The Right Opinion
Cheap Politicians
Now that the National Football League has apparently learned that it can be costly to hire cheap officials, perhaps the rest of us should learn the same lesson when it comes to government officials, whose bad calls can do a lot more damage.
What do we do when we want a better car, a better home or a better bottle of wine? We pay more for it. We definitely need a lot better crop of public officials. Yet we insist on paying flea market prices for people who will be spending trillions of tax dollars, not to mention making foreign policy that can either safeguard or jeopardize the lives of millions of Americans.
Any successful engineer, surgeon, or financier would have to take a big pay cut to serve in Congress. A top student from a top law school can get a starting salary that is more than we pay a Supreme Court justice.
No doubt many, if not most, government officials are already paid more than they are worth. But the whole point of higher pay is to get better people to replace them.
We may say that we want people in Congress, the courts or the White House who have some serious knowledge and experience in the real world, not just glib tricksters who know how to pander for votes. But we don't put our money where our mouth is.
Let's face it. You're not likely to get a good suit of clothes at a flea market. And you're not likely to get the cream of the crop to go into the government when they would have to accept a big drop in income to do so.
There are always going to be warm bodies available to fill the jobs in government. We have lots of warm bodies there now. There will also always be some people who are willing to sacrifice their family's economic security and standard of living, in order to get their hands on the levers of power.
These are precisely the kinds of people whom it is dangerous to have holding the levers of power.
Can we afford to pay members of Congress, the President of the United States, and federal judges the kinds of money that would enable us to tap a far wider pool of far more knowledgeable people with successful real world experience? We can't afford not to. Cheap politicians are expensive in their reckless spending of tax money. It is the ultimate in being penny-wise and pound-foolish.
To get some idea of the cost, ask yourself: How much would it cost to pay every member of Congress, the president, and every federal judge a million dollars a year?
There are 535 members of Congress, so a salary of a million dollars a year would cost $535 million, or just over half a billion dollars. There are 188 federal appellate judges and one President of the United States. That's 189 more people, bringing the total number of people to 724, and the total cost to $724 million, at a time when people in Washington are talking trillions.
That is less than one percent of the annual cost of the Department of Agriculture. Put differently, we could pay all of these 724 officials a million dollars a year each -- for an entire century -- for less than it costs to run the Department of Agriculture for one year.
If we limited how long any given individual could hold office in the government -- preferably one term -- we could have highly knowledgeable people with real world experience in charge of taking care of the nation's business, instead of spending their time doing things to get reelected.
They would be a lot harder for special interests to bribe with campaign contributions, when high officials would face no more campaigns after getting elected. We don't need career politicians.
The best crop of public officials this country has ever had were in the generation that founded the United States of America. Most of the Founders had careers outside of politics.
Is all this a realistic prospect in the world today? Of course not! What is the most realistic prospect today is the status quo today.
But the New Deal was not a realistic prospect three years before Franklin D. Roosevelt took office. It was not a realistic prospect in 1775 that the American colonies would become an independent nation a year later. The whole point of discussing new ideas is to get people thinking about them, so that they might become realistic prospects in the future.
COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM

14 Comments
Bruce R Pierce in Owensboro, KY
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 8:51 AM
This is one time I have to differ with you. This issue was debated by our Founding Fathers pointed out by F A Hayek and proven throughout history. The more you pay Government officials the more corrupt and out of control those officials become, the worse of society has to offer will follow the money.
wjm in Colorado
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 10:54 AM
I would rather see them paid for their service as a stipend to cover expenses, and no pension, no perks, no fortunes amassed at the expense of the people. Term limits as well. That would weed out more than a few weasels.
Bruce R Pierce in Owensboro, KY
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 11:11 AM
If it was done that way there would be no need for term limits as they would have to go back and "work for a living" again. That would keep the onerous regulations down because they would have to live with those regulations. I remember hearing a story about a politician that tried to open a business after he left politics and found it almost impossible.
mugwumps in Pa
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 10:58 AM
First time I ever heard you talk like a dork. So we got Obama and Romney from the poor farm? Public servants should get servants pay. The pay and benefits are outrageous already. We'll only get dedicated people when we elect them instead of those high paid people you suggest. It only takes a little common sense to do the right thing and keep your nose out of everything else. That was supposed to be the American way.
tapdaddy in Indiana
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 4:33 PM
Public servants should get servants pay? I'll bet anybody under your thumb is close to dead and I would hate to have to work for you.
Old Sarge in Hinesville, GA
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 11:04 AM
After the 2010 elections some of the new members of the House were interviewed about their daily schedules. One of the interesting points made was the amount of time they spent on the phone banks soliciting donors for their next election. They don't have time to take care of the Nation's business because they are constantly running for relection. The system is completly out of control. Term limits with no pension and Obamacare as their health insurance!
Liz in Maine
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 2:38 PM
Old Sarge: I agree! Term limits (6 years) with 6 or more years between different branches of the government (you can't be a sitting Senator or Representative for the six years prior to running for president) no pensions just social security and ACA health insurance for all federal employees. Sounds rather ‘equitable’ don’t you agree? Oh, one last thing, rescind all current pensions for former employees until the former employee is 65.
Robert A. Hall in Des Plaines IL
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 11:20 AM
When I was elected to the Massachusetts Senate, on a pledge to be a full time senator, the salary was $12,000 per year. I could live on that because it was 1973, I was single, and as an old mud Marine, living in a $90 a month, three room basement apartment—including my district office—didn’t bother me. But most of the senators were part-time and successful lawyers, insurance agents or wealthy. Being a senator enhanced their main income, with all the conflicts that created. When I retired undefeated from the senate ten years later, I was still single, still poor and I pulled the $14k I had in the retirement fund to use as a down payment on a house, thus losing my vesting rights to a retirement that would now be paying me a whopping $7,000 a year. It is little wonder that we had senators go to jail when offered $50k bribes. I will link to this from my Old Jarhead blog. (www.tartanmarine.blogspot.com)
Robert A. Hall Massachusetts Senate, 1973-83 Author: The Coming Collapse of the American Republic All royalties go to help wounded veterans For a free PDF of my 80-page book, write tartanmarine(at)gmail.com
The American in Columbus, Ohio
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 7:29 PM
You, in a word, are THE Man! Two words, I guess. I would suppose the emphasis on the proper syllable would be Man. Thank you for your service.
PS: It sounds funnier in person and up close!
Miss Kitty in Missouri
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 2:14 PM
I think higher salaries, term limits, and no pensions or health benefits (in retirement from public service) makes a lot of sense. They can go back to work after being a part-time public servant.
tapdaddy in Indiana
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 4:24 PM
More intelligence expressed in one article than I have heard in the last ten years. How many times have we heard the expression, you get what you pay for?
Gerald Tierney in New York,NY 10021
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 4:57 PM
Either $1,000,000 or possibly $0 dollars. They all get just 6 years, mayors,governors, president. I mean all elected officials. Can never hold the same job for 2 terms, but can move to another job, above or below. Elections to be held every 2 years. Senate should be elected by whole country. Every elected official on ballot every 2 years for recall. While holding office no one can run for another position so will have to wait 2 years to run again. Needs lots of discussion. Jerry
tapdaddy in Indiana
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 5:11 PM
Everybody's upset at the idea because you have all fallen into the trap that is "class envy." I don't make $1 million, so I'm not going authorize anybody to make $1 million. I'm going to stay a part of the population that is a part of the problem, I'm going to wallow in my own self pity and make sure everybody makes, about the same money as I do, but no more. That way when everything goes awry, it won't be my fault.
Bo in FromTexas
Tuesday, October 2, 2012 at 6:35 PM
(1)Term limits, 2 (2) To be qualified to run you have to have a net worth of $1,000,000, not including your house. (3) You get no salary or benefits, you serve at the pleasure of the citizens. (4) You get caught taking money from anybody or entity that benefits from your vote, you are charged with accepting a bribe and vigorously prosecuted. Minimum sentence- 5 years in a high security federal pen. (5) Total and totally transparent representation of the majority of your constituency.