Perry Wants Part Time Congress

[Cammmpbell]

Hell...he'd forget which part and what time.

 

[blastoff]

One of the better ideas any politician's ever come up with. The less they're all in session the less mischief they can get into on our behalf. Sounds like Rick would bring a little Texas to the cesspool that is D.C.

 

[tinydancer]

Hell...he'd forget which part and what time.

I'm going to ignore the partisan shot and point out to you that Switzerland has a direct democracy that works extremely well and their elected representatives are part time.

Check this out. I love this part. Each member has to actually bone up on the new proposals. That sure beats the hell out of Pelosi's famous line "we have to pass the bill to know what's in it."

Being member of parliament is not a full-time job in Switzerland (at least they are not paid accordingly ...).

Formally, parliament meets four times a year for several weeks. In between, each member has to read proposals for new laws individually and to attend one-day conferences of commissions.

Here is a brief explanation of how it works:

Direct Democracy: Referendum and Initiative

* Frequent referendums on new or changed laws, budgets etc,
- some of them mandatory
- others "facultative" (only if 50,000 citizens demand for it)
* Ordinary citizens may propose changes to the constitution ("initiative"), if they can find a number of supporters (100,000 out of about 3,500,000 voters). Parliament will discuss it, probably propose an alternative and afterwards all citizens may decide in a referendum whether to accept the initiative, the alternate proposal or stay without change

While the federal system can be found in many other countries like the U.S.A., Germany, Austria etc., and separation of powers (government, parliament, courts) are common to all democracies (or at least should be), referendums are rare in most other countries. In Switzerland's long tradtion of Direct Democracy, frequent referendums do have a stabilizing influence on parliament and government.

* referendums will increase parties' willingness to compromise (otherwise a defeated party will call for a referendum)
* referendums favour big coalitions (shared power motivates compromise, exclusion from power motivates obstructive referendums)
* referendums increase stability (as extreme laws will be blocked by referendum, parties are less inclined to radical changes in lawmaking and voters are less inclined to call for fundamental changes in elections)
* The two chambers of parliament meet several times annually to sessions of several weeks and between them to preparing meetings of numerous commissions. Being member of parliament is not a full time job in Switzerland, contrary to most other countries today. This means, that Swiss members of parliament are closer to everyday life of their electorate.


Switzerland's Government and Politics

It's an interesting concept.

ETA: I thought it was important to highlight the last sentence.

 

[paulitician]

He is a terrible Debater but he's spot on with this one. I've been saying this for years. We need a Congress that meets far less often. They're just over-reaching too much these days. Banning light bulbs and such. We now have more than enough Government in our lives. How many more laws do we really need? When they're away they can't do any damage. I definitely agree with Perry on this. The less Congress meets,the more free our nation will be. Kudos to Mr. Perry.

 

[JWBooth]

Good idea...need a part time potus too.

 

[ScienceRocks]

This is a good idea!!! I wish he was a better debater and was anti-illegal.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

Hell...he'd forget which part and what time.

There was never supposed to career long politicians, or congressman. There's a reason why none of the founding fathers who were president sought a 3rd term as president.

 

[Inthemiddle]

One of the better ideas any politician's ever come up with. The less they're all in session the less mischief they can get into on our behalf. Sounds like Rick would bring a little Texas to the cesspool that is D.C.

It's a HORRIBLE idea. We pay these people six figure salaries in taxpayer money. I demand they work a full time schedule for such pay. Congress is hardly capable of getting anything done as it is. Cutting back their hours isn't going to make anything better. Do we have a budget yet?

 

[Luissa]

It is great empty gesture, but Perry is a moron and needs to read the Constitution.
A few of his proposals are unconstitutional, and would also mean changing the Constitution.

 

[Luissa]

One of the better ideas any politician's ever come up with. The less they're all in session the less mischief they can get into on our behalf. Sounds like Rick would bring a little Texas to the cesspool that is D.C.

It's a HORRIBLE idea. We pay these people six figure salaries in taxpayer money. I demand they work a full time schedule for such pay. Congress is hardly capable of getting anything done as it is. Cutting back their hours isn't going to make anything better. Do we have a budget yet?

I personally like how he says we should cut their pay if they don't have a budget. Him and Cain really need to read the Constitution.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

Hell...he'd forget which part and what time.

I'm going to ignore the partisan shot and point out to you that Switzerland has a direct democracy that works extremely well and their elected representatives are part time.

Check this out. I love this part. Each member has to actually bone up on the new proposals. That sure beats the hell out of Pelosi's famous line "we have to pass the bill to know what's in it."

Being member of parliament is not a full-time job in Switzerland (at least they are not paid accordingly ...).

Formally, parliament meets four times a year for several weeks. In between, each member has to read proposals for new laws individually and to attend one-day conferences of commissions.

Here is a brief explanation of how it works:

Direct Democracy: Referendum and Initiative

* Frequent referendums on new or changed laws, budgets etc,
- some of them mandatory
- others "facultative" (only if 50,000 citizens demand for it)
* Ordinary citizens may propose changes to the constitution ("initiative"), if they can find a number of supporters (100,000 out of about 3,500,000 voters). Parliament will discuss it, probably propose an alternative and afterwards all citizens may decide in a referendum whether to accept the initiative, the alternate proposal or stay without change

While the federal system can be found in many other countries like the U.S.A., Germany, Austria etc., and separation of powers (government, parliament, courts) are common to all democracies (or at least should be), referendums are rare in most other countries. In Switzerland's long tradtion of Direct Democracy, frequent referendums do have a stabilizing influence on parliament and government.

* referendums will increase parties' willingness to compromise (otherwise a defeated party will call for a referendum)
* referendums favour big coalitions (shared power motivates compromise, exclusion from power motivates obstructive referendums)
* referendums increase stability (as extreme laws will be blocked by referendum, parties are less inclined to radical changes in lawmaking and voters are less inclined to call for fundamental changes in elections)
* The two chambers of parliament meet several times annually to sessions of several weeks and between them to preparing meetings of numerous commissions. Being member of parliament is not a full time job in Switzerland, contrary to most other countries today. This means, that Swiss members of parliament are closer to everyday life of their electorate.


Switzerland's Government and Politics

It's an interesting concept.

ETA: I thought it was important to highlight the last sentence.

There are a number of states that have "the people's referendum" process already in place. If the legislature passes a law, and if enough people don't like the new law and enough referendum signatures are validated, a referendum to overturn the law ends up on the ballot. The state of Maine does it all the time, and it has been an overwhelming DISASTER for the people who live in the state of Maine.

 

[Meister]

One of the better ideas any politician's ever come up with. The less they're all in session the less mischief they can get into on our behalf. Sounds like Rick would bring a little Texas to the cesspool that is D.C.

It's a HORRIBLE idea. We pay these people six figure salaries in taxpayer money. I demand they work a full time schedule for such pay. Congress is hardly capable of getting anything done as it is. Cutting back their hours isn't going to make anything better. Do we have a budget yet?

At the end of the day, paying them their wage and having them work less days would save taxpayers a lot of money.

 

[Cammmpbell]

Hell...he'd forget which part and what time.

I'm going to ignore the partisan shot and point out to you that Switzerland has a direct democracy that works extremely well and their elected representatives are part time.

Check this out. I love this part. Each member has to actually bone up on the new proposals. That sure beats the hell out of Pelosi's famous line "we have to pass the bill to know what's in it."

Being member of parliament is not a full-time job in Switzerland (at least they are not paid accordingly ...).

Formally, parliament meets four times a year for several weeks. In between, each member has to read proposals for new laws individually and to attend one-day conferences of commissions.

Here is a brief explanation of how it works:

Direct Democracy: Referendum and Initiative

* Frequent referendums on new or changed laws, budgets etc,
- some of them mandatory
- others "facultative" (only if 50,000 citizens demand for it)
* Ordinary citizens may propose changes to the constitution ("initiative"), if they can find a number of supporters (100,000 out of about 3,500,000 voters). Parliament will discuss it, probably propose an alternative and afterwards all citizens may decide in a referendum whether to accept the initiative, the alternate proposal or stay without change

While the federal system can be found in many other countries like the U.S.A., Germany, Austria etc., and separation of powers (government, parliament, courts) are common to all democracies (or at least should be), referendums are rare in most other countries. In Switzerland's long tradtion of Direct Democracy, frequent referendums do have a stabilizing influence on parliament and government.

* referendums will increase parties' willingness to compromise (otherwise a defeated party will call for a referendum)
* referendums favour big coalitions (shared power motivates compromise, exclusion from power motivates obstructive referendums)
* referendums increase stability (as extreme laws will be blocked by referendum, parties are less inclined to radical changes in lawmaking and voters are less inclined to call for fundamental changes in elections)
* The two chambers of parliament meet several times annually to sessions of several weeks and between them to preparing meetings of numerous commissions. Being member of parliament is not a full time job in Switzerland, contrary to most other countries today. This means, that Swiss members of parliament are closer to everyday life of their electorate.


Switzerland's Government and Politics

It's an interesting concept.

ETA: I thought it was important to highlight the last sentence.

That's exactly what our forebears wanted for us. All this committee seniority and other things that tie a congressman or senator to more than one term is a device they invented and has nothing to do with the original constitution. Face it...the electoral college was set up for the same reason. When the only transportation they had was horses and carriages a 200-500 mile trip was a substantial undertaking. The originals assumed that a good patriot would leave his home or local business and travel to Washington and serve one term. That's the first correction we should demand...term limits. Lot's of luck. Don't hold your breath.

 

[hortysir]

It is great empty gesture, but Perry is a moron and needs to read the Constitution.
A few of his proposals are unconstitutional, and would also mean changing the Constitution.

One of the better ideas any politician's ever come up with. The less they're all in session the less mischief they can get into on our behalf. Sounds like Rick would bring a little Texas to the cesspool that is D.C.

It's a HORRIBLE idea. We pay these people six figure salaries in taxpayer money. I demand they work a full time schedule for such pay. Congress is hardly capable of getting anything done as it is. Cutting back their hours isn't going to make anything better. Do we have a budget yet?

I personally like how he says we should cut their pay if they don't have a budget. Him and Cain really need to read the Constitution.

Can I ask where in the constitution does it dictate the schedule and pay for the legislative branch?

 

[paulitician]

A Part-Time Congress and Term Limits would solve most of our problems. They just meet too often and constantly over-reach. And they get too entrenched with the special interest groups. New & fresh faces every few years would be great for the country. That's how i feel anyway.

 

[Inthemiddle]

At the end of the day, paying them their wage and having them work less days would save taxpayers a lot of money.

They get paid the same whether they work 1 day a year or 365 days. And since they are the ones who set their own pay rates, that's not likely to change any time soon.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

i think this is just a political tactic by Perry to position himself as an "outsider" of Washington D.C......Newt....and BO of course.....are insiders....

 

[Inthemiddle]

Can I ask where in the constitution does it dictate the schedule and pay for the legislative branch?

The 27th Amendment states that any change in pay shall not take place until an election of the legislature has occurred. Thus, any attempt to cut Congress' pay would not only have to go through the legislature (which they'll never do) it would not take effect until an election anyway.

 

[Meister]

At the end of the day, paying them their wage and having them work less days would save taxpayers a lot of money.

They get paid the same whether they work 1 day a year or 365 days. And since they are the ones who set their own pay rates, that's not likely to change any time soon.

I don't care about their wages....they can keep them, they just wouldn't spend as much money and the taxpayer would have more of their own money.

 

[Inthemiddle]

I don't care about their wages....they can keep them, they just wouldn't spend as much money and the taxpayer would have more of their own money.

That's an entirely unfounded thing to say. The truth is that the Congress can barely get the work done when working full time. If they became part time, they'd still be arguing about the budget for 2006.