“When I hear any man talk of an unalterable law, the only effect it produces upon me is to convince me that he is an unalterable fool.” – Sydney Smith, 1808
“It is better to travel well than to arrive.” – Buddha
“Ticket’s to President Obama’s inauguration have sold out. At least that's what the president is telling Joe Biden.” – Conan O’Brien
“And I swear that I don't have a gun, No, I don't have a gun…” Kurt Cobain, ‘Come as You Are’
“England, where no one has guns; fourteen deaths. United States — and I think you know how we feel about guns; whoo! I'm getting' a stiffy — 23,000 deaths from handguns. But there's no connection, and you'd be a fool and a communist to make one.” – Bill Hicks, 2004
According to a new poll, Congress is now less popular than head lice, Nickelback, and Donald Trump. In a related story, head lice is insulted that it's being lumped in with Donald Trump and Nickelback." - Conan O'Brien
“A man once said, ‘Why such reluctance? If you only followed the parables you yourselves would become parables and with that rid of all your daily cares.’
Another said, ‘I bet that is also a parable.’
The first said, ‘You have won.
’The second said, ‘But unfortunately only in parable.’
The first said, ‘No, in reality: in parable you have lost’.” – Franz Kafka
“A virtuous heretic shall be saved before a wicked Christian” – Benjamin Franklin
"Nothing reassures parents more than surrounding their kids with the kind of guys who have a lot of weapons and nothing to do on weekdays." - Stephen Colbert, on putting armed guards in schools
“The society which scorns excellence in plumbing as a humble activity and tolerates shoddiness in philosophy because it is an exalted activity will have neither good plumbing nor good philosophy: neither its pipes nor its theories will hold water.” – John W. Gardner
"IF YOU CAN'T FIX IT WITH A HAMMER, YOU’VE GOT AN ELECTRICAL PROBLEM"
WRITTEN BY A 21 YEAR OLD FEMALE
Wow, this girl has a great plan!
This was written by a 21 yr old female who gets it. It's her future she's worried about and this is how she feels about the social welfare big government state that she's being forced to live in! These solutions are just common sense in her opinion.
This was in the Waco Tribune Herald, Waco , TX , Nov 18, 2011
PUT ME IN CHARGE . . .
Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.
Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.
Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.
In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good.."
Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.
If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.
AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job.
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".
Our government should not be immune from similar risks.
Therefore: Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218members.
Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State). Then, reduce their remaining 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.)
$437,100,000 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)
$108,350,000 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.
$7,500,000,000reduction in pork barrel earmarks 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 does not hesitate to head home for extended weekends, holidays and recesses, when what the nation needs is a real fix for economic problems. Also, we had 3 senators who were not doing their jobs for the 18+ months (on the campaign trail) and still they all accepted full pay. Minnesota survived very well with only one senator for the first half of this year. These facts alone support a reduction in senators and 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.
$70,850,000 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.
$8,084,558,400 per year, estimated total savings. (That's 8-BILLION just to start!)
Corporate America does these types of cuts all the time.
There's even a name for it.
Also, if Congress persons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, taxpayers could save a bundle.
IF you are happy with Washington spends our taxes, be happy. Otherwise, it's time to "downsize" Congress.
.Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.