On Fri, Jul 23, 1999 at 02:57:26AM -0400, Sean H. Breheny wrote:
> Hi Dennis,
>
> I do disagree about the pay,however. I don't think anyone would ever become
> a politician because of the salary. I think power and graft are the main
> driving factors behind those who are just out to help themselves (the
> majority of them).

Of course. Power is the principal motivation to which the
offered compensation speaks. The pay sucks, so why would
anyone subject themselves to the process just for the pay?
The question I have is, if (a) people could seek elective
or appointive office without running the significant risk
of ruining their lives, and (b) the rewards included competitive
pay and benefits, then would you see a change in the motiviations
and ethics of the people seeking those offices? Personally, I
think so, but I don't expect we'll ever get to run that
experiment.

> I think a big part of the answer is term limits,and a return to people who
> are NOT politicians for their whole lives. (Of course, this doesn't solve
> everything, it just makes it harder for companies and SIG's to "buy"
> someone for themselves and have him as their own rep for years and years).

It doesn't solve everything, but worse it adds further
complication to the compensation system, and  it eliminates
the possibility of experienced, senior legislators. I
think that term limits work well for CEO type positions,
such as President, Governor and so on. But not so much for
legislative and appointive positions.

--Bob

--
============================================================
Bob Drzyzgula                             It's not a problem
bob@drzyzgula.org                until something bad happens
============================================================