Congressional Reform Act of 2012

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

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.



2. No Tenure / No Pension:

A congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.



3. Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security:

All funds in the Congressional retirement fund moves to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, Congress participates with the American people.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, server your term(s), then go home and back to work.




4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan just as all Americans.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.



5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.




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

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.




7. Congress must equally abide in all laws they impose on the American people.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work. Or go to jail, if appropriate.





8. All contracts with past and present congressmen are void effective 1/1/13.

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, serve your term(s), then go home and back to work.

Okay I agree with all the above... now how do we make it happen?

Shirley

Okay I agree with all the above...now how do we make it happen?

Shirley

THAT is going to be the hard part. The people that need to institute the changes are the very same people who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo and abuses they (by THEY I mean BOTH parties) created.

We try in Idaho, but the election is all but over before we get to vote.

Shirley

Hello smoothy:

I agree. I also agree that we shouldn't kick dogs and we should help old people cross the street.

excon

I have a problem with the whole concept of term limits, as it assumes that there is no advantage to having experienced people around. You woudn't support term limits for the army would you (no officers with more than 12 years experience)? Or in the corporate world (no managers who have worked in the same company for more than 12 years)?

I think the real issue is how to make it so that incumbents don't have an unfair advantage over challengers in the elections, and the only way to do that is with strict campaign finance reform. That's not about to happen either.

The one place I could support term limits is in the leadership of the House and Senate. Make it so that the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the Senate can only serve 6 years in those positions. Same thing with committee chairs. And make it so that a freshman in congress isn't handicapped compared to the old salts - so that your district isn't put at a disadvantage if you vote out the incumbent.

I am in total agreement. We have not yet become a banana republic.

Let's maintain the "Of the people, for the people" concept

Yes. Absolutely.

In answer to ebains, problem with your theory is that with the Constitution being written as it was, the above question is the answer. Think how little experience the founders had as they wrote the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. It doesn't require career politicians to run this country, it requires short terms of service for our country, it requires life experience, common sense, business experience and attention to detail - not political experience.

It is the political experience that has killed our liberty and replaced liberty with fraternity.

I have a friend who was a Senator in Ohio, served his promised 2 terms with a 98% scorecard and did so much for the state in the 70's, then retired as promised. He tore down left agenda, ended up being Majority Leader, his common sense approach to gov and regulations got him on the Sm Biz Advisory Board of Reagan's, the highest popularity in the state of any representative and pulled Ohio back from a brink. He did it through common sense and attention to detail. Not a kid lost their life, got an award or became sick without a personal letter or visit for him in his district, not a citizen turned away ever. We begged him to continue as our Senator, he could have easily replaced RINO Regula, but his belief was and remains citizen legislators. He went back to his landscape company and served politics in other ways, through his party, through Supreme Court reviews, etc. He is now late 70's and still serves America.

That is how our country is supposed to run. Common Sense men doing common sense things. We need to return our country to that and term limits is the best way.

To see what political life does to a person not of this mind, all u need to do is view this one video on Gov't Gone Wild http://governmentgonewild.org/thevideocongressdoesnotwantyoutosee

Should say - Not a kid lost their life, got an award or became sick without a personal letter or visit FROM him in his district, not a citizen turned away ever.

Please see my response to your response. Thanks!

Indianlittle- I am for term limits and getting back to the Constitution.
No mor pay raises until Congress proves they are working for us..

If all members of congress have term limits, and no pensions or health care, why wouldn't they spend their six to twelve years in office wielding the power and influence of their positions to provide themselves with a sweet little nest-egg when their terms of office are over? This proposition invites even more corruption and greater corporate influence than our current system. And do you think requiring congress-members to contribute to social security will fix anything? Yes, they ought to contribute, but money from a few hundred extra people won't make a difference. This proposal is fueled by spite. And Congress does deserve our spite, but why not spend your time and political energy on something more results oriented? None of these propositions will make government any better.

As to: 5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

The reference to the CPI should be changed to the formula used to calculate Social Security "so called" COLA.

I agree with the recommendation, but like everyone else said the question is how do we take it to the next step. Money talks, and unfortunately those of us answering this site probably do not have the money to make a lot of noise to make changes. I am doing my best to find out how to implement it since it does sound like a good answer to our problems.

Question is ? All the items listed for removal or change,, were they put in place by the Congressmen or Congresswomen or were they voted in by the public, If all the Job PERKS came about by congressional vote,, its clear that Congress is out for themselves and not the Public.

I am not sure how the perks came about, however, they do need to be fixed.

If the Social Security, Medicare and Health Care system is good enough for the whole population of the U.S. and all the people these legislative entities are answering to than why should they need to have a different system?

I thought that "Congressional Act of 2012" was going to be on the 2012 Ballot for the American people's vote. Isn't Warren Buffet & the like putting his support and money into making it happen? I hate getting elated over simple "wishful thinking."

Hello people:

It's a MADE up right wing wish list. It's NOT REAL.

excon

I thought that "Congressional Act of 2012" was going to be on the 2012 Ballot for the American people's vote.

Looks like a lot of people who purport to know how to fix the system have no idea how the system even works. Read the Constitution! There is no mechanism in the Constitution for a direct vote by the public on federal legislation.


If the Social Security, Medicare and Health Care system is good enough for the whole population of the U.S. and all the people these legislative entities are answering to than why should they need to have a different system?

As for congressional perks - the house and senate are on the same social security plan as everyone else, and have been since 1984. Also the provisions of the Affordable Care Act also apply to them.

They may participate in Social Security, however, their pension is not based on Social Security rates.

The law required all members of Congress to participate in Social Security as of January 1, 1984, regardless of when they first entered Congress. Because the CSRS was not designed to coordinate with Social Security, Congress directed the development of a new retirement plan for federal employees, called the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), which does coordinate a federal pension with Social Security.

Members of Congress are eligible for a pension at age 62 if they have completed at least five years of service. They are eligible for a pension at age 50 if they have completed 20 years of service, or at any age after completing 25 years of service. The amount of the pension depends on years of service and the average of the highest three years of salary. By law, the starting amount of a member’s retirement annuity may not exceed 80 percent of his or her final salary.

Not to exceed 80% of their salary? I would like to retire with a pension that is 80% of my salary... most people would.

Not to exceed 80% of their salary? I would like to retire with a pension that is 80% of my salary...most people would.

It's not just congress Check out what the pension plans are for unionized state and federal employees - 80% is not far off. It's not uncomon to have government retirees with pesions that exceed their highest "real" salary, for example by working over-time the last year on the payroll.

Well we are not talking about them here we are talking about Congress. Kind of like when the principal told you we are talking about your actions not Sally's so don't try to pass the blame.

Congress voted in their pension plan and they are responsible for their actions and any other entity is equally responsible for their actions, but have no influence on Congress.

Congress needs to be responsible.

Here in Idaho we think a little differently than people do in other parts of the country... Freedom and People's Rights are #1.

We are responsible people that demand our congressmen be responsible. Our Governor lives in his own home on his Ranch and not in some expensive "Governor's Mansion"

Idaho Pride! We will never give up our Guns or our Freedom!

Are we rolling down hill like a snowball heading for Hell! I think so... with our leaders we have we soon will be out in the cold. Thanks democats and republicans for all you have done to destroy America and line your pockets!