I say compensate them the equal to what the average american makes. I bet you they'll be lots of action to make that number grow then.

Btw who'd you work for Invictus.. wondering if it could of been my rep.

As in, abolish the Commerce Department all together and make NASA just cut a little or stay even. That kind of thing. Wouldn't want you people to think I'd gone all lefty.

I hope it's overblown, Invictus, but clearly there are plenty of Congresspeople that have never known the common man and never will, and they, by my own judgment, are generally the problem.

"I say compensate them the equal to what the average american makes. I bet you they'll be lots of action to make that number grow then."

But how do you keep up a Washington apartment in addition to your own home on the national average salary? How is it worth it to do all the extra work a member of Congress has to go through when you're not adequately compensated for the aggravation and time you have to put in to it?

I won't say who it was. I will say it was a man, though.

I think I can guess who given from what you've said before and I think that person would of been my representative.

The median income from 2011 was 51k. That should be enough to compensate for having an apartment in another state. It should be worth it cause you're serving your country not because you'll make a ton of money.

That's the problem in part with Congress these days. They're not there to make the country a better place they're there for the most part to make a career in politics.

Who says it was my Congressman?

You may not be aware, but Washington, DC and safe areas close to it all have very expensive rents. And, knowing how hard it is, I gotta say I would never do what a Congressman has to do for just $51,000. The only people who would do all that for that amount of money will be people who are already independently wealthy. Cutting Congressional pay will just make the chambers MORE white, MORE male, MORE rich, and MORE old.

And, just so it's clear, I'm not advocating for raises. Just keeping pay as it is now.

I was saying it would of been mine not necessarily yours.

I disagree those are people who wouldn't wanna waste their time for not enough pay off. Also I should mention I'm strongly in favor of term limits for Congress.

@CF ... Term limits would be a dream in Congress. What would be even better is abolition of multiple terms throughout all legislative bodies (plus President) and extending terms so that they aren't worrying about reelection so much. Obama is a great example of that - not only did he spend much of his time on his campaign in 2010 and 2011, but look at the person he is now that he's in his final term compared to prior: he's completely different. Many of them follow that pattern, specifically in the White House.

@Invictus ... More people would be open to paying Congresspeople six digits (or something higher than now) if the appropriate cuts could be made in other areas, specifically the military and potentially welfare cuts. The military cuts are the most easily achievable.

Well we figured out we lived relatively close. I think the districts at the time would have included both our towns.

Term limits just mean non-elected Washington power players get the expertise and power rather than elected officials. A career bureaucrat with forty years of Beltway intrigue experience can run circles around a Congressman who can only be there for, say, twelve.

They do get six digits, $174,000. That's a lot, but it's not some absurdly huge amount. Paying Congress, including the higher pay the Speaker and other positions get, is less than 100 million dollars. This is a non-issue for our budget crisis, which is calculated in trillions and is really all about entitlements.

Just don't think people should be career politicians. That's how we get a congress who is out of touch with the average American. Also things would change with term limits. You could only serve so much time then you move on to another project, go home and do things or serve there.

Not sure on the districts I think I may still be one over.

You're dodging my point, Celticfox. You'd only be there a little while, while the permanent government is there forever. Term limits mean you'd have to leave just as you were getting the hang of things, or be so long as to be meaningless.

Ok so do you think that we shouldn't have term limits on the Presidency then? I didn't set what the term limits should be,. but letting people be in Congress for 30+years is a little much.

How long would you say it takes to learn your way around? A few years?

My favorite was when we paid $585,000 to put up Joe Biden and retinue in a Paris hotel for ONE NIGHT.

I get that security is important and expensive, but I just can't believe there wasn't a better way to do that. Don't we have embassies?

Agreed there semck.

The presidency and being in Congress are incomparable.

Due to the way the chambers place such a premium on seniority it takes longer than the amount I've heard the most, twelve years. You've got to build relationships with journalists and bureaucrats and fellow lawmakers and actually learn what the laws and regulations are and learn how to run your staff effectively and then, on top of all that and other things, be responsive to your constituents back home in such a way that they'll reelect you. It's be nice to go back to the 19th century and have everyone serve one or two terms, but that's just not how the world works any more.

If you want to make Congress more responsive, at least double the size of the House. Districts are so big it is humanly impossible for the member and his staff to be adequately responsive to local needs and at the same time be a meaningful part of the governing process in Washington.

I agree Biden should have stayed in an embassy.

Is there so much emphasis because the older members have been there for so long? You don't think that those things would change as well if term limits were put into place?

Well, the rules of the chambers may change. Not the rules of social interaction. If you only had 12 years then just as the member really knows and understands and is connected with the system he has to go. On the one hand, hurrah! Kick the bums out. On the other, the real bums are still there, and they never have to face an electorate. And just as a good guy understands their tricks he has to leave and cannot use his position in Congress to try and change anything.

I would hope with term changes then the whole taking 12 years to get into things would change as well. Right now our Congress people are in a never ended gotta get elected cycle. How would you solve that problem? Election reform or do you not see it as a problem?

More than double, let's quintuple the House. And do something about gerrymandering.

Gerrymandering is a problem I don't think anyone can argue that one.

Why would term limiting members of Congress change anything about the career civil service?

Quituple may be too big. One Congressman out of a thousand is irrelevant, one out of 435 like now is overrun by the 800,000 or however many it is now constituents he has to be accountable to. It's a tough balance to strike, which must be a part of the reason Congress has been ignoring the issue for a hundred years.

It would change the way they deal with Congress. Just like Presidential term limits changed the way Congress dealt with the President.

Out of curiosity what would your fix be Invictus? Btw really curious, not looking to attack you.

Agreed, invictus. We need to do something about the unaccountable, unelected, out-of-control, fourth branch.

If we still used federalism, that would be nice. Then most decisions would be made by your local state legislature, yet the state legislature wouldn't get big because there are 50 states. Truly national decisions would still be made by people representing tons of people, but it wouldn't matter quite as much.

Yeah, they'd ignore it more since all the n00bs there wouldn't have the experience to properly hold them democratically accountable.

My fix? A bigger House, for one. Having impartial committees draw congressional districts which run along county, township, and municipal lines rather than the state legislatures draw gerrymandered ones. Fewer federal responsibilities generally so it doesn't matter so much that Congress and the civil service are full of crooks and fools. Et cetera, et cetera.