Platform Item 28: Controlling our Representatives

Our Senators and Representatives have considerable opportunity to enrich themselves during their tenure in office, indeed many do enrich themselves well beyond what they would reasonably be able to accomplish for themselves on the same income outside Washington D.C..  Why should this be?   It cannot be the salary.   One must therefore project that the problem is one of the perquisites of office.   As a result we take the following position regarding the trappings of office:

 

  • Eliminate the Congressional retirement plan and replace it with a 401K plan that requires Congressmen to contribute and the taxpayer to match up to 3% of the total plan.

  • Force the Congress to participate in Social Security – require that all current retirement funds including those of currently retired Congressmen be immediately deposited in the Social Security trust fund and remove that Social Security trust fund from the general budget. 

  • The healthcare plan for Congressmen and Senators and all federal employees must be no better than those of private employees. 

  • Take away the cars. 

  • Take away the lavish expense accounts. 

  • Congressmen must live by the same rules as all other federal employees. 

  • Take away all private planes.

  • Congressmen air travel must be 'coach'. 

  • Congressmen must verify at the risk of criminal penalty that they own or rent a bona fide residence in their home district. 

  • Stop the foreign junkets.  It is the President who represents us internationally, not the Congress.  

  • Enforce ethics violations through an independent body.  

  • A means must be provided for the Congressmen's constituents to recall someone who violates their trust. 

  • Congressmen must justify the number and the purpose of each member of their personal staff. 

  • Every Congressman and Senator must read the legislation and verify under the penalty of perjury that they have sufficient knowledge of a bill to cast their vote.     

  • Require a minimum of 1 day per 100 pages of a bill from the time of introduction on the floor to its scheduled vote to provide Congressmen an opportunity to fully study legislation.  

  • Do not allow a vote on any measure until 60% of the Congress has verified under penalty of expulsion and criminal charges of perjury that they have read the legislation.

  • Provide for automatic expulsion from the Congress of any legislator who more than three times has failed to verify their reading in any session with exceptions only due to illness or other provable means of temporary incapacitation.  

  • Provide a means to challenge the fitness of the individual that holds the gavel and create a means for punishing those who would bring baseless charges before the Congress.  

  • We should truly want to live in a colorless society.  Eliminate black caucuses.  

  • We should truly want to live in a gender neutral society where the rights of men and women are equal.  Eliminate all women's caucuses. 

  • Eliminate the concept of groups and any legislation intended to benefit one group over another.  The Constitution talks of individual rights, not group rights.

  • Force the Congress to live within its means by a balanced budget amendment. 

  • Make it a crime to spend beyond projected revenue flows.  

  • Free the Congressional Budget Office from the onerous rules that require them to estimate based upon assumptions economists know to be unrealistic. 

  • Force each Congressman to be in his/her home district for Town Hall Meetings at least three separate times per year to include every summer recess.  Town Hall Meetings should never be fewer than one month apart without scheduling an additional Town Hall Meeting.  

  • Each Representative and Senator must provide an annual report to their constituents that identify each vote taken on the floor and in committee, a summary of the bill and an explanation as to why the vote was taken that way on behalf of the District or the State.    

  • No campaigning or electioneering in odd numbered years.  

  • Require that every piece of legislation carry with it a statement from the Attorney General that verifies its conformity to the limited powers granted it by the Constitution.

  • Provide a means to challenge the Attorney General opinion to the Supreme Court.  

  • Force the Congressman to pick up their portion of the bill when they dine or travel with lobbyists. 

  • Gifts from lobbyists must be refused.

  • Create criminal penalties for any Congressman who accepts a position with any firm that benefitted from legislation in which the Congressman played a part within five years of exit from office.

  • Require a public audit of all tax returns for five years beyond the legislators exit from office.

  • Require the Congressmen to report any relationship whether it be spouse or other significant person that could be perceived as a conflict of interest.

  • Require that Congressmen recuse themselves from any vote where a perceived conflict of interest might exist. 

  • Require that the Congressman always pay a tax rate that is 2% above the rate paid by private individuals in the same income bracket and disqualify the Congressman from all tax deductions not claimed on his/her tax return prior to his/her first election to office.

  • Congressional tax returns must be public and audited every year.  Any exclusion of income or any unpaid tax should be cause for immediate expulsion and criminal penalty. 

  • Require that medical histories be public. 

  • Require that arrest records be public.

  • While in office, all speech honoraria should be paid to the government.   Within their home districts and states, Congressmen and Senators must never benefit from speeches made to their constituents.   Allow only that reasonable expenses be reimbursed.  These men and women need to be approachable by all of us.

  • As long as the federal government is involved in funding or regulating local schools, the children of elected representatives must be required to attend public schools.   

 

Argument

Men and women go into the Congress supporting two homes and making a salary that is less than $200K yet in a few years they are millionaires.   It is not the salary that is gaining them these riches.   They are profiting at taxpayer / consumer expense in many different ways.

 

When Dwight Eisenhower was in England planning the invasion of Normandy, Mamie was approached by Hollywood.  They wanted to do a movie on the general's life.  Mamie contacted Ike and he responded with a hell no.   It was his position that he didn't think much of the measure of a man who would personally profit from a position of public trust.    Let's see how many in our government today agree with him.  

 

It is difficult to take income away from an individual who is already retired, however these are the people who over the last several decades created this problem and there are many Americans today who are suffering a loss of income as a result of their decisions.   Why should they be immune to the hardship they have caused?  

 

 

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments

  • 10/31/2010 12:32 AM Curious wrote:
    I like a lot of this. I wonder how some of it could be enforced, but I like the ideas.
    Reply to this
  • 10/31/2010 12:15 PM john cottam md wrote:
    Your requirements of any congressman to "verify" personally that they know what is in the bill does not go far enough. I was surprised and happy to see these things on the list as I have had them on my personal list for some time now. BUT, we certainly must have learned by now that leaving anything in terms of "certification" up to the person being "certified" themselves is letting the Fox mind the hen house - the hens WILL be eaten - that is the lesson! So. Look at this: Each bill MUST be voted on by at least 60% of congress. For any member to vote, HOWEVER, they MUST actually PASS A TEST as to the contents of that bill, to a rate of let's say 90% correct answer rate. The Test could be put together by proponents of the bill but must have outside input as well (also preferably by OPPONENTS of the bill) to ensure little "additions" that can be very important, do not get swept under the carpet or purposefully "ignored". This would have a PROFOUND influence on bills. First, it would make them simpler in language, and it would also make them SHOrter. there is nothing more scary and destructive to any democratic process/goverment than excessively huge bills that are clear that those voting on them do not even have a clue as to their contents.
    Nancy Pelosi should have been removed from congress solely on her statement "But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.” in her comments on the healthcare bill (Obamacare).

    Short, easy to understand bills are the way to go. This ensures little to no argument as to their content, and as to the knowledge of the content by those voting on it. If the bill is too complex or too long, the failure rate on the test to be taken will be too high to pass the 60% vote rule. the result will be better bills, period.
    Reply to this
    1. 11/2/2010 11:39 PM The Patriot wrote:

      I totally agree with you regarding Pelosi.   Fortunately we got her out of the Speaker Role tonight and she will no longer control legislation.   With regard to your test, I see no chance that such a measure would ever be approved by either house.  As many restrictions as I would like to have had on this last Congress I would not expect anything of the nature you describe to be practical.  I would doubt you could sell that idea to even one legislator let alone 218 Representatives and 60 Senators.  

      The Patriot


      Reply to this
  • 10/31/2010 12:19 PM john cottam md wrote:
    One of list items: "Eliminate the concept of groups and any legislation intended to benefit one group over another. The Constitution talks of individual rights, not group rights."

    One thing is for sure as well - too many representatives from any one profession tend to favor that profession. I would also try to limit the number of representatives from the Law profession to 15% of congress. Even the Iraqi constitution in a male dominated Islamic state saw fit to make sure that AT LEAST 15% of the congress were WOMEN!! I know this may seem to go against "choice", but they are working with it and it is working for them. the sooner we get lawyers out of congress in huge numbers the sooner we will have more just laws written.
    Reply to this
    1. 11/2/2010 11:43 PM The Patriot wrote:

      As much as I would love to reduce the number of attorneys in both chambers there is no way that you should be able to tell the voting public who they may elect to office based upon a quota for any profession.   The same would be true for quotas for women, minorities or any other group.   Affirmative action is a dismal failure as it is applied in business.  There is absolutely no way it could survive an election without disenfranchising voters.

      The Patriot


      Reply to this
  • 10/31/2010 12:23 PM john cottam md wrote:
    I would certainly not punish congresspeople at a higher tax rate than anyone else - lets just make it fair and even for everyone involved. They are just paid at a rate like anyone else and they should pay the same as anyone else - no more, no less.
    Reply to this
  • 10/31/2010 12:25 PM john cottam md wrote:
    ALL "arrest" records need to be sealed. It is only CONVICTION records that should be public. Anyone can be falsely accused (we have seen the level of abuses of govt) - even multiple times - So, to publicize arrest records is defamatory and creates bias.
    Reply to this
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Name (required)

 Email (will not be published) (required)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.