Why Not Just Give Every Congressman $100 Million a Year?
It’s good that the new Treasury secretary has money, lots of money, hundreds of million of dollars, according to the newspapers.
If you are going to have someone look after the Government’s money, he should have lots of money of his own. That way, there is less incentive to steal. If you already have, say, $900 million, why take a ride on somebody’s corporate jet? Why let somebody foot the bill for a trip to Scotland to play golf? Only poverty-stricken congresspeople need to do that.
Surely, if somebody has hundreds of millions of dollars, why would it even cross their mind to help themselves to some of the public’s money? No, it wouldn’t occur to them. Smart move on President Bush’s part to appoint a gazillionaire Treasury secretary. Clever way to protect the country’s money.
Also, it’s a good idea for the treasury secretary to have more money then the president, just on general principal, though that idea probably never crossed the President’s mind when he chose a gazillionaire.
It’s also smart to make certain that the head dog at Treasury has more money than the vice president, particularly the vice president. You don’t want the vice president lording it over the treasury secretary in one of those “who has the biggest Washington cojones junk yard dog” standoffs.
But even though we have the treasury secretary problem solved, we’re still left with 535 poverty stricken congress people scrounging around for money, chickens scratching in the dirt for worms.
However, a very wealthy treasury secretary provides the inspiration for a final solution to the threadbare congresspeople dilemma.
What if we just gave every member of congress a $100 million allowance every year? That’s more than $12 million a month that they could spend however they wished: cars, bling, babes, golf outings, homes on the Riviera.
I know, this idea sounds shocking at first. But with that much money coming in every year, what could a lobbyist possibly offer a member of Congress in return for a vote on a key piece of legislation? Not much, that’s for sure.
If the congresscreature wanted to keep a yacht down on Potomac, he or she wouldn’t have to go through embarrassing gyrations in which a lobbyist “loans” them the boat and then sells it to a sultan who leases it back, etc., ect., ect. Instead, the congressperson can just buy the damn boat for $10 million in cash and move on to shopping for a Gulfstream.
A major benefit to taxpayers would be that with so much money, congresscreatures would have little incentive to enact specious legislation that lobbyists want. Thus, they would spend less of the public’s money on dubious programs.
In fact, if giving each congresscreature $100 million a year stopped the lobbyists in their tracks, the public would doubtlessly actually save money that would otherwise be wasted trying to please lobbyists.
A further benefit would be that receiving a guaranteed $100 million per year would attract a higher class of people to run for Congress. Who wouldn’t agree that we need a higher class of people in Congress?
Yes, money talks. Everyone else takes the bus.