tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5222839876578062342.post8142016426569254180..comments2024-03-16T02:58:07.351-04:00Comments on Me Me Me Me Me: Congressional Reform Act of 2011MSWallackhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04025607935715642114noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5222839876578062342.post-73843804488719704692011-08-16T13:31:53.369-04:002011-08-16T13:31:53.369-04:00Val:
Thanks for commenting. In all honesty, I'...Val:<br /><br />Thanks for commenting. In all honesty, I'm not familiar with what the framers of the Constitution had to say about their expectations vis-a-vis the tenure of members of Congress. It seems to me that if they were particularly concerned about elected officials making a career out of public service, then it would have been easy to add a term limit provision to the Constitution. Was this discussed and discarded or not discussed at all? I hate to admit it, but I don't know.<br /><br />With regard to the suggestion that the term "compensation" was used instead of "pay" because the two words were not deemed to be synonymous, again I must plead ignorance. However, when I review the text of Article 1, Section 6, it appears to me that compensation was, indeed, intended as remuneration for service in Congress, not for losses incurred while serving. Why do I say this? The text of Article 1, Section 6 provides that members of Congress "shall receive a Compensation for their Services". Note the "for their Services" portion of the clause. The text does not say, as you suggest, "for reimbursement for losses" or anything similar; rather, it links the compensation to the service of being a member of Congress.<br /><br />I don't think that your comparison with military duty is wholly apropos, either. While it's true that members of the militia would do their duty (when called up), the standing army (and, in particular, the officer corps), became a professional army. As partial evidence for this, witness the creation of the military academies that turned out an officer corps.<br /><br />But the crux of your comment is whether members of Congress should be entitled to a pension. As I said in my initial reaction to the so-called Congressional Reform Act of 2011: "I think that the better discussion would be the amount of the pension and under what circumstances, if any, the pension benefit is lost." Unfortunately, I don't know enough about how Congressional pensions work. I don't know, for example, if the amount of the pension is based upon years in Congress; nor do I know if the pension is cut off if a member of Congress is resigns or is removed. But these are just details. I think a discussion as to the nature and extent of Congressional pensions is appropriate. But I guess that I don't really have a problem with the core concept itself, so long as the pension is in an appropriate amount and with reasonable restrictions.<br /><br />And think about the reasons why offering a Congressional pension might be a good idea. Perhaps we don't want our members of Congress to think of Congress as a career. But, on the other hand, don't we want <i>good</i> members of Congress to stick around? Moreover, we don't want to limit Congress to those who can afford to be away from their principal careers because that might inverse effect of making it a near requirement to be rich before serving in Congress.<br /><br />So, rather than getting worked up about Congressional pensions, I'd much rather focus my attention on reducing the influence of corporate money on our political system.MSWallackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04025607935715642114noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5222839876578062342.post-72842914950904309022011-08-16T11:28:41.392-04:002011-08-16T11:28:41.392-04:00Why shouldn't we give Congressmen/women pensio...Why shouldn't we give Congressmen/women pensions?<br /><br />Because Congress was never created to be a "career" for anyone. That's why they used the term "compensation" instead of pay in the Constitution. "Compensation" was to reimburse them for losses incurred while serving their country in Congress.<br /><br />In a way, it was kinda like military duty. You donate a few years, go do your duty, and then you go home again and resume "life."<br /><br />ValAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com