The 28th amendment

The 28th amendment

PostBy: gerard On: Thu Apr 01, 2010 10:10 pm

I saw this on the net the other day and thought I'd share it since I agree with it wholeheartedly and am curious as to who can make a plausible argument against it?

For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they didn't pay into Social Security, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform that is being considered...in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop. This is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.

Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution

"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."
gerard
 
Stove/Furnace Make: yukon dual fuel
Stove/Furnace Model: husky

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: brckwlt On: Thu Apr 01, 2010 10:50 pm

this would be a nice common sense law, i hope it happens some day
brckwlt
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Axeman-Anderson
Stove/Furnace Model: Rebuilt 1953 AA-130

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: Black_And_Blue On: Thu Apr 01, 2010 11:25 pm

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

- John adams
Black_And_Blue
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Alaska 140


Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: brckwlt On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 12:12 am

i miss that guy ...

wish we had someone like him in charge again

instead we have douches like obama a lousy junior senator who voted present over 100 times while he was an apprentice senator butchering the constitution and claiming its flawed. only a POS who thinks they are entitled to everything would ever think like obama does
brckwlt
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Axeman-Anderson
Stove/Furnace Model: Rebuilt 1953 AA-130

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: freetown fred On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:38 am

Good find gerard--it's like people like John Adams knew all this was going to come about at some point :( Greed & self centerdness seems to have become an ammendment--some days after giving the state of our country some serious thought as a simple man,I feel much more tired & older then I really am--& I ain't no spring chicken--it seems like I used to understand things alot better :confused: used to be being rightous was more important then being right or that they were one in the same--I know come Nov. Momma & I are going to do our part in trying to start with a clean slate & hope & pray that our choices are good ones--not that I think that other then a civil uprising they could get much worse.I remember saving for a new car or making sure we had the kids college money put up,or being able to go out to dinner & a movie once a month :) since hearing that Momma no longer will have a job come Sept--I'm thinking about silly things like monthly bills,yearly taxes & hoping that neither one of us gets sick---oh well,theres got to be a light at the end of this tunnel somewhere :)
freetown fred
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: HITZER 50-93
Coal Size/Type: BLASCHAK Nut/Stove mix

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: plumb-r On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:18 am

Sorry to hear about the wife's job Fred. I think it's like you said we all need to make a effort in November and maybe we can tip the scale enough to get some balance in this country. :(
plumb-r
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: 608 Energy Master I Stoker

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: Hambden Bob On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 6:38 am

Fred,there is a light at the end of the tunnel,my Brother,and it's a train! :shock: ...Just kidding! I too,have been fortunate to be with a good woman. This September looks the same for us. We've been fortunate to have such notice! Thank God we're the age we are. Can-Kickings and Burps in Life's Daily Moments don't rattle us like they once did. We're not green kids. We adapt,improvise and overcome. We take care of our own. When we fail,we get back up,buy a bottle of Nu-Skin,Apply,Let Dry And Fly! Our Founding Father's(and the Mother's,Father's and Wives that made them what they were) too often have been made to look SuperHuman and without flaw. They weren't,they were just men. But one thing they all had was the ability to have guts,free-will and determination. They came up with some good stuff. It's up to us to keep that stuff intact. I'd love to see our Officials serve to what's been proposed here. :up:
Hambden Bob
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Harman 1998 Magnum Stoker
Coal Size/Type: Rice-A-Roni !

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: lowfog01 On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:18 am

Please stop spreading misinformation about the Congressional Retirement system. Check out http://www.senate.gov/reference/resourc ... L30631.pdf

Representatives do not get a retirement of any kind after one term. Senators get next to nothing if they retire after one term. As the reference will tell you a one term (2 years) Congressman will only get a return of the money he personally puts in to the 401K; that's because a government worker - any government worker - doesn't get vested in the system until 5 years. He can not retire, he merely resigns or quits taking the money he personally put into the retirement system with him. One term Senators are different because they have 6 year terms but they do not retire with full pensions. A one term senator is not going to get a big retirement check; he will get both the money he contributed and that which the government contributed to his 401K for his eventual retirement. Unless he is 65 upon leaving Federal employment that money must be rolled over into a new 401K plan for their future retirement; failure to do so will result in taxes and a fine. The Government contribution to the 401K is 5% of the base salary (I think) but the government will match up to your contribution not to exceed 10%. You can personally add more but it won't be matched beyond 10%. The current federal retirement system does not provide a huge government retirement check monthly and it's certainly not enough to solely exist on. If you are not contributing to the 401K plan, too, you are going to be a hurting puppy at retirement age. If you get a decent retirement check from the Government after retirement as a member of Congress it's because you have been there for many years, like Robert Byrd, and have been contributing the max to your 401K each month. If you were elected before 1984 you may be under the older plan which was far more generous. Anyone elected after 1984 has been paying SS and will be able to collect that.

The current government does not provide as generous retirement plan as it used to and it's certainly unfair to continue to imply that it does. The current retirement plan is on par with any Fortune 500 company's retirement plan.

This is a subject near and dear to me as my husband is a government worker and we fall under the same plan as the Congress does. We contribute to the plan via the 401K up to the maximum government matching of 10% of salary per year. We have been doing so for 26 years even though it was tough at times. That 401K is his retirement pay as it is with the rest of the government workers.

That being said, I agree that Congress needs to be held accountable under each and every law they pass; to have it any other way is unacceptable. Unfortunately, I don't see this Amendment happening under the current Congress and the other routes to an Amendment to the Constitution would have an uphill climb to getting passed. It should be done anyway but it will be an uphill climb. Lisa
lowfog01
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Mark II & Mark I

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: freetown fred On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 9:50 am

Soooo,a limit on terms served would be nice,I'm surprised at you,but you mention nothing here on the health care made available to them compared to us issue & only touched on the accountability issue law wise--lets look at Kennedy & Mary-Jo,Spitzer & his whores,the sexual scandals constantly uncovered with politicians & aids & who knows who else,the head of the RNP,who they will keep on because of the upcoming elections & they don't want to rock the boat--my thoughts--sh_t can the bunch of them :mad: I don't care what kind of rehab the sick bastards go into--if it were you & me nobody would care,especially the judge,my saying"I torry,I'll do better :( O.K. so gerard got some??? mis-info on the retirement issues,big deal--I only could wish that I had all the time off that these politicians get & get paid for.What do they need so much rest for--I guess guilt makes you tired--guilt over the nothing they seem to primarily do as far as getting us out of this quagmire that has been created by them over the years :!: The more I read & hear,the more they come off as the suk-asses they are--as usual they cover each others butts & we pay them outlandish amounts of money for them to do it
lowfog01 wrote:Please stop spreading misinformation about the Congressional Retirement system. Check out http://www.senate.gov/reference/resourc ... L30631.pdf

Representatives do not get a retirement of any kind after one term. Senators get next to nothing if they retire after one term. As the reference will tell you a one term (2 years) Congressman will only get a return of the money he personally puts in to the 401K; that's because a government worker - any government worker - doesn't get vested in the system until 5 years. He can not retire, he merely resigns or quits taking the money he personally put into the retirement system with him. One term Senators are different because they have 6 year terms but they do not retire with full pensions. A one term senator is not going to get a big retirement check; he will get both the money he contributed and that which the government contributed to his 401K for his eventual retirement. Unless he is 65 upon leaving Federal employment that money must be rolled over into a new 401K plan for their future retirement; failure to do so will result in taxes and a fine. The Government contribution to the 401K is 5% of the base salary (I think) but the government will match up to your contribution not to exceed 10%. You can personally add more but it won't be matched beyond 10%. The current federal retirement system does not provide a huge government retirement check monthly and it's certainly not enough to solely exist on. If you are not contributing to the 401K plan, too, you are going to be a hurting puppy at retirement age. If you get a decent retirement check from the Government after retirement as a member of Congress it's because you have been there for many years, like Robert Byrd, and have been contributing the max to your 401K each month. If you were elected before 1984 you may be under the older plan which was far more generous. Anyone elected after 1984 has been paying SS and will be able to collect that.

The current government does not provide as generous retirement plan as it used to and it's certainly unfair to continue to imply that it does. The current retirement plan is on par with any Fortune 500 company's retirement plan.

This is a subject near and dear to me as my husband is a government worker and we fall under the same plan as the Congress does. We contribute to the plan via the 401K up to the maximum government matching of 10% of salary per year. We have been doing so for 26 years even though it was tough at times. That 401K is his retirement pay as it is with the rest of the government workers.

That being said, I agree that Congress needs to be held accountable under each and every law they pass; to have it any other way is unacceptable. Unfortunately, I don't see this Amendment happening under the current Congress and the other routes to an Amendment to the Constitution would have an uphill climb to getting passed. It should be done anyway but it will be an uphill climb. Lisa
freetown fred
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: HITZER 50-93
Coal Size/Type: BLASCHAK Nut/Stove mix

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: lowfog01 On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:25 am

[quote="freetown fred"]Soooo,a limit on terms served would be nice,I'm surprised at you,but you mention nothing here on the health care made available to them compared to us issue & only touched on the accountability issue law wise--lets look at Kennedy & Mary-Jo,Spitzer & his whores,the sexual scandals constantly uncovered with politicians & aids & who knows who else,the head of the RNP,who they will keep on because of the upcoming elections & they don't want to rock the boat--my thoughts--sh_t can the bunch of them :mad: I don't care what kind of rehab the sick bastards go into--if it were you & me nobody would care,especially the judge,my saying"I torry,I'll do better :( O.K. so gerard got some??? mis-info on the retirement issues,big deal--I only could wish that I had all the time off that these politicians get & get paid for.What do they need so much rest for--I guess guilt makes you tired--guilt over the nothing they seem to primarily do as far as getting us out of this quagmire that has been created by them over the years :!: The more I read & hear,the more they come off as the suk-asses they are--as usual they cover each others butts & we pay them outlandish amounts of money for them to do it

So I am confused... my point was to clear up the misunderstanding on the Congressional Retirement Plan. Simply, it's not all that great as alluded to by the first posting here. I didn't mention anything else about health care or other perks of the job because what's put forth about them is accurate to the data I've seen. My last paragraph clearly says I support the proposed admendment. Congress and government officials in general should be held to the same laws as the common people. I also said it's not going to be easy to get that amendment accomplished. Personally, I don't think term limits are the answer. I think each state should have a means within the state Constitution to remove members of Congress for just cause; a referendum if you will - like NJ has. I am working with my state AG to put such a clause in the VA Constitution. I'm sorry if I ruffled any feathers, I hope it didn't mess up your day. Lisa
lowfog01
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Mark II & Mark I

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: Hambden Bob On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:53 am

Grand Madame Lowfog....You have once again proved your fiber of being by clearing up a misconception with fact! Hat's off to you and shame on me. You have shown what the word "fair" means. All anyone can ask for is the truth. We get so little of that. Gerard,like everyone else hear,posts from the heart,I do believe. When something false or misunderstood comes up or out,we rely on each other to keep it straight. Thank you for the clearance. Fred,I've got to go to the Coal Bunker for a time-out! :bag:
Hambden Bob
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Stove: Harman 1998 Magnum Stoker
Coal Size/Type: Rice-A-Roni !

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: tvb On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 11:53 am

I think each state should have a means within the state Constitution to remove members of Congress for just cause; a referendum if you will - like NJ has.

While technically this is true (for NJ at least) because the state constitution says it is, in reality it isn't. Recently the mob that is trying to recall Menedez was told by the former Secretary of State (under Corzine):
"It has been determined that the qualifications and election of a Member of the United States Senate is a matter of exclusive jurisdiction of federal authority and that neither the United States Constitution nor federal statute provide for a recall proceeding for a federally-elected official.
Therefore, in my capacity as the Chief Election Official of the State of New Jersey, I hereby determine that neither the Notice of Intention to Recall nor the proposed Petition can be accepted for filing or review."


This was likely based upon a federal court ruling in 1967 where a Republican tried to recall Senator Frank Church over his opposition of the Vietnam War. At the time, it was reported by the New York Times:
United State District Judge Alfred C. Hagen has ruled that a United State Senator "cannot be recalled by the people of the state from which he was elected."...
The judge said a state recall of a Senator would violate the portion of the Federal Constitution, which says of Congress that "each house shall be the judge ofthe elections, returns and qualifiications of its members."
The case never made it to the Supreme Court.

Now, if the current mob can convince a judge to ignore the above ruling and allow them to proceed with their recall efforts, the state law requires the following in order to launch a recall effort: 1.3 million registered voters to sign a petition asking for the recall, and each page must have text that outlines the full cost to the taxpayers of the effort. In these budget slashing times here in NJ, the likelihood of overcoming that requirement is highly unlikely.
tvb
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska
Stove/Furnace Model: Channing III

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: freetown fred On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:23 pm

Bear with me Lisa,Ive become a tad wound up over the last week or sooo,that's why I threw surprised in there--thanks for the come back & clear up--SORRY :) But,I sure felt better after writing all that/I think Bob pretty well covered it all ;)
lowfog01 wrote:
freetown fred wrote:Soooo,a limit on terms served would be nice,I'm surprised at you,but you mention nothing here on the health care made available to them compared to us issue & only touched on the accountability issue law wise--lets look at Kennedy & Mary-Jo,Spitzer & his whores,the sexual scandals constantly uncovered with politicians & aids & who knows who else,the head of the RNP,who they will keep on because of the upcoming elections & they don't want to rock the boat--my thoughts--sh_t can the bunch of them :mad: I don't care what kind of rehab the sick bastards go into--if it were you & me nobody would care,especially the judge,my saying"I torry,I'll do better :( O.K. so gerard got some??? mis-info on the retirement issues,big deal--I only could wish that I had all the time off that these politicians get & get paid for.What do they need so much rest for--I guess guilt makes you tired--guilt over the nothing they seem to primarily do as far as getting us out of this quagmire that has been created by them over the years :!: The more I read & hear,the more they come off as the suk-asses they are--as usual they cover each others butts & we pay them outlandish amounts of money for them to do it

So I am confused... my point was to clear up the misunderstanding on the Congressional Retirement Plan. Simply, it's not all that great as alluded to by the first posting here. I didn't mention anything else about health care or other perks of the job because what's put forth about them is accurate to the data I've seen. My last paragraph clearly says I support the proposed admendment. Congress and government officials in general should be held to the same laws as the common people. I also said it's not going to be easy to get that amendment accomplished. Personally, I don't think term limits are the answer. I think each state should have a means within the state Constitution to remove members of Congress for just cause; a referendum if you will - like NJ has. I am working with my state AG to put such a clause in the VA Constitution. I'm sorry if I ruffled any feathers, I hope it didn't mess up your day. Lisa
freetown fred
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: HITZER 50-93
Coal Size/Type: BLASCHAK Nut/Stove mix

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: lowfog01 On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 2:04 pm

So it's not going to be easy to remove anyone from Federal office via a referendum; I would expect that. At least NJ has a mechanism in place to remove officials that do not meet the expectations of their constituents. I'm sure you will correct me if I'm wrong but I believe the NJ district judge has allowed the petition stage to go forward. If the behavior, is so horrible, say being found guilty of a felony or deliberately and repeatedly ignoring the clear and known wishes of your constituents, getting the 1.5 signatures shouldn't be beyond reach. In the case of my elected federal officials the senators and a majority of the representatives repeatedly voted for somethings clearly against the wishes of their constituents. They knowingly voted for a bill that has multiply questions of constitutionality; they bragged about it. If the majority of constituents are mad enough about it, then we should have a means to remove them prior to the completion of their term regardless as to how the Chamber decides to act regarding their bad behavior. Do you think the threat of an early removal would have changed how my elected officials approached the recent health care bill or any other failure to actually represent the wishes of their constituents? I do, I think that if VA had such a clause in their State Constitution, we would have had two more votes against this bill then we had.

Yeah, removing a Federal election official from office via a referendum is not going to be easy; it's designed not to be but the people of the states should be able to do it. Lisa
lowfog01
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Mark II & Mark I

Re: The 28th amendment

PostBy: lowfog01 On: Fri Apr 02, 2010 2:19 pm

[quote="freetown fred"]Bear with me Lisa,Ive become a tad wound up over the last week or sooo,that's why I threw surprised in there--thanks for the come back & clear up--SORRY :)

Not to worry, when ever we use this method of communication to have a discussion we have to take into consideration what outside forces are impacting our personal experiences at this moment in time and the past. It sounds like from your postings your have a lot on your plate and I certainly never intended to add any more stress.

I was thinking of your farm today as I was preparing my little 10 X 15 garden. Man, farming takes a lot of work and it must appear as if no one appreciates it at times. Certainly, from what I've read, you don't do it for the huge financial return. That's why I've always had a garden, I don't want the kids to think tomatoes come from the store. :D I want them to see the whole picture and not to come to expect things just appear - poof. This country is built on the back of your labor and to see it any other way is foolish. We city folks would be very hungry if you guys closed up shop.

Anyway, sorry if I did cause you anymore stress. Take care, Lisa
lowfog01
 
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Mark II & Mark I