Skip to main content

The Modest Proposal

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," and his board of directors gives him a big bonus. Our government should not be immune from similar risks. Therefore:

Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members.

Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State).
 

Then, reduce their 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 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)
· $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 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 head home 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.
· $59,675,000 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. (that's 8-BILLION just to start!)

Big business does these types of cuts all the time.If Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, tax payers could save a bundle. Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term. IF you are happy with how Congress spends our taxes, delete this message. Otherwise, then I assume you know what to do.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Moldy Middle

While taking statistics during my quest to get an MBA and while earning my engineering degree, the professors always emphasized the importance of finding the statistical mean of any population by using the Central Mean Theorem (a.k.a the highest point of the Bell Curve). As an engineer, this was essential in order to maximize throughput, minimize cost and waste, and ultimately make a better, faster, cheaper widget. A funny thing happened on the way to the dark side of marketing. I discovered that the only thing in the middle of the road was quite literally dead road kill. I do not know if you remember stores like Bradlees, Ames and Service Merchandise (just to name a few), but they all folded because the environment changed and they were caught trying to service the mythological “average customer.” Part of that change came when Wal-Mart began its juggernaut with the discount department store. Wal-Mart did two things right: 1) Focused on “mobile” consumers, and 2) Fo...

Traits of an Entrepreneur

I will begin and end this article with two quotations. The first is from Edward Rogers: "You don't deserve to be called an entrepreneur unless you've mortgaged your house to the business." --Edward S. (Ted) Rogers  This one sentence pretty much says it all. Entrepreneurs are not necessary gamblers, but they are willing to put everything they own, or go all in, in order to make it happen. In the classical sense an entrepreneur is define as anyone who has possession of a new enterprise, endeavor, venture or idea, and assumes significant accountability for the inherent risks associated with the development, growth, and outcome. He or she is an organizer who combines land, labor, material resources, and/or capital to create and market new goods, products, or services. The term "entrepreneur" is loaned from the French and was first defined by the Irish economist Richard Cantillon, where the term was applied to the type of persona who was willing to take upon th...

The Rush to Bottom

I cannot take credit for these words of wisdom, and sadly I do not know who wrote it originally. So, I cannot acknowledge them by name but I can acknowledge their exceptional talent to get a message across with clarity and hard-hitting truths.   Whomever this author is, I thank and admire you and take pleasure in sharing this with others!   I have also included a video if anyone is interested in sharing it. “When the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great...but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.” An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer. The professor then said, “OK, we will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades will be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so ...