politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Tie their pay to the median income for their district. Give them a direct incentive to increase the quality of life for the people they represent.
They don't make their money in salary. They make their money in investments, kickbacks, and donations.
Also, start prosecuting trading on insider knowledge on both sides of the aisle.
I mean, we would have to start by making it illegal.
Little column a, little column b. Just cuz they make more money from being a shill doesn't mean their salary is peanuts. Anyway, as long as we're gonna crack down on politicians, give them the same rules as athletes in the NCAA: can't make money off your position or image or else you're out. Fire anyone who gets money from anything other than their salary or mowing the lawn.
Yes, tie their salary to the median income of their district and tie their insurance to what's offered in their district. Finally, have them fined student loans and medical bills that match the averages of their district. Same people who say no free lunch? Guess what, pay for all of your own meals, no gifts, no per diem, get our politicians off welfare. Bootstraps and all that.
It's not that their salary is peanuts, it's that their salary is peanuts compared to what they make on the side. More than half of them are millionaires, and none of them got that way on a government salary.
I'd clutch my pearls, but I can't afford any... *Grips bedazzled medical bracelet*
Part of that reason is that campaigns are so expensive and take up so much time that anyone wanting to run for higher office has to quit their job and probably donate a lot of their own money to help fund it. It keeps lower-income people out of office.
One solution I could see would be a stipend for anyone who got enough signatures to be on a ballot. That would still require the candidate to spend significant amounts of time campaigning to get those signatures, but they could likely still hold a job while doing it.
In Spain having a seat in Congress or Senate means having part of the expenses of the campaign paid by the State. If you don't spend too much and get enough seats you get all your money back.
I'd prefer not to add another layer of "you live in a poor area so you don't get shit" to the pile.
The point is that poor areas would drag down the lawmaker’s salary, so they’d be encouraged to properly support those areas.
Do you think the median wage for the rural part of Alabama could afford a shoebox in Washington DC?
Theres only three ways that would play out
Option 1: Representatives from poorer districts are literally homeless and dressed in rags, what a great look.
Option 2: Said representatives sell their votes to mantain any semblance of a dignified quality of life
Option 3: Only the already wealthy can afford to be in government
I wasn't confused about the point I just think it's a bad idea that won't work and ultimately boils down to "you represent poor people, so fuck you."