In response to:

Budget Farce Suggests Term Limits Needed

gyrene74 Wrote: Dec 11, 2012 7:12 AM
I have said for years that Congress, and any other elected body, or official, should be bound by strict term limits. With that in place, all those good folks out there who would love to contribute to this country, and who have a mass of great ideas to contribute with, would get up, and run for office. They know only too well, that the "good ole boy" syndrome controls Washington, and that they would have to vote like the potentates do, otherwise they would have nothing to do but sit on their duffs. And, it should be just like when this country started. Legislators would meet for three months, conduct the countrys business, and go home. No pay while in session either. No benefits, nor, as they are so prone to say, "entitlements" either.
Auspex Wrote: Dec 11, 2012 3:43 PM
Well, they have to eat and have shelter while they work. I have no problem paying a congressman a reasonable salary, with the same benefits as the AVERAGE WORKING American. If they want their pay or benefits to go up, they do what the AVERAGE WORKING American does, they work harder and make the company more efficient or more profitable or both. Then that rising tide lifts all boats...

Put simply, the fiscal cliff debate is an illustration of staggering political cowardice. Politicians of both parties are unwilling to ask voters to pay for all of the big government promises that they made on the campaign trail. They would rather risk the country's long term future than risk losing the next election.  As a former elected legislator, I can assure them that their offices are not worth the price they are asking us, the voters, to pay.

Big government is hugely expensive. Beyond the costs in money, the regulations and political intrusions of an all-controlling nanny-state government create economic disincentives....