked a day in their lives.

ConfederateAmerican read my blog
Mar 13, 2008 | 12:26 PM

Here is a good read as to the pro's and con's on Term Limits. For myself, I strongly support Congressional Term Limits for many more reasons than you lists. In my opinion the career politicans are simply out of touch with and/or totally ignore the desires of the majority of American Citizens - The Murthas and Kennedys need to be put back on the street.
---------------------------------------------
PRO 1

The Framers, lived in a different time. Congress as they envisioned it did not need term limits, because they envisioned it was always going to be a part-time job. James Madison, for instance, simply assumed that Representatives would be "called for the most part from pursuits of a private nature and continued in appointment for a short period of office." That assumption, understandable in its day, allowed the Framers to believe that Congress would just naturally remain a citizen legislature, without any Constitutional requirement that those serving in Congress not spend their entire lives there. The Framers never had reason to question their mistaken assumption, because Congressional service remained a part-time job for the nation's first century. The early Congress met for only a matter of months each year. In fact, the early Congresses met mostly during the winter months, when most citizens could afford time away from their normal jobs in the primarily agrarian economy.



CON 2

The term limits concept was considered during the Constitutional Convention of 1787, it was rejected by the delegates, who instead provided for short terms of office, two years for

ConfederateAmerican read my blog
Mar 13, 2008 | 12:30 PM

Good ol Blog didn't take all I wanted to paste... here is the rest of it. Hopefully it takes all of it this time...

CON 2

The term limits concept was considered during the Constitutional Convention of 1787, it was rejected by the delegates, who instead provided for short terms of office, two years for the House of Representatives, four years for the Presidency, and six years for the Senate. James Madison, who opposed term limits at the Constitutional Convention, recorded in his notes the words of a fellow delegate, Roger Sherman: "Frequent elections are necessary to preserve the good behavior of rulers. They also tend to give permanency to the Government, by preserving that good behavior, because it ensures their re-election."

CON 3

James Madison, in The Federalist, No. 53, cited the advantage of long-standing membership in a Congress elected directly by the people and explained the disadvantage of a great number of new members in Congress:

A few of the members, as happens in all such assemblies, will possess superior talents; will, by frequent re-elections, become members of long standing; will be thoroughly masters of the public business, and perhaps not unwilling to avail themselves of those advantages. The greater the proportion of new members and the less the information of the bulk of the members, the more apt they will be to fall into the snares that may be laid for them.

CON 4

Alexander Hamilton: "Nothing appears more plausible at first sight, nor more ill-founded upon close inspection [than term limits].... One ill effect of the exclusion w

GRAYWOLF read my blog view my photos
Mar 13, 2008 | 3:31 PM

There is nothing limiting a president to serving 8 years. He/She can only be elected as president twice.

For an extreme example:

Someone could be elected VP. The President is assassinated after inauguration (4-years as Pres for this VP)...next election, same thing happens (4 more years as Pres), same thing next election (4 more years)...The Pres for the previous 12 years is still eligible to run for President twice. making his years as President 20 years (if he survives to the end)

scottythecomic read my blog view my photos
Mar 14, 2008 | 9:08 AM

535, KK. Term limits are cool by me. Hard to say on the raise issue. Salary benefits to the spouse I don't support. The fat cats will always favor the fat cats.

Graywolf is correct.

moankie82 read my blog
Mar 15, 2008 | 7:44 AM

DDawg, I agree with you all the way. There should be term limits on all political offices.
They should have a set pay and raise scale like everyone else. When I hope for a 5% increase, they vote themselves a 20% increase. It would be nice to decide my raise.

Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




DDawg

To borrow a line from a song by John Legend, I am going to start off the new year early by "being the change I want to see".

Member Since: 3/10/2008