“I’ve thought about what it would take for average Americans to petition for a new law”
Isn’t that supposed to be sort of the whole idea? You lobby/petition your representatives for what you want?
“We would have to lobby Congress to draft the bill and that takes a lot of money, access and influence.”
We’ve already got those. They’re called lobbies.
But there aren’t any lobbies that are pressing Congress for Pay For Performance, term limits, or serious campaign finance reform. If there are, they don’t have much of a voice.
“But there aren’t any lobbies that are pressing Congress for Pay For Performance, term limits, or serious campaign finance reform. If there are, they don’t have much of a voice.”
I agree. My point was just that you don’t have to try to “imagine” what it would take to do so. You just have to look at any of the effective lobbies to see what it takes. Unfortunately, it would be difficult to get “what it takes” motivated behind the issues you’re mentioning.
Government already does this. Most rates for government contracts are set out up front, we do lowest bid contract awards etc.
Yes, you’re exactly right. For most military contracts, the “profit” is a fixed percentage of the contract, and compensation rates for everyone who’s going to work on the contract are negotiated up front.
Government already does this. Most rates for government contracts are set out up front, we do lowest bid contract awards etc.
Yes, you’re exactly right. For most military contracts, the “profit” is a fixed percentage of the contract, and compensation rates for everyone who’s going to work on the contract are negotiated up front.
As far as they know.
Reminds me of the old story…
Guy turns in his expense report to the boss for approval. Boss looks it over and says, “Jim what’s this item…$50 for a pair of pants”? Jim says, “Well, I was on the way to the big client presentation when a car drove through a puddle next to me and soaked my pants in muddy water. Knowing how important the presentation was, I ducked into a store and bought a new pair of pants and was still able to make the presentation on time…by the way, we got the account”! The boss responds, “Sorry, you know we can’t reimburse for clothing, you’ll have to take it off your expense report”. Jim is a little annoyed, but takes the report back and returns 10 minutes later with a new expense report that reflects the exact same reimbursement amount. He hands it to his boss and says, “here you go, try to find the damn pants in there now”!
If you really want to hit them in the pocket book, Congress would have to to draft and pass a comprehensive campaign financing bill.
I’d say hit their their pay AND their contributions. If their performance is down we hit their “Bonuses” which would be compaign donations. In fact we “Redistribute” their bonuses.
Let’s say Government spending is up rather than down, deficit spending is up, crime etc etc whatever criteria we decide on, we deem that their “Performance” is 50%. Not only do we cut their pay by 50% but whatever campaign donations they get 50% of those are “Redistributed” to whomever is going to run against them.
Ok, according to my constitutional law professor friend the only way a “Pay for Performance” bill could get passed would be on a state by state basis. So, for example, here in WA we could get it on the ballet that representatives from our state would have Pay For Performance that would be determined by the voters for any state-level representatives.
The issue is apparently more murky at the federal level because while the state could vote to limit the pay of their congressional representative it would be tough to enforce. The only real way to get it done would either be through lobbies (not too likely) or by then electing people to Congress who will take the measure up as a bill and present it before others.
So it wouldn’t be an easy road to hoe but it’d certainly be fun to cause a little ruckus. I wonder if some AIG and GM executives who now have extra time on their hands want to take this ball and run with it?
Ok, according to my constitutional law professor friend the only way a “Pay for Performance” bill could get passed would be on a state by state basis.
I hope he really didn’t say “passed”, because if he did, you might not be getting your money’s worth from that particular class…
Bills get passed and enacted all the time that are subsequently found to be unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the constitutionality of any given piece of legislation just isn’t as important to many legistators as you and I might hope.
My feeling is its unlikely to go back the other way, few people are going to vote to have the government provide them with less.
And this is why our way of life is lost and why this country and others like it will eventually eat itself alive.
We want more, and will do less for it. The only outcome to this mentality is collapse or having people control how and what you do.
If we continue, something I’m guessing we will, our offspring will have far less opportunities to succeed and far less growth than will have had our ancestors. In fact I would be willing to bet that their quality of life will by comparison eventually become less than ours.
