Do members of Congress and heads of government departments make too much?

[Integrityrespec]

Should members in the US Congress and the leaders in government agencies, departments and so on have to work for the average household income in America?

 

[joko104]

Should members in the US Congress and the leaders in government agencies, departments and so on have to work for the average household income in America?

No. These are high positions for which we want the most qualified and capable. The vast majority of Americans are not.

 

[chuckiechan]

No. These are high positions for which we want the most qualified and capable. The vast majority of Americans are not.

AFAIK, they are exempt from insider trading laws, and that should be changed. Thats where most make their money-trading on inside information.

 

[MrPeanut]

The problem isn't their salaries it's all the money they make everywhere else.

 

[Rexedgar]

AFAIK, they are exempt from insider trading laws, and that should be changed. Thats where most make their money-trading on inside information.

Was changed in 2012; not sure how effective it has been.

STOCK Act - Wikipedia


Edit: that this was necessary, speaks to the deficiencies in our system, imo.

 

[Integrityrespec]

They don't really need stocks, they get large fees for speeches and writing books and articles.

 

[joko104]

AFAIK, they are exempt from insider trading laws, and that should be changed. Thats where most make their money-trading on inside information.

I 100% agree. Congress should not be exempt from any laws, including exemptions for anti-discrimination laws and certainly not from insider trading.

 

[Helix]

Should members in the US Congress and the leaders in government agencies, departments and so on have to work for the average household income in America?

I have supported that in the past. Average wage, average vacation time, and the average healthcare plan. That seems fair.

 

[chuckiechan]

Should members in the US Congress and the leaders in government agencies, departments and so on have to work for the average household income in America?

We need smart people in government, too.

Its the politicians political philosophies that are driving real household income down and government pay and benefits up.

 

[TheParser]

Should members in the US Congress and the leaders in government agencies, departments and so on have to work for the average household income in America?

NO.

They should work for nothing.


Then you would get people who are willing to leave their jobs to serve the people for a limited period of time and then leave and give others a chance.


President Trump, for example, does not need the salary. When he leaves tomorrow (if the Dems get their way) or in January, 2025 (if the Republicans get their way), he will then give someone else a chance "to serve the people."


You would not get hacks who hang on for decades because they love the glory and power.

 

[Rogue Valley]

The problem isn't their salaries it's all the money they make everywhere else.

Along with the perks the high-flyers enjoy.

 

[Cephus]

They don't really need stocks, they get large fees for speeches and writing books and articles.

There's nothing wrong with that once they are out of office. If they are still on the public dole though, it shouldn't be permitted.

 

[DH Kirkwood]

Should members in the US Congress and the leaders in government agencies, departments and so on have to work for the average household income in America?

I'm not concerned with our represenatives' salary, so much as the money they can recieve in large campaign donations and from lobbyists. Body-cams on lobbyists, and move towards public funding of elections.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

NO.

They should work for nothing.


Then you would get people who are willing to leave their jobs to serve the people for a limited period of time and then leave and give others a chance.


President Trump, for example, does not need the salary. When he leaves tomorrow (if the Dems get their way) or in January, 2025 (if the Republicans get their way), he will then give someone else a chance "to serve the people."


You would not get hacks who hang on for decades because they love the glory and power.

There are plenty of independently wealthy people in Congress who have been holding on for decades for the glory and the power.

 

[Logician Man]

They work ?

 

[Carleen]

AFAIK, they are exempt from insider trading laws, and that should be changed. Thats where most make their money-trading on inside information.

Yes. A lot of them are much richer when they leave along with great benefits.

 

[Bodi]

Should members in the US Congress and the leaders in government agencies, departments and so on have to work for the average household income in America?

yes. the fact that the majority in Congress are millionaires is a huge problem.

 

[Cardinal]

AFAIK, they are exempt from insider trading laws, and that should be changed. Thats where most make their money-trading on inside information.

That really is one of those things where everybody, regardless of which side of the aisle they come from, should be able to call a time out and unite to end that ****.

 

[Bodi]

No. These are high positions for which we want the most qualified and capable. The vast majority of Americans are not.

You think that Congresspeople are qualified to run a nation? They are mostly idiots that talked there way into their jobs and are running the country like ****.

 

[HumblePi]

Most people don't realize that there's 535 men and women that make up the U.S. Congress, yet we only see a couple dozen of them at most making public statements regarding policies or opinions. Congressmen and other officials live in an entitled, comfortable little bubble. They're shielded from most interactions with the public. They have staff to read emails coming in, they don't read the phone messages coming in, they don't look at their own Facebook page themselves, they're given a nice comfortable filtered safe-space to live in.

They exist in a very comfortable world and when the times come where anxiety, aggression, anger and fury happens a both on the right and left it sometime comes because they aren't listening to people, they're protected, they're safe, they're in this little microcosm. So once in a while when these guys get out to a restaurant or in an elevator and get someone in their face crying and telling their stories that speak from real pain and real experience, they're appalled and shocked. That's the political cost of ignoring the people that got them to Washington, the people that they represent.

They have to be more available to their constituents than they have been or they're going to continue to be chased by frustrated and angry people in restaurants and other public places. They want to put in their sparse time in Washington, vote on the committees they're assigned to and leave it all behind once they walk out the door. The House of Representatives has averaged 138 "legislative days" a year since 2001, according to records kept by the Library of Congress. That's about one day of work every three days, or fewer than three days a week. With the amount of money they're getting in exchange for the amount of time they're putting into the job, it's no wonder it seems like everyone and their uncle wants to run for Congress.

 

[washunut]

I'm not concerned with our represenatives' salary, so much as the money they can recieve in large campaign donations and from lobbyists. Body-cams on lobbyists, and move towards public funding of elections.

Then you were against this action by Obama I am sure.

Obama Forgoes Public Money in 1st for Major Candidate - The New York Times

 

[chuckiechan]

There's nothing wrong with that once they are out of office. If they are still on the public dole though, it shouldn't be permitted.

Case in point. Lets assume you are the husband of a powerful House member and just happen to run a construction company that specializes in public works. Given environmental hurdles, and other road blocks, who would you ask for your first budget bid? Yeah, that guy. He basically has “first right of refusal” for any public works project he chooses to persue.

Want to invest in some land? Why worry when you can buy in a planned, but not publicizedright of way excluded from public domain requirements. Its worth what her cronies say it is.

 

[Cephus]

Case in point. Lets assume you are the husband of a powerful House member and just happen to run a construction company that specializes in public works. Given environmental hurdles, and other road blocks, who would you ask for your first budget bid? Yeah, that guy. He basically has “first right of refusal” for any public works project he chooses to persue.

Want to invest in some land? Why worry when you can buy in a planned, but not publicizedright of way excluded from public domain requirements. Its worth what her cronies say it is.

Immediate family should be forbidden from getting any government contracts, period. It's too easy to receive favored treatment.

 

[digsbe]

From congressional salaries? I honestly wouldn't say so. From speaking deals, corruption, lobbyists, and other means of income? Absolutely. The bulk of their money doesn't come from the congressional salary.

 

[Waddy]

They spend about 110 days actually "in session", which can vary from a couple of hours to almost 24 hrs if they stick around for all the debate. The rest of the time they are out fund-raising.

They have a free doctor if they use the House physician.

They get a subsidy on their health care premiums unavailable to private citizens.

They have a gym and free meals, as few of them pay their bills.

They can get free transportation.

They have a taxpayer funded slush fund to pay off misconduct allegations, like sexual misconduct.

They also get a $174K death benefit while the top military death benefit is only $100K.

They have a very good pension program.

I don't know if this has changed, but upon retirement they could keep whatever was in their campaign war chest.

We make a big deal over CEO's making many, many, times more than the workers; maybe Congress people should make just 20% over the national average earnings, and do away with all the special perks.