Posted on 01/14/2011 5:03:18 AM PST by MsLady
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.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. 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.
What do you imagine they presently do?
I think what you suggest is that members of Congress pay for their retirement plan out of PRE TAX INCOME, rather than have the payment arranged TAX FREE.
That was the older CSRS system. The current FERS plan lets them pay for the greater part of their retirement out of DEFERRED INCOME TAX FREE, just like a 401(k) plan ~ plus, there's a residual annuity system set up similar to the former CSRS but not as valuable, plus they are part of the Social Security System.
What you folks need to do is get someone involved in the development of this idea who understands how the system currently works, and who can steer you around the shoals of ignance.
Concerning not letting Congress raise their pay, the current Constitution says a currently sitting Congress can't raise its own pay. It can only raise the pay of a future Congress. If a pay raise is decided on that can't happen until after the next election so you can vote against the Congresscritter if you want on that basis.
As far as Congress "losing" its current health system would that mean all those guys who sign up with Kaiser Permanente under the Federal Employees Benefit System and go to Fairfax Hospital (a regular old county hospital just like any regular old county hospital in this country ~ except it's the best one) would need to DROP Kaiser?
Is that what you mean?
Then what would they do? Sign up with Aetna? You know Aetna sends folks to Fairfax Hospital as well.
I've never quite figured out what it is you want Congresscritters to sign up with once they abandon their current deal that gives them the same thing federal employees get ~ so why don't you tell us what that is.
Good points. I was just passing a long an email that a friend sent. I’m not a lawyer. It looked pretty good to me. Especially where they can’t stay in power until they die. To many of them get to comfortable with the power they’ve been given and began abusing it. Like they have become the ruling class, no longer working for the people.
They can steal while in office though.
I seriously doubt there'd be any shortage of candidates.
... need to add a total time restriction: D. If any combination of the above terms inclusive of a four year term as POTUS should cause the total years of the terms to exceed twelve years, no additional election to federal national office can occur.
Of course the downside to term limits is that it increases the power of the unelected, unresponsive, and uncaring federal bureaucrat. For them I suggest a re-qualification exam or interview every 5 years conducted by a non-governmental entity. Failure to re-qualify earns you a 30 day notice of termination of employment and benefits.
Boy we’ve really allowed our our system to get seriously messed up, haven’t we?
Amen
Nice ideas, but Constitutional Amendments shouldn’t refer to statutes (Social Security).
Also, I’d prefer term limits to apply to the House only, or be more generous in the Senate: the Founders intended the Senate to be an “aristocratic” institution which would check the democratic whims of the House. Unfortunately, repealing the 17th Amendment seems to be a non-starter, but we ought to keep something of the idea.
How about:
“No person shall be a Representative who has previously served three terms as a Representative, whether complete two year terms or shorter terms owing to the filling of a vacancy by election or appointment under the laws of one of the several states.
No person shall be a Senator who has previously served four terms as a Senator, whether complete six year terms or shorter terms owing to the filling of a vacancy by election or appointment under the laws of one of the several states.
All laws generally applicable to citizens, nationals and residents of the United States shall be applicable to both Representatives and Senators during their term of office.
Congress shall pass no law creating special privileges, immunities, or rights applicable to Senators or Representatives, save as implementing those privileges, immunities and rights specifically granted in the Constitution of the United States or amendments thereto. Any law having created privileges, immunities or rights applicable to Senators or Representatives not provided by the Constitution of the United States or amendment thereto shall become null and void upon ratification of this amendment.”
One might even want to extend the generally applicable laws and no privileges, immunities and rights clauses to all officers of the Federal government.
Well, it sounds good to me. Anything to rein in the people that have decided to become our ruling class.
And Congress is going to happily propose this Amendment, placing limits on their imperial lifestyles?
Do you really think so? Or will this bill be “sent to committee” to die a long, slow death?
Please read Article V and consider the options for making Amendments.
If we elect enough Rand Pauls, Ron Pauls, Sarah Palins, Michele Bachmanns and the like yes I think we can.
7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.
That will never happen.
Never say never :)
In this case it’s to say so,congress critters feel above the law,note record of laws they broke and got away with it.
They get away with so much it’s sickening. It’s always, oh, I didn’t know. Or oh I didn’t mean to. Or oh, you took my words wrong, I didn’t say that. Oh ooops, my mistake, silly me.
The downside is that unelected career bureaucrats will accrue more power.
True they think it they give you an answer that makes you feel good it lets them off the hook.
So many of them have gotten away with it for so long, they think we are stupid and they can get away with anything. It reminds me of spoiled children. I think it’s time the American people gave congress a bigger spanking then they just got.
2012 will be show time.
bttt , thanks MsLady
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.