About Me

Name: BCORIG
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Saving Some Money?

Rassmussen says Congressional Performance 54% Say Congress Doing Poor Job (as of February third).

Voters don’t like what they’ve seen so far as Congress works to lift the troubled U.S. economy.

  • Just 12% say Congress is doing a good or excellent job, and 54% rate their performance as poor in the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. This is drop of two points in the positive column and a jump of seven in the poor category compared to two weeks ago, which marked Congress’ highest marks in a year.
  • Congressional approval has fallen a long way since the inauguration of President Bush eight years ago. At that time, 35% said Congress was doing a good or an excellent job. Just 18% said poor.
  • Only 23% of voters say it is very likely that Congress will address the serious issues facing the nation in the near future, a drop of seven points from two weeks ago. Eleven percent (11%) say Congress is not at all likely to address serious issues.
  • Seventy-one percent (71%) of all voters now believe Members of Congress are more interested in their own careers than in helping people (17%).
  • Thirty-one percent (31%) say most members of Congress are corrupt while 41% disagree.
  • Sixty-two percent (62%) say Congress has not passed any legislation in the past year that will significantly improve life in America; 12% say it has. These numbers have been largely unchanged for months.

Just for fun:

 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 (and, I realize, some major modifications to The Constitution - but this is just for fun, isn't it?).

Some Yearly  Monetary Gains  Include:

  • $44,108,400 for  elimination of base pay for congress. (267  members X $165,200 pay / member /  yr.)< /span
  • $97,175,000 for  elimination of the above people's  staff. (estimate $1.3 Million in staff per  each member of the House,
  • $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)
NB 
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  Congressmen and women  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.
 


.



 

 


 

 


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive