How to fix congress - President and Congress need to put this into law

[2Design]

*Congressional Reform Act of 2011*

1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman/woman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they're out of office.

2. 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. It may not be used for any other purpose.

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

4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by CPI or 3%, whichever is lower.

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

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

7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen/women are void effective 1/1/12.

Congressmen/women made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, it should not be a career. Serve your term(s), then go home and back to work
You may not agree entirely with all these points, but this is a start -

THIS MAY BE HOW TO FIX CONGRESS!

[opihimoimoi]

1. VOTE BLUE is how to fix the danged thing

[MNBrewer]

16. "Blue" has responsibility in breaking it

How can they reasonably be expected to fix it?

[opihimoimoi]

19. The dems have to stfu while the Baggers self annihilate

[abelenkpe]

2. You know they won't tho right?

[MineralMan]

3. Nothing Good Will Come from Congress

until we elect a very strong majority of Democrats to Congress. We can begin that process in 2012, if we all work toward it. As long as the Republicans can block legislation, there is no hope for real reform. The future is up to each and every one of us. We must not fail.

[LadyInAZ]

4. smiles... I like these...

[chemp]

5. misinformation

his latest rant against Congress has been circulating since the start of the year, urging passage of a "reform act" to correct abuses of power by Congress. But as we often find with these chain messages, the author doesn’t know very much about the subject.

He or she (the author is anonymous, of course) repeats a number of false claims that we have debunked before. The author:

Demands that members of Congress be forced to "participate in Social Security." But members of Congress already participate, paying Social Security payroll taxes just like nearly every other worker. Once upon a time that wasn’t true, but members of Congress were brought under Social Security way back in 1984. Yet bogus claims like this continue to circulate more than a quarter-century later, despite our best efforts.
Urges that "Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose." But as we’ve explained before, the idea that Congress has exempted itself from many of its own laws is also somewhat out of date. A law enacted in 1995 applied 13 civil rights, labor, and workplace safety and health laws to Congress, removing the basis for earlier criticisms. It’s true that members of Congress retain a degree of immunity from arrest or prosecution, but changing that require an amendment to the Constitution, which grants that immunity in Article I, Section 6. (The authors of the Constitution didn’t want any president to try what King Charles I of England had done in 1642 — sending troops to arrest his critics in Parliament.) The message is confused, at first mentioning earlier constitutional amendments, but then describing the proposal as an "act," which refers to legislation.

<more>

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/03/congressional-reform-act/

[pinboy3niner]

8. +1000

Snopes and others also have debunked this. :thumbsup:

[TheKentuckian]

6. I don't really think so. It seems like how to fix some of your resentment toward Congress

but continues to ignore structural issues and the fact that it is a millionaires club with the interest of millionaires.

I think even at zero perks and pay the problems would continue and likely increase by making dead certain that only the independently wealthy can even be bothered.

[RB TexLa]

7. no thanks

1) So you want to make sure that only billionaires can serve for any length of time in Congress

2) Do you want to make everyone not in the SS system have to have their retirement funds moved into it?

3) They can do that now

4) They can't vote themselves a pay raise, only for the next congress

5) Such as one provided by their employers like they have now?

6) So the separation of powers in the constitution? What is it "just a God damn piece of paper?"

7) Yes let's throw contract law out the window, who needs it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. +1

[proud2BlibKansan]

9. 1. They're entitled to a pension just like any other American worker

2. They DO participate in Social Security.

3. They CAN purchase their own retirement plan.

4. Their pay raises are automatic. They need to change that.

5. They participate in the same health insurance program available to all federal employees.

6. When did Congress become exempt from abiding by laws?

7. What contracts? Are you proposing that contracts available to all Americans not be available to Congress? Isn't that the same thing as exempting them from laws, which you oppose in #6?

THIS IS FROM A STUPID RIGHT WING EMAIL THAT HAS BEEN GOING AROUND FOR YEARS. IT IS FALSE INFORMATION THAT SHOULD BE VERIFIED BEFORE POSTING HERE (for the thousandth time).

[pacalo]

10. I'd like the voters to decide if they deserve a pay raise.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. Indirectly, they have

Raises are automatic, which is the result of legislation approved by elected officials.

But I agree. Pay raises for Congress should be on the ballot on election day.

[shraby]

11. They are not entitled to anything, much less a pension

after only 5 years of service.

[proud2BlibKansan]

13. Why should workers not be entitled to pensions?

Be careful what you wish for. Workers in other occupations are entitled to a pension, based on years of service, after 5 years of employment. Congress members, as well as other workers who only work for 5 years, get a much smaller pension than those with more years in the system. There's nothing unfair about this system. And as I said in my previous post, this is from a right wing email that has been repeatedly debunked.

[mulsh]

15. the authors of this should do a little research, here's part

of my response after receiving this via e-mail last week

In 1982 the Social Security Act required all federal employees, including members of congress to participate in Social Security. It ended member's participation in the Civil Servant Retirement System (pension). As of January 1 1984 congress critters began paying into Social Security.
there is a lot of concise info about congress's benefits and pension at the link.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/a/congresspay.htm

In addition to passing this constitutional amendment you will have to repeal the XXVII amendment which address congressional pay issues.

The XXVII Amendment was originally proposed in Sept 25, 1789 and ratified May 7, 1992. I'm not very good with numbers but I believe that's a bit longer than it too the Constitutional Amendments noted in the email.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_amendments_11-27.html

Article I of the US Constitution covers term limits. You can find this info in sections 2 and 3.

[kentuck]

17. What is 3% of $170,000??

that's what they get now. That's no solution.

[MineralMan]

18. Nope. This is bogus.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/28thamendment.asp

It's good to check things out before posting them. There are a couple versions of this nonsense circulating in email forwards. One says the idea is Warren Buffett's. Wrong again. It's bullshit.