Government Cuts

W

wrightme43

When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to happen are 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.

I feel our government should not be immune from similar risks. I therefore am recommending the following cuts to be implemented by the next president elect.

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.

Some yearly monetary gains include:

$44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress. (267 members X $165,200 pay / member / yr.)

$97,175,000 for elimination of the above people's staff. (estimate $1.3 Mil in staff per each member of the House, and $3 Mil 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)


Note: Congress did not hesitate to jump on a train for home this week 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.

$59,6 75,000 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.

Big business does these types of cuts all the time.
 

dako81

FZ Rider
Elite Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
1,192
Reaction score
9
Points
38
Location
St.Joe/Kalamazoo Michigan
Visit site
Yea, but you'd have to cut their budget proportionally too. If there's $15B in pork ear marks now, and there's half as many people fighting over the money, there won't be half as many earmarks, each of them is going to get more money.
 
W

wrightme43

Option II

Grind all of there brains into a fine powder and make a vaccine.

Option III

Pay them in proportion to the decrease in national debt.

Option IV

Run them over with steam rollers and make jerky for bears.

Option V

Simpsons style glass dome over D.C. and fill it with water.

I can go on. LOL
 

CCHOUSEKY

Kentucky Wildcat Fanatic
Joined
Feb 21, 2007
Messages
1,445
Reaction score
20
Points
0
Location
Lexington, KY
Visit site
I think you've got a great idea there, wrightme, but there's a problem.

It would take a Constitutional Amendment to change the makeup of Congress.

"Article. I.
Section 2 - The House

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

(Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.) (The previous sentence in parentheses was modified by the 14th Amendment, section 2.) The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five and Georgia three.

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

Section 3 - The Senate

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, (chosen by the Legislature thereof,) (The preceding words in parentheses superseded by 17th Amendment, section 1.) for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; (and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.) (The preceding words in parentheses were superseded by the 17th Amendment, section 2.)

No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."


The 17th Amendment continues:

"Amendment 17 - Senators Elected by Popular Vote. Ratified 4/8/1913. History

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution."


Trust me, I'm all for smaller government and this, at least in theory, sounds like a great idea. But I seriously doubt the bigwigs in Washington would EVER let it get that far.
 

tom5796

Fizshizzle
Elite Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
538
Reaction score
16
Points
18
Location
6 Blocks from Fenway
Visit site
I'm all for reducing the size of the government. But there are many other areas with larger impact. The IRS for one. Simplify the tax code and close it.

My company has announced 2400 layoffs, and none of us remaining will be receiving raises this year. The top brass has taken significant pay cuts for the year, and word is that many of us in upper-middle management will also see pay cuts.

This is what we do to survive. And it is preemptive as we actually had a good 4th quarter. It is survival.

The most positive thing the gov could do right now, to create jobs, is eliminate corporate taxes completely.

While some folks will waive the complexity flag, I cannot understand how the notion that incentives are what makes the world go 'round is underestimated.
 

keira

Mrs. Reiobard
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
24
Points
0
Location
Hillsboro, NH
Visit site
much as i would like to see changes, i don't think that is the place to do it. even in a state as small as NH, i don't always feel well represented by my representatives. to cut everything by half would mean that there are now half as many people representing us, meaning they are representing twice as many (which isn't really the case because we have never had a populationt his huge, let alone when the consitituion was written). not that i have any better ideas, but i don't want to become an even bigger number than i already am.
 

Nelly

International Liaison
Elite Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
8,945
Reaction score
125
Points
63
Location
Co Offaly, ROI
Visit site
Option II

Grind all of there brains into a fine powder and make a vaccine.

Option III

Pay them in proportion to the decrease in national debt.

Option IV

Run them over with steam rollers and make jerky for bears.

Option V

Simpsons style glass dome over D.C. and fill it with water.

I can go on. LOL
How much will the redundancy and pension payoffs be?

Nelly
 

hardway

Junior Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Location
Sebastopol, Ca
Visit site
much as i would like to see changes, i don't think that is the place to do it. even in a state as small as NH, i don't always feel well represented by my representatives. to cut everything by half would mean that there are now half as many people representing us, meaning they are representing twice as many (which isn't really the case because we have never had a populationt his huge, let alone when the consitituion was written). not that i have any better ideas, but i don't want to become an even bigger number than i already am.

I agree. Being an anarcho-capitalist (look it up), I believe in in the peaceful and voluntary dissolution of the state in total, but if we're going to stick with a state as ruling authority, less representation would not be beneficial.
If we follow this line of logic, why don't we ****can the whole congress and just have a king, way cheaper!
 
Last edited:

Smittyboy

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
575
Reaction score
19
Points
18
Location
Wisconsin
Visit site
Hardway, do you need a hug? LoL JK! If everybody had less rep, it would just make elections for those people that much more important. I agree with IRS needing the boot. That's why I voted huckabee in the primary! He wanted to liquidate the system and simplify taxes, some say, to a flat tax... Sounds like the KISS method to me. That is my mantra... Taxes are ridiculously complex.
 

tom5796

Fizshizzle
Elite Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2007
Messages
538
Reaction score
16
Points
18
Location
6 Blocks from Fenway
Visit site

necrotimus

Stop looking at my title!
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Messages
1,189
Reaction score
28
Points
0
Location
Bristow Virginia
Visit site
I'm a government contractor who has worked for many different agencies. In my opinion you could easily down size the federally employed workforce by 25% to 50% percent. If you outsourced the work completely you could probably cut your expenditures by 75%. In one extreme case a government agency was backlogged so we offered up two people to help out. Those 2 people out produced 150 people over a three week long period.

Also for those not familiar with the government it is almost impossible to fire employees so many managers will transfer or even promote someone who is a problem.

And of course finally there is about a 4% pay increase that has been pretty much standard for all federal employees regardless of merit.

What about the increased amount of unemployment? People should be given jobs equal to their ability. The hard workign ones can either continue workign or get jobs with contractors. The ones who aren't doing anythign will continue to do what they do best except we wont be paying them.

And the 800 billion to 1 trillion dollar bailout plan that WE the peopel will be paying for? Best estimates are by the time the money is put into play the recession will be over. Also some of the groups that are askign for a bailout are a joke. Public Broadcasting which the public pays for is asking to be bailed out??!! There are a lot of other suspects but I am getting tired and need to post on a happier topic elsewhere.
 

Smittyboy

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2008
Messages
575
Reaction score
19
Points
18
Location
Wisconsin
Visit site
Yay to promotion to the point of ignorance!!! Here's hoping that no drama obama actually does anything he says he will... Minus his crazy useless initiatives... Just the good stuff... I'm not expecting much, but I'm hoping for a lot!
 

Nelly

International Liaison
Elite Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
8,945
Reaction score
125
Points
63
Location
Co Offaly, ROI
Visit site
Yay to promotion to the point of ignorance!!! Here's hoping that no drama obama actually does anything he says he will... Minus his crazy useless initiatives... Just the good stuff... I'm not expecting much, but I'm hoping for a lot!
Can he do any worse?......

Nelly
 
Top