Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Should Millionaires Be Allowed In Congress?

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   
250 members of Congress — or 47 percent — have a net worth of more than $1 million, according to a new study by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

The study, which analyzed data from legislators’ financial disclosure forms, found the average senator had a net worth of about $2.63 million last year. That’s up 11 percent from $2.38 million in 2009 and 16 percent from $2.27 million in 2008.”

Do you really feel that these people have any grasp of what is going on in the streets of America, or are they so shielded, that they cannot do an effective job for the average american ?




posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:40 PM
link   
There should be no discrimination on who is allowed to run for office. The average net worth in congress should be higher than the general pop. Being able to make money is a good indicator on how well you understand society, and how well you can accomplish a goal.

The notion that we should ban millionaires from congress goes against the ideals that America was founded on. If your district feels a more average person (socioeconomically) deserves to be in congress, well then elect them.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by winterkill
 


I have asked myself that question many times. Few in congress can relate to the common people regardless their rhetoric. It is the money that pours in, money with an agenda, that gets people elected, not free thinking people, but people who think they have no other choice.

BTS, should they pass Obamacare if it doesn't cover them?

Also, should anyone in congress be able to vote on a war if they have not served or their child will not serve.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by liveandlearn
 





Few in congress can relate to the common people


Congress isn't supposed to be a collection of common people. It's supposed to be the thinking elite.

I don't think a random collection of 600 average Americans would be a good choice for legislating the country.


Believe me, I'm not satisfied with congress and the current ethics of politics kills me. But the answer is not to limit the net worth of candidates.

We need exceptional people in congress, and exceptional people often make a good deal of money.

ETA: The solution for a more relatable elite and congress is a better public education system so that more are born into the common class and climb the ladder.
edit on 11/21/2012 by PatrickGarrow17 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Anybody should be allowed to run for office. The problem is that each Congressman represents 750,000 people. I don't think 750,000 people could agree on anything, so they're just representing the noisiest thing in the room.

The numbered limit of 435 Congressman was arbitrarily set by Congress in the 1930s.

We should, instead, have 1 Congressman per 50,000 citizens. That would put the total at around 6,000 Congressmen. They could meet at RFK Stadium until the Capital building was altered or a new one built; or we could move the House to some place like Omaha or Denver. They don't necessarily need to be in DC.
edit on 21-11-2012 by GreenGlassDoor because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Wow.

As if those congressman have any "understanding" of the world or this economy pretty damn easy to become millionaires when they write the laws.

Now then why the hell should we being paying them and giving them other perks eh?
edit on 21-11-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:06 PM
link   
The only problem is that people in congress are allowed to trade on wall st with information they get in their daily lives. if people outside of congress were to use this information it would be labled insider trading but that rule doesnt apply to them.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Well, then, neither should you because you are rich beyond everyone else’s wildest dreams and it is you, sir, who are out of touch. Observe:



The fact is a million bucks isn’t that much money. There are 3 million millionaires in the US, 10 million in the world. Japan has nearly 2 million and as a percentage of its population, is much higher than the US. Yes, there are Mexican drug lords who are billionaires, but the fact is education and wealth correlate very well. The better educated you are, the more successful you are.

So what do you want? Congress is obviously screwed up enough as it is, but all these supposedly “poor” people keep electing these guys in. If the poor people are so smart, why is that? And are they really poor? The average welfare recipient on food stamps and public housing is a zillionaire compared to someone in Angola or Haiti. Our poor are a whole lot richer than your poor.
edit on 11/21/2012 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:23 PM
link   
No one should be able to buy a congressional seat, and that is in fact what is happening, isn't it? That being said, sure millionaires should be allowed in Congress, but if and only if the campaign playing field is level in the areas of campaign spending. In addition, I'd be very leery of how anyone who becomes a millionaire while being a civil servant does in fact become one.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   
how about no person or company as a whole is allowed to donate more than $1000.
00 per candidate. Then no one is up for sale unless you blackmail them.
edit on 21-11-2012 by winterkill because: spelling error



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Statistically...no. They represent too small of a percentage of the entire population. Sure they need to be represented as well, but not the percentages that are present...it's turning into a plutocracy.




I always thought working in the State or Federal Government as an elected representative should be the equivalent of Jury duty. You get an average salary...you do not get to get rich on lobbyists...when your terms are up, you go back to whatever you did before public service....no giant pension and lifetime healthcare either.

This would attract people that WANT to work for the people and get things done...not just line their pockets and the pockets of their criminal friends on Wall Street and the Military Industrial Complex.

We wouldn't have this





edit on 11/21/2012 by Jeremiah65 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
My simple persons take?

Anyone can run for that BUT first, all folk running for any seat in the entire Govt - even President hopefuls - MUST live a full year with no access to their money, homes, insurance, nothing. They must work a min wage job, find a place to live, and get by that way. Find out how it is personally. Only then can they run for whatever seat they're looking for.

Only then. Walk a legitimate year in the middle/lower class shoes. One small year. We do it year after year after year. One measely year is all you have to do, hopefuls. Go to the ER when you're sick. Decide between rent, food and bills - or meds for your suddenly sick child. ONLY then may you run for a Seat.

I really think that would make a HUGE difference. They're still wealthy - just have zero access to the finest of living while doing that year. Anyone caught cheating is out of the running. Period.

Perhaps a little empathy from 'been there/done that' would actually DO something positive for once.
edit on 21-11-2012 by sarra1833 because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-11-2012 by sarra1833 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   
It's simple just pay each person in office regardless of position the average American income (minus the top 25% of wealthiest people) plus one half. If they want to increase their wage at the top they must increase the lower and middle class wealth. I mean 75K a year isn't bad plus most of them already have businesses so they are wealthy already. For the most part I don't even know why some of them even accept a government income any way.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by GreenGlassDoor
Anybody should be allowed to run for office. The problem is that each Congressman represents 750,000 people. I don't think 750,000 people could agree on anything, so they're just representing the noisiest thing in the room.

The numbered limit of 435 Congressman was arbitrarily set by Congress in the 1930s.

We should, instead, have 1 Congressman per 50,000 citizens. That would put the total at around 6,000 Congressmen. They could meet at RFK Stadium until the Capital building was altered or a new one built; or we could move the House to some place like Omaha or Denver. They don't necessarily need to be in DC.
edit on 21-11-2012 by GreenGlassDoor because: (no reason given)


They really don't need to meet. Each Congressperson should be able to do their job from an office inside their district. Electronic voting, videoconferencing, etc. There is no real reason to get them all together in one place any longer. In fact, the more independent the congresspersons are, the more likely they will be willing to do the right thing. you could also set up the voting so when they vote they do not know what anyone else voted for. It would go a long ways to end political bloc voting as well.



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by winterkill
 


Yes.

Although it should be mandatory that you make only the median American citizen wage while you are in office.

You should also have to disclose all your finances. All of them.

True accountability starts at true transparency.

~Tenth



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by winterkill
 


That only shows that America is run by the wealthy as our politicians are not part of the common citizenry, that is why once they get into power they never look at the people who are beneath them. Then people wonder why politicians in Washington do not work for the people.

They only cater to the interest that keep them wealthy. Rather than asking should millionaires be allowed in congress we should ask if common working class and poor people should be allowed in Congress, the answer is never, as those wealthy politicians are the ones that pass the laws that are written by the private interest
edit on 21-11-2012 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by winterkill
 


No fair it only takes one word to answer this question. Making that ugly red mark against us for not providing more than one sentenc...hmmmph....well the answer is and should always be a RESOUNDING NO ******* WAY!



posted on Nov, 21 2012 @ 09:55 PM
link   
One has to wonder how many congressmen and senators entered office as millionaires , and how many did not but will leave as multi millionaires.
That may be the better question.

"It's just outrageous that our legislators could be profiting directly from the legislation that they're making," says Aaron Task. Top 10 Wealthiest Members of Congress (by household assets, 2010) according to The Washington Post: •Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) $448.1M •Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) $380.4M •Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) $231.7M •Rep. Jared Polis (D-CO) $143.2M •Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-FL) $136.2M •House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) $101.1M •Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W. VA) $99.1M •Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) $85.6M •Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) $73.2M •Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) $69.0M

www.cnbc.com...



posted on Nov, 22 2012 @ 05:03 AM
link   
reply to post by sligtlyskeptical
 


It's a legal requirement that they meet in person per Article I Section 4 of the Constitution, where they must assemble at a designated time and place.





new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join