Here's a thought,

[MadHound]

Rather than paying our Senators, Representatives and President hundreds of thousands of dollars in salary, instead pay them what their constituents make. In the House, you make the median salary of your district. As a Senator, the median salary of your state. In the White House, the median salary of the country.

First of all this would not leave our leaders pauperized in DC. These people get housing allowances paid to them, along with food allowances and other such perks. Hell, the President gets a grand mansion on prime real estate. Furthermore, a large number of these people are already millionaires, and the rest are certainly well off.

What this salary scale would do is to keep the plight of the common man in view. When you are getting paid $13,000/yr because you are from a poor district, then you will sit up, take notice, and actually start to do something for your constituents. Furthermore, it would save us money, something that seems to be in vogue right now, so our leaders should put their money where their mouth is.

Finally, it will reinforce that quaint old notion among our leaders that going to DC is public service. Not a way to get rich, not a step into that revolving door of politics/lobbying/politics, but that quaint, old fashioned notion that our Founding Fathers had, that of public service.

Just a thought.

[OneGrassRoot]

1. And a good thought it is. :) n/t

[Mnemosyne]

2. I want every single one of them to live on minimum wage for one year

before taking office. Only then could they begin to have a clue about the suffering much of their "work" inflicts.

:hi:

[pipoman]

3. They are not getting rich

on their current salaries. They are getting rich on the connections they make and the 'perks' associated with the job.

[OneGrassRoot]

4. The whole damn system needs an overhaul. It's corrupt to the core. n/t

[MadHound]

5. True that,

But, if they are directly confronted with the state of their constituents in each and every paycheck, then perhaps they will actually start to pay attention to the needs of their constituents.

This isn't intended as a way to punish these people, but rather to raise the awareness of the condition of their constituents. Far too many people head to DC and almost immediately forget about their constituents. This is a way to remind them.

[ThomCat]

11. Yes. They are getting unspoken promises of getting rich

on the deals they make with lobbyists that make corporations rich now. They just won't get fully paid for those deals until after they leave office.

They then get job offers and speaking deals to make sure they are very comfortable for the rest of their lives as a way of saying "thank you" for all those special deals, custom laws, deregulations, and raids on the treasury they facilitated while in office.

[blindpig]

6. Nice thought, but not in this environment.

They'd just grasp all the more desperately at that lobbyist money. That's where the real bucks are anyway, that and the post- office perks.

[MadHound]

7. If not now, when?

It's not like we're going to get publicly funded elections anytime soon, so why not go with this now:shrug:

[TicketyBoo]

8. Because they would have to enact

the legislation themselves. Not gonna happen.

What needs to happen is real campaign finance reform, and until we get it (never), things are just going to get worse and worse.

[kctim]

9. Love it!

[phantom power]

10. while we're at it, take away their health plan. They can use our private health ins.

[DirkGently]

12. Given that money appears all our leaders value, this makes perfect sense, particularly "median."

[hootinholler]

13. I don't think they get housing allowances.

Not positive, but I think they have to pay for housing.

-Hoot

[MadHound]

14. They get a $3,000/yr housing allowance.

Not to mention other perks and payouts.

[Horse with no Name]

15. I hope you don't mind

but I have reposted this.
It makes too much sense and it is TOTALLY a bipartisan issue.

[BzaDem]

16. That would have some pretty significant unintended consequences. Like the only people who run in

poorer districts would be the people who were rich enough to not need a salary.