Should we Fire Congress?
Aug 10, 2011
File it under “blinding flash of the obvious”: The other day, Warren Buffett presented a quick, easy, and impossible-to-dismiss solution to America’s deficit spending problem on CNBC. His sound advice should serve as a wake-up call to both Congress and the voters as our country approaches a critical election year.
“I could end the deficit in five minutes,” Buffett said. “You just pass a law that says that anytime there is a deficit of more than three percent of GDP, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for reelection.”
Can anyone seriously doubt that this would work? Is there any good reason not to propose and pass such a law?
I have a funny feeling that Buffett’s idea could vindicate Ronald Reagan’s belief that “every complex problem has a simple solution.” And Warren Buffett’s blinding flash of the obvious is not even an entirely untested idea: A wildly popular new California ballot initiative proposed docking the pay of state legislators for every day that a balanced budget is late. Crazy idea, right? Guess what? It passed. Guess what else? It worked. Suddenly, the budget that was supposedly impossible to balance got balanced.
Buffett’s proposal simply raises the stakes. If the members of Congress don’t shape up, put our country’s financial house in order, and stop running deficits, then they’re fired. Period.
I would never, ever run my business at a deficit. I would never run my household at a deficit, and I hope you wouldn’t either. Why the hell should our government believe that it can run a deficit indefinitely?
Congess has forgotten that this is our money it is spending. The only realistic chance we now have to remind them that it’s our money is intense public pressure for a constitutional amendment along the lines of what Buffett has proposed. If you think this idea is far-fetched, and that public pressure would never be strong enough to get such an amendment through Congress, you may be underestimating the current level of public rage. Check out this poll, which reveals that 62% of the US voting public “would dump all current legislators in Congress if they could vote today.” And if you are still wondering how deep the emotions of voters really run, you should log onto Twitter, do a search on the hashtag #firecongress — and prepare to have your eyes opened.
If you aren’t curious about whether your representative in Congress, or your favorite presidential candidate, supports Buffett’s proposal, you should be. Why not ask?
You can reach out to your Congressional representative about this issue (or any issue) very easily, just by clicking this link and sending an e-mail.
If your Senator or member of Congress has a Twitter account, you can also send a tweet about this, and get the conversation started even more quickly. Here’s the directory of available Congressional Twitter handles.
You can also write a letter, of course. Here’s the directory of congressional addresses.
If you get an answer that says Buffett’s idea wouldn’t work, but doesn’t say why … if you get an answer that is evasive … if you get an answer that pretends you were really asking for a civics lesson about how the Constitution gets amended … or if you get no answer at all … then you should make a resolution to fire your congressman or congresswoman next November.
If there was ever an idea whose time has come, Warren Buffett’s proposal that we prohibit members of Congress from running for re-election if they don’t get government spending under control is that idea.
Stay tuned…
LINKS:
NPR: Coincidence? Their Pay Withheld, California Lawmakers Strike Budget Deal
Poll: Americans Say Dump Entire Congress
Congress Contact
Twitter Handles
Congress
While everyone is voting on whether they “would dump all current legislators in Congress if they could vote today” maybe they should devote those voting hours to when it really counts… Like initially putting them in office.
Hmmmm, interesting that Buffet used GDP and not GNP. One particularly unpleasant aspect of GDP is its ability to rise, or grow as economists like to say, while the real incomes of the broadest classes decrease, somewhat like we are seeing now with corporate profits on the rise as incomes shrink. Once again, the sound we hear from the wealthy is a cry for more.
I have a funny feeling that Buffett’s idea could vindicate Ronald Reagan’s belief that “every complex problem has a simple solution.”
I almost forgot, this cannot be true. A perfect example: funding and training a Muslim insurgency to counter the Soviet action against the growing militant Muslim extremism threatening Afghanistan during the 80′s. The Reagan white house devised a simple (simplistic) solution to a complex geographical/political/theological problem compounded by oil routes, cold war fears, a rising nationalism parading as American virtue, and the not so insignificant international opium trade, which by itself has been at the epicenter of western policy making for the last 2 or 3 centuries.
I’d say the results are not very supportive of the premise. They do however, fit the definition of Blowback. Maybe that’s what he meant; “every complex problem has a simple solution which itself bound to become a wicked problem” (look it up, it’s a science term)
jz, your not in congress because…?
Thanks for publicizing a great American with a great American idea…!
I just found and posted the video clip on my FB wall, for all 485 friends to see…and consider.
Thanks JZ…I’m behind you on this one !
~ S
I think they should only be allowed one term anyway. That is incentive to get things done too.
Plus it saves all that time devoted to re-election which is most of the time they are in office.
And no pay after they leave office, that is the “Big Government” we should cut. I don’t think we should pay any politician after they leave office including the presidents. They for the most part are rich enough to pay their own way after they leave office, Bush and Clinton pull down many millions each year, why do we have to pay them more?
Well said JZ. Americans can’t run a household on a deficit and neither can a company…so why isn’t Congress held to the same standard? They need some fir under them to whip them into shape. They should be fired, just as any accountant would.
if unemployment was at 5% and dropping there would have been nary a peep about balanced budgets. Who remembers Dick “deficits don’t matter” Cheney? So why now?
nothings changed.
BTW- good analysis NOBODY.
Congressional Reform Act of 2011
1. No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay
when they are out of office.
2. All Senate and House of Representatives members (past, present &
future) will participate in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social
Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social
Security system, and all Congress men and women participate at the
same level as the American people. Funds collected may not be used
for any other purpose or programs.
3. Congress men and women can purchase their own retirement plan and will pay the same rates as all Americans do.
4. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional
pay will be determined by the individual states they represent every
two years with the raises limited to the lower of CPI or 3%. with no
special adjustments.
5. Congress loses their current health care system and participates
in the same health care system as the states they represent and the
American people.
6. Congress will equally abide by all laws they impose on the
American people. No provisions for special treatment will be
allowed.
7. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective
1/1/12.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen.
Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.
Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers
envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s),
then go home and back to work.
;o) add to that Campaign Funding REFORM!
Sincerely,
We the People
P.S. I am NOT the original author of this document
Interesting thoughts from an interesting guy. I continue to struggle with the whole political process. The extreme views on both sides of the aisle have led this country to the brink. The problems are real and we continue to hear again from both sides bickering about facts and not one party talking about solutions. I watched the Republican debate last night and was so disappointed in the constant negative campaigning, the tearing back and forth yet not once did I hear a candidate talk their plan.
First and foremost I would love to see someone lay out the issues in a simple and understandable way. 2nd I would like to see each candidates proposed solutions.
Having run businesses for the last 10 years, it is pretty clear we can not continue to keep spending more than we take in (kind of obvious). The first rule of a turnaround is to first convince all parties involved that you have a problem. I don’t think the American public needs to be convinced. The second rule is to identify the issues that need to be addressed. The American public understands there is a problem, but I am not convinced the American public understands what all the problems are. With the proliferation of real time media it is not clear what the facts are. There are facts regarding taxes, expenses, job creation that are reported differently in the media. The candidate that can clearly identify the issues will be the candidate that will win. The 3rd rule of a turnaround is that once everyone knows there is a problem, and the key issues identified, then solutions need then to be proposed. Once a plan is made the last rule is to implement, implement, implement!!!
Companies face revenue/expense issues every day. Why is this so difficult?? If the US government were a Board of Directors of a company, they would be fired for their fiscal irresponsibility.
The last point I will make is that no matter what the answers are, we are all going to feel pain. As one famous executive told me “you can’t go from being devils to angels overnight”. We will have to do things that will be painful to both parties.
Thanks for the blog