Lounge of Tomorrow

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)
-   Daily Grind (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   Can we all say Awwww (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=4845)

JWBear 01-09-2007 11:07 AM

Four days? They were only working three days per week!

If the average American can work five days a week, so can Congress. They are no better than we are, and we pay their salary!

Moonliner 01-09-2007 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWBear (Post 113548)
Four days? They were only working three days per week!

If the average American can work five days a week, so can Congress. They are no better than we are, and we pay their salary!

I thought we had already been over this. In this thread.

The number of days in session on the hill does not reflect the number of days they work. Congress members make frequent trips to their home districts and while in town regularly meet with constituents (or lobbyists) work in informal ad-hoc groups, and do plenty else to stay busy. If your vision is that they work three of four days a week and take the rest off then I'm afraid you are mistaken. Any move to increase the time spent on the hill would in fact be counterproductive.

Oh. Errrr on second thought. Let's make them work 6-Days a week on the hill.

tracilicious 01-09-2007 11:55 AM

I'm not politically adept enough to argue much on this issue, I just wanted to point out that a recent Rolling Stone had a huge article on this subject recently. I'm somewhat baffled by people that are defending this congress. Is it because you voted for it's leader and you don't want to feel stupid?

Ghoulish Delight 01-09-2007 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonliner (Post 113558)
Any move to increase the time spent on the hill would in fact be counterproductive.

While I agree that a 5 day work-week is unrealistic considering the logistics involved in holding offices at home and in Washington, I can't agree with this statement. There's got to be a balance point somewhere between allowing them personal time, time to work locally, and getting their butts in their congrssional chairs to perform the duties for which they were elected. The last session of congress was tipped way too far towards the former two parts of that equation.

JWBear 01-09-2007 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Moonliner (Post 113558)
I thought we had already been over this. In this thread.

The number of days in session on the hill does not reflect the number of days they work. Congress members make frequent trips to their home districts and while in town regularly meet with constituents (or lobbyists) work in informal ad-hoc groups, and do plenty else to stay busy. If your vision is that they work three of four days a week and take the rest off then I'm afraid you are mistaken. Any move to increase the time spent on the hill would in fact be counterproductive.

Oh. Errrr on second thought. Let's make them work 6-Days a week on the hill.

Can you honestly tell me that you really believe that they go to meetings (or do any work at all) every weekend they go home? Please!

Until just a few years ago, Congress Members did not fly home every weekend (at taxpayer expense, I might add). They stayed in Washington while Congress was in session. I see no reason why they can't go back to that.

Prudence 01-09-2007 02:58 PM

My congressperson recently answered an email query from my brother within minutes. Personally. At some hour when reasonable folks have been asleep for a few hours. Doesn't mean he's the hardest working pol on the hill, but perceptions count and we were impressed.

Therefore, it must be the rest of you whose congresspeople are slackers.

wendybeth 01-09-2007 05:20 PM

We had a fantastic Congressperson in Tom Foley, and then other people went and voted in that nimrod George Netherbutt. I know Tom worked especially hard, because for years my mom worked for him and the guy was an absolute workhorse. Netherbutt was a waste of time and space.

Gn2Dlnd 01-09-2007 05:48 PM

And in Mark Foley, we had a fantastic page.

Or two.

Prudence 01-09-2007 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wendybeth (Post 113677)
We had a fantastic Congressperson in Tom Foley, and then other people went and voted in that nimrod George Netherbutt. I know Tom worked especially hard, because for years my mom worked for him and the guy was an absolute workhorse. Netherbutt was a waste of time and space.

I don't understand why a district would vote out the speaker of the house. We don't usually have a lot going for us over in that "other Washington." We need all the clout we can get.

sleepyjeff 01-09-2007 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prudence (Post 113707)
I don't understand why a district would vote out the speaker of the house. We don't usually have a lot going for us over in that "other Washington." We need all the clout we can get.

Look up Foley vs the People of the State of washington


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.