sailingaway
04-03-2013, 08:31 PM
http://media.washtimes.com/media/community/viewpoint/entry/2013/04/03/rppoint_s640x427.jpg?73b8e21685896c3f2859310aaa5ad b253919b641
WASHINGTON, April 3, 2013 ― President Obama’s recent decision to take a five percent pay cut to show solidarity with furloughed workers is a nice gesture, but it is a token sacrifice compared to the suffering the average American faces on a daily basis. In 2011, Republican candidate Ron Paul made a far more magnanimous offer when he promised that if elected as president, he would only accept $39,336 in compensation ― what he termed the “average income of Americans.”
Both President Obama and members of Congress should follow Ron Paul’s example in these times of fiscal peril and economic suffering. While the average American grapples with inflation-buoyed energy and food prices as well as a dizzying array of government compliance expenses, the average member of Congress makes between $174,000 to as much as $223,500 per year and is generously reimbursed for expenditures made in conducting the affairs of their office. The President of the United States makes some $400,000 in salary yet lives completely at taxpayer expense, surrounded by aides and staffers who provide for his every need and whim 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
With the pay and perks that accompany Federal office, it is impossible for Washington D.C. to represent a nation that is growing poorer and poorer with each day. Washington delights in the best of the best while Main Street constantly revises its standard of living to lower and lower levels. If our elected officials are serious about the rich “paying their fair share” the first place they should start is by shrinking their salaries to less than $40,000 a year.
There are some who will take great offense to this suggestion, claiming in response that both the President and the members of Congress have important jobs and should be compensated according to their responsibility. My response to that is, look at America’s private sector. Outside of government, Americans are compensated based on their market value and how much they produce for a company. With few exceptions, most Americans produce vastly more than they are actually paid and are grossly undervalued with respect to their actual educational or skill worth.
When we look at elected officials, the calculus of getting paid six digits to be pampered by staffers and ghost supported by expert intellectuals just doesn’t add up. Unlike private employees, anyone who has either served in elected office or been a staffer to one will tell you that the “hard work” and heavy lifting is all done by the support team outside of public view, not by the elected official themselves.
Don’t believe me? Go to your congressional delegation’s next town hall meeting and ask them a technical question within the scope of their committee’s authority. Let’s say for example they voted “yes” on this year’s $633 billion dollar defense bill. Ask them to explain to you on the spot the difference between the tribes in Afghanistan and which ones we actively support with taxpayer dollars. What do you think they will say?
Or here’s another one: Ask them to explain to you in detail the capabilities of the Ohio-class nuclear submarine our tax dollars are supposedly going to “modernize” compared to the Chinese Type 094 submarine. Think they can do it? Chances are they’ll be frantically gesturing for their staff to pass them “the BlackBerry” for help, yet they are being paid more than most international experts and making dangerous policies without having all of the intelligence at their hands.
Former president George W. Bush spoke accurately when he said “I’m the decider and I decide what is best” ― elected officials have the privilege of making unreasonable legislative or executive demands of both their staffers and the average American and all they do is “decide” what others must do for them. The only “stress” involved with being an elected official is the stress of having to face a hostile media and the stress of figuring out how to be re-elected.
Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/making-waves-hawaii-perspective-washington-politic/2013/apr/3/take-a-pay-cut/#ixzz2PPTS126S
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter
I reminded him in comments that Ron also didn't take his pension.
WASHINGTON, April 3, 2013 ― President Obama’s recent decision to take a five percent pay cut to show solidarity with furloughed workers is a nice gesture, but it is a token sacrifice compared to the suffering the average American faces on a daily basis. In 2011, Republican candidate Ron Paul made a far more magnanimous offer when he promised that if elected as president, he would only accept $39,336 in compensation ― what he termed the “average income of Americans.”
Both President Obama and members of Congress should follow Ron Paul’s example in these times of fiscal peril and economic suffering. While the average American grapples with inflation-buoyed energy and food prices as well as a dizzying array of government compliance expenses, the average member of Congress makes between $174,000 to as much as $223,500 per year and is generously reimbursed for expenditures made in conducting the affairs of their office. The President of the United States makes some $400,000 in salary yet lives completely at taxpayer expense, surrounded by aides and staffers who provide for his every need and whim 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
With the pay and perks that accompany Federal office, it is impossible for Washington D.C. to represent a nation that is growing poorer and poorer with each day. Washington delights in the best of the best while Main Street constantly revises its standard of living to lower and lower levels. If our elected officials are serious about the rich “paying their fair share” the first place they should start is by shrinking their salaries to less than $40,000 a year.
There are some who will take great offense to this suggestion, claiming in response that both the President and the members of Congress have important jobs and should be compensated according to their responsibility. My response to that is, look at America’s private sector. Outside of government, Americans are compensated based on their market value and how much they produce for a company. With few exceptions, most Americans produce vastly more than they are actually paid and are grossly undervalued with respect to their actual educational or skill worth.
When we look at elected officials, the calculus of getting paid six digits to be pampered by staffers and ghost supported by expert intellectuals just doesn’t add up. Unlike private employees, anyone who has either served in elected office or been a staffer to one will tell you that the “hard work” and heavy lifting is all done by the support team outside of public view, not by the elected official themselves.
Don’t believe me? Go to your congressional delegation’s next town hall meeting and ask them a technical question within the scope of their committee’s authority. Let’s say for example they voted “yes” on this year’s $633 billion dollar defense bill. Ask them to explain to you on the spot the difference between the tribes in Afghanistan and which ones we actively support with taxpayer dollars. What do you think they will say?
Or here’s another one: Ask them to explain to you in detail the capabilities of the Ohio-class nuclear submarine our tax dollars are supposedly going to “modernize” compared to the Chinese Type 094 submarine. Think they can do it? Chances are they’ll be frantically gesturing for their staff to pass them “the BlackBerry” for help, yet they are being paid more than most international experts and making dangerous policies without having all of the intelligence at their hands.
Former president George W. Bush spoke accurately when he said “I’m the decider and I decide what is best” ― elected officials have the privilege of making unreasonable legislative or executive demands of both their staffers and the average American and all they do is “decide” what others must do for them. The only “stress” involved with being an elected official is the stress of having to face a hostile media and the stress of figuring out how to be re-elected.
Read more: http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/making-waves-hawaii-perspective-washington-politic/2013/apr/3/take-a-pay-cut/#ixzz2PPTS126S
Follow us: @wtcommunities on Twitter
I reminded him in comments that Ron also didn't take his pension.