Blog Catalog

Thursday, January 20, 2011

The next amendment to the Constitution?


I got the following in an email yesterday and I have to say two things about it:  First, I think there's some merit to it.  Second, I think a lot of people from all political parties feel the same way about Congress and Washington and third, it has little likelihood of ever happening.  We're all too busy trying to make a living to make this happen.  We're not yet "mad as hell and not going to take it any more", if you know what I mean.

That said, here goes.  I haven't researched what they say about the 26th Amendment.  I think it makes some sense:

The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year-olds) took only 3 months & 8 days to be ratified.

Why?  Simple!  The people demanded it.  That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.

Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure.

Congressional Reform Act of 2011

 1. Term Limits:  12 years only, one of the possible options below.
     A. Two Six-year Senate terms
     B. Six Two-year House terms
     C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms

2.  No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

3.  Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately.  All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.

4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11. 

9.  Government legislators cannot leave government work and go to private business as lobbyists or any other occupation that influences government, directly or indirectly, for two years after leaving office.  (I added this one myself).

The American people did not make the current contract with members of Congress.  Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
 
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.

Much of  what we face, in terms of privilege and selfishness in this country might best be changed starting from the top down.
______________________________________

That said, the term limits might put the corporations in even more control of our government, if we didn't also put into effect true, stringent campaign finance reform--and a shortened, say, 3-month election campaign--so all the corporate money and lobbyists and that money is taken out of the governmental and election process.  If we don't do that, regardless of what else we do, there will likely be no real change.  The above would help, sure, but we still have to get the outside money out of our government, I think we'd all agree.

Thoughts, ladies and gentlemen? 

1 comment:

Sevesteen said...

1. rather than term limits, no consecutive terms at all, and no running for one office while holding another. I don't want lame duck politicians--they should always have a chance at being re-elected in the future, otherwise there is little incentive to be honest. However, they shouldn't be campaigning during their term.

5. I want congress paid very, very well--Possibly major corporate CEO level pay, but to fund much of their staff and expenses out of their own pocket. No junkets, few free trips (other than back and forth from their district to DC), no large staffs paid by the taxpayers.

8. No, we should keep our promises, even under these conditions. However, I'm fine with any congressman who runs again losing these benefits.

9. 2 years probably isn't long enough. Minimum 5.