Tom,
I forgot to mention the important part. James felt that the Lord had closed
a door in his life and opened a window so he acted upon it.
This is not the first time that James has been squeesed out from his job, and
he has always got another the very next day or two. He has not been out of
work for long since I came into his life!
Thanks for the advice and I am inclined to agree with you - these stimulas
checks are not all they are cracked up to be.
Sharing an email:
The
Proposal:
When
a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to
happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers
need to find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job
would be eliminated as well. Wall street, and the media normally
congratulate the CEO for making this type of "tough decision", and his
board of directors gives him a big bonus.
Our
government should not be immune from similar risks.
Therefore:
Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218
members and Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State). Also reduce
remaining staff by 25%.
Accomplish
this over the next 8 years. (two steps / two elections) and of course
this would require some redistricting.
Some
yearly monetary gains include: $44,108,400
for elimination of base pay for congress. (267 members X $165,200 pay
/ member / yr.) $97,175,000
for elimination of the above people's staff. (estimate $1.3 Mil in
staff per each member of the House, and $3 Mil in staff per each member
of the Senate every year)
$240,294
for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%.
$7,500,000,000
reduction in pork barrel ear-marks each year. (those members whose
jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork earmarks
are at $15 Billion / yr)
The
remaining representatives would need to work smarter and would need to
improve efficiencies. It might even be in their best interests to work
together for the good of our country?
We
may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient
resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of
what your representative is doing.
Congress
has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in 1911
when the current number of representatives was established.
(telephone, computers, cell phones to name a few)
Note:
Congress
did not hesitate to head home when it was a holiday, when the nation
needed a real fix to the economic problems. Also, we have 3 senators
that have not been doing their jobs for the past 18+ months (on the
campaign trail) and still they all have been accepting full pay. These
facts alone support a reduction in senators & congress.
Summary
of opportunity: $44,108,400 reduction of congress members.
$282,100,000
for elimination of the reduced house member staff.
$150,000,000
for elimination of reduced senate member staff.
$59,675,000
for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members.
$37,500,000
for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members.
$7,500,000,000
reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of congress members.
$8,073,383,400
per year, estimated total savings.
Big
business does these types of cuts all the time.
If
Congress persons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like
everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits there is no
telling how much we would save. Now they get full retirement after
serving only ONE term.