.
Feedback

Would You Want Your Elected Official to Take This Pledge?

If our elected officials treated themselves more like an average American, they would have a better understanding of what is needed, and maybe even work with each other.

Over the weekend I started a new Facebook group that addresses some of the "perks" that our elected officials give themselves.

My thought is that if our elected officials treated themselves more like an average American, they would have a better understanding of what is needed, and maybe even work with each other.

Following is a description of what this group AMERICANS TO END ELECTED OFFICIALS' PERKS is about:

AMERICANS TO END ELECTED OFFICIALS' PERKS believe:

1) Elected representatives at every level of government must be representative of all Americans and remain equal to all Americans and must not be considered to be above average Americans in rank or privilege

2) Elected representatives at every level of government must not enjoy special benefits or privileges from their public service that is a betterment of what average Americans benefit from.

3) Most specifically all elected representatives at every level of government must not enjoy better health care coverage than average Americans, nor retirement benefits than average Americans.

To achieve the objective that no elected official at any level of government enjoys better health care coverage or retirement benefits than average Americans have access to, AMERICANS TO END ELECTED OFFICIALS' PERKS request that all candidates for elective office, including incumbents running to remain in their seat, pledge the following:

The pledge

Elected officials at the federal level

1) All Candidates for elective office at the federal level pledge that upon being elected to office, they will immediately and persistently propose and support legislation that:

A) All members of Congress, and elected officials in the Executive and Judicial Branches of the federal government will no longer have access to any health coverage other than Medicare.

B) Health care coverage under Medicare shall include family members as are normally defined under private health care plans, and the all medical services under their Medicare coverage will be at the same costs, co-pays and deductibles as paid by all seniors under Medicare coverage.

C) Health care coverage under Medicare shall commence upon the elected official taking office, and will end at the earliest of their being voted out of office, leaving office, or retirement. Upon the termination of coverage, elected officials may continue their Medicare coverage under the normal rules and terms of COBRA, at their own cost.

D) All elected officials noted above shall pay into Social Security at the same rates as those in the private sector. They shall enjoy no other retirement coverage, other than any that they pay for on their own, such as 401K plans that are available to those in the private sector.

Elected officials at the state and local level

2)All candidates for elective office at the state level pledge that upon being elected to office, they will immediately and persistently propose and support legislation that:

A) All members of legislative branch, and elected officials in the executive and judicial branches of the federal government will no longer have access to any health coverage other than the Medicaid plan that their state offers to those who qualify.

B) Health care coverage under Medicaid shall include family members as are normally defined under private health care plans, and the all medical services under their Medicaid coverage will be at the same costs, co-pays and deductibles as paid by all other participants under their state’s Medicaid coverage.

C) Health care coverage under Medicare shall commence upon the elected official taking office, and will end at the earliest of their being voted out of office, leaving office, or retirement. Upon the termination of coverage, elected officials may continue their Medicaid coverage under the normal rules and terms of COBRA, at their own cost.

D) All elected officials noted above shall pay into Social Security at the same rates as those in the private sector. They shall enjoy no other retirement coverage, other than any that they pay for on their own, such as 401K plans that are available to those in the private sector.

E) The elected state officials shall pass legislation that provides that elected officials in all other levels of government within their state, i.e. county, city, school board, municipalities, etc., shall have the same or lesser health and retirement provisions as those stated above.

Voter participation

Voters who support the ideal that elected officials should not enjoy benefits or privileges greater than those available to average Americans in the private sector are encouraged to contact their elected officials and all candidates for elected office and demand that they publicly support the pledge as stated above, and upon election will immediately and persistently propose and support the legislation as outlined.

Link to the group:  http://www.facebook.com/groups/374818409259537/

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Shorewood Patch? Find your Local Patch »

CowDung October 15, 2012 at 08:43 pm
It seems a bit stupid to insist that members of Congress go on Medicare/Medicaid to get a better idea of what living like the 'average American' is like. Is the 'average American' on Medicare/Medicaid?
Our elected officials get the same health coverage as other government employees--what's wrong with that? Congresspeople do pay into Social Security, why shouldn't they be eligible to receive SS benefits like everyone else that pays into the system?
CowDung October 15, 2012 at 08:46 pm
It seems to me that the 'perks' you are complaining about are really no different than the 'perks' offered to other government employees...
Maybe you can turn this article into one of those spam e-mails that Snopes will eventually find and debunk...
splinter October 16, 2012 at 12:34 am
Yes, (1) tax reform (where the result code fits on a single page in 12 pt); (2) entitlement reform (avg lifespans have increased so we just need to adjust time); (3) health care reform (what we got is health insurance reform - we need reforms directly focused on costs including malpractice reform, consumer incentives, ban co-shifting (like Maryland) and interstate competition, etc.); (4) overall gov't reform (Congress, Civil Service, etc.); and (5) high rate of return investments in infrastructure (grid, bridges, etc.).
Is that too much to ask?
wiscoleeds October 16, 2012 at 02:47 am
How about all elected officials must send their children to the local public school district (pay attention Mayor Barrett). And all public employees must not have better benefit plans than the average tax payer in their county.
YAMATO October 16, 2012 at 11:28 am
Right On! And make all those getting free crap work, somehow, to earn it. Like using all those shovels Obama had bought to give out.
AWD October 16, 2012 at 12:17 pm
I never liked the 'walk a mile in someone else's shoes' mindset; I hear that line a lot from Progressives. I don't have time nor do I care about the circumstances in other people’s lives, why would I want to experience their personal burdens?
Scott Berg October 16, 2012 at 02:39 pm
How about "If government was run like private industry, we'd be *SO* much better off and taxes would go WAAAAY down!"
Let's see, a mayor is effectively the CEO. Milwaukee's proposed 2013 budget is about $1.5 billion if you include utilities, pensions, etc. Mayor Barret is salaried at about $147,000. What would the CEO of a private company of that size be making? Make sure you add in stock options and bonus, including what he'd get even if the place was tanking. My point is that senior government officials make a lot less than their private industry counterparts. If someone is talented enough to handle all that responsibility, why would they pass it by for a fraction of the salary?
Dave Koven October 16, 2012 at 02:43 pm
AWD..."Let them eat cake". The line to the guillotine forms here, right behind you.
Dave Koven October 16, 2012 at 02:52 pm
Cow Dung...Try, as a minor govt. filing clerk, walking into the Senate barbershop and asking for a free trim like the other government workers get in the Senate. Failing that, try for a free meal in the Senate cafeteria. I'm sure they won't mind if you squeeze in next to them on the Lear jet they travel around the country in. Finally, try working at your govt. job for only one term (two years in the House) and getting a lifetime pension of your full year's salary and very comprehensive health insurance, also for life. When the laughter dies down, let me know how you did.
J. B. Schmidt October 16, 2012 at 03:15 pm
This is pointless. The government officials will just change the rules to their own benefits on SS and Medicare. Therefore, they will still receive above average benefits while still maintaining the integrity of the pledge.
How about we stop making government a supplier of healthcare and retirements?
CowDung October 16, 2012 at 03:23 pm
Dave:
Congresspeople do not get free meals in the cafeteria--they pay the full price for their meals. The senate cafeteria is not government run and tries to turn a profit. As far as retirement benefits: "Members of Congress receive retirement and health benefits under the same plans available to other federal employees. They become vested after five years of full participation. As it is for all other federal employees, congressional retirement is funded through taxes and the participants' contributions. Members of Congress under FERS contribute 1.3 percent of their salary into the FERS retirement plan and pay 6.2 percent of their salary in Social Security taxes. Members of Congress are not eligible for a pension until they reach the age of 50, but only if they've completed 20 years of service. Members are eligible at any age after completing 25 years of service or after they reach the age of 62. Please also note that Members of Congress have to serve at least 5 years to even receive a pension. The amount of a congressperson's pension depends on the years of service and the average of the highest 3 years of his or her salary. By law, the starting amount of a Member's retirement annuity may not exceed 80% of his or her final salary." So a one term congressman doesn't get to collect full salary and comprehensive life insurance for life as you claim. http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/uscongress/a/congresspay.htm
CowDung October 16, 2012 at 03:28 pm
They also don't get to fly around for free on Learjets. If they need to fly, they usually fly on military jets (if space is available). The speaker of the house does get to fly on a private jet--that was a change after 9/11 to increase security as the speaker is after the VP in presidential succession.
Their 'perks' end up being free haircuts. I'm inclined to let them keep that one. Although I do recall some flap over the cost of Hillary's haircuts as compared to Kerry's. Not sure why it would have been news if all the haircuts were free...
Dave Koven October 16, 2012 at 03:30 pm
Cow Dung...I stand corrected. Thank you.
Bren October 16, 2012 at 04:02 pm
Or, why don't we use government for services it can be transformative in providing, such as managing healthcare and retirement funds?
Greg October 16, 2012 at 04:11 pm
A CEO with the City of Milwaukee profit margin would be out the door faster than a prune through a goose.
David Tatarowicz October 16, 2012 at 04:15 pm
@CD Although on the surface it may seem like they don't get special health care cover there are some choice exceptions to that:
" All plans cover hospital, surgical and physician services, and mental health services, prescription drugs and “catastrophic” coverage against very large medical expenses. There are no waiting periods for coverage when new employees are hired, and there are no exclusions for preexisting conditions" Now with ObamaCare the pre-existing conditions applies for everyone, but when Romney and Ryan abolish ObamaCare. , that will be special, also most employees have to wait before they are qualified to get any coverage, usually 30 to 90 days, also most plans do not coverage mental health, and very little if anything on prescriptions. In addition Congress gets: (continued next comment) "
David Tatarowicz October 16, 2012 at 04:18 pm
Continued Congress Health Care
"In addition, members of Congress also qualify for some medical benefits that ordinary federal workers do not. They (but not their families) are eligible to receive limited medical services from the Office of the Attending Physician of the U.S. Capitol, after payment of an annual fee ($491 in 2007). But services don’t include surgery, dental care or eyeglasses, and any prescriptions must be filled at the member’s expense. House and Senate members (but not their families) also are eligible to receive care at military hospitals. For outpatient care, there is no charge at the Washington, D.C., area hospitals (Walter Reed Army Medical Center and National Naval Medical Center). Inpatient care is billed at rates set by the Department of Defense." Source: FactCheck.Org
David Tatarowicz October 16, 2012 at 04:21 pm
@CD I do agree they should receive SS coverage --- my mistake if you misunderstood that --- but I do not think they should also have a separate defined benefit retirement plan that we also pay for --- almost all of those have been eliminated by private business, and they are the ones that are first to go when a company goes bankrupt to get out of its legacy costs.
CowDung October 16, 2012 at 04:26 pm
My point was that they get the same benefits as other government employees. They aren't getting 'special perks' for being members of Congress.
Johnny Blade October 16, 2012 at 04:35 pm
Ummm because it is NOT the responsiblity of our constitutional government to do any of those things
CowDung October 16, 2012 at 04:39 pm
See my link below for an explanation of their retirement benefit. Again, similar to what other government employees get.
J. B. Schmidt October 16, 2012 at 04:39 pm
@Bren
Your assumption that government can be transformative without the corruption we are currently seeing is the fallacy at the core of the liberal thought. When legislators legislate what is bought and sold, it is the legislators that are for sale.
susan scalero March 12, 2013 at 08:36 pm
Excuse me gentlemen; but our elected officials do very well they work about 120 day's a year in Washington, at the salary of about $174,000 per year depending how long they have been around, that is $13,000 A DAY!!!!!! & they pay a host of handler's to do all the work that they put their name & face to. Is being healthy in this country only for the rich / educated? If I did'nt do my job no one would be going out eat!!
c March 12, 2013 at 09:30 pm
Wow I've seen some ignorant rants posted by people who don't know what the F they are talking about, by Scott, yours takes the proverbial cake.
c March 12, 2013 at 09:32 pm
Bren actually thinks government is effective and efficient. Been to the DMV lately? How about the milwaukee county courthouse, which is staffed by a bunch of high school AA flunkies?
I see you don't get out much, or partake in the real world at all, go back to your bubble of ignorance.
c March 12, 2013 at 09:33 pm
Susan,
sounds like a union teacher. 6 figure compensation for about 7 months of work. Then moan and whine about how special, yet unappreciated, they are.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Steve ® June 10, 2013 at 03:55 pm
So? What was used and what harm does it cause? Although ironic this may provide more good thanRead More harm. What is written on the application sign?
Cricket June 11, 2013 at 01:31 pm
The bluff and other areas need to be planted with things that will snuff out the weeds. They areRead More harmful to animals and possibly birds, of which there are many at atwater. Obviously not many animals but there are squirrels and rabbits and other native mammals. Not to mention the kids at the play area. Most adult humans can handle an occasional wiff of a pesticide but not children or animals. I have held several pesticide licenses in my day so I have had much course work on this. I am surprised the village has done this but I know restoration is about to begin - again - on the bluff and perhaps they are trying to rid the bluff of all the weeds. It is a shame that the 15+ kids they hire every year can't be up there weeding instead. I don't know what else they could be doing as the village has reduced the amount of annual flower beds that need to be maintained.
PaulRevere June 10, 2013 at 12:40 pm
The liberal minded Patch had it going their way for some time. Then, the contrary opinions became aRead More "voice to be heard". So, like all liberal media, just shut down the "free speech". Speech that educates the people is a NO-NO in the world of "public education". Have no fear, other avenues to educate the public is on the way.
CowDung June 10, 2013 at 12:53 pm
Given the amount of liberal propaganda that is posted around here, one does have to wonder if PatchRead More intended to make it more difficult to reply to comments (and set the record straight)...
Mike Stevens June 14, 2013 at 07:20 am
Wow, PaulRevere, AKA the hardest working person in America, who only takes 1 day per month off andRead More who believes all evil is related to public schooling, has time to not only comment on St. Louis area Patch sites, but on Milwaukee area sites as well? Paul, perhaps you should go back to school to check your grammar--other avenues to educate the public ARE on the way, not IS on the way. Oh, you must be too busy working 20 hours a day (but finding tons of time to comment on several Patch sites) to check grammar
Walker celebrates after defeating the liberal unionista blue fisters
Steve ® June 6, 2013 at 12:10 pm
Sure Keith. I am sure every time you use the term Tea Bagger it is not vulgar. The symbol for yourRead More failed recall movement was a Blue Fist. No one wants to be ruled by a fist and I don't see how that is vulgar when your own logo was a blue fist. Try again.
Keith Schmitz June 6, 2013 at 01:03 pm
Are you assuming we're stupid Steve? Don't. BTW -- you called yourselves Tea Baggers. We're onlyRead More using the term you selected. What a great PR roll-up for this group of Neanderthals. You're problem with that any fister reference is usually the speaker feels it is where his head should be.
Greg June 6, 2013 at 01:10 pm
OHHHHHHHHHHHHH, that is why their fists are blue, OUCH!
Bob McBride June 6, 2013 at 09:04 am
I think if you look at most of the sites still running the older version, you'll see the sameRead More messages of impending doom we got just before the change...
Bob McBride June 6, 2013 at 09:15 am
I got the name wrong, it was "Bellmore", not Belmont. It was part of rollout of what atRead More the time was being referred to as "Patch 2.0" in the press. It was rolled out to five towns in the Long Island, NY area in September of last year. I'm going to attempt to post a link to an article:: http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/189296/aols-redesigned-patch-websites-make-a-play-for-neighborhood-groups/
CowDung June 6, 2013 at 09:30 am
"I think if you look at most of the sites still running the older version, you'll see the sameRead More messages of impending doom we got just before the change... " | I think that's true, Bob. I poked around at a number of Patch sites around the country and the 'Welcome to the New Patch' articles were full of the same complaints we are seeing here. | This Patch redesign seems to be the 'New Coke' of websites...
Greg June 4, 2013 at 03:38 pm
Starting at ONLY $70,000.00 Time to cash in your aluminum cans.