5 ms·

What if we legally required politicians to work regular jobs 2 months a year?

11 points by ekoeko 4mo ago

I was just wondering if some variation of this idea has been tried before?

thedevindevops 4mo ago
You'll need to be strict with your definition of 'regular', as the offers from companies you really don't want them working for will flood in.
- ekoeko 4mo ago
  sure, i'm imagining a predefined list of like 20 jobs that they get to choose from. like truck driver, cashier, food delivery or construction worker.
  - b3ing 4mo ago
    They’d probably pay someone to do the work for them, like drive the truck while they sit in the cab. It’s a nice wish, but we don’t have that kind of power and they won’t put themselves in a situation like that by making a bill then voting on it. The fatal flaw of the constitution is it has no ethics or morals baked in, it should have things in there like employee handbooks do with a specification that amendments cannot change. Again wishful thinking.
    - HenryBemis 4mo ago
      I see the segregation of duties falling apart. "My company" would hire that politician, set him on a nice office, air condition, unfiltered internet, an assistant, 4 SBUX coffees and pizza every day. And once the 2 months are out, let the favors begin!
yawpitch 4mo ago
How about they have to live off the lowest provided level of food assistance, with the lowest level of provided health insurance, and they don’t get paid until after they’ve left office and their pay is determined by a public plebiscite?
- skyberrys 4mo ago
  Now this would be something. But who would take a job so disruptive to their daily life. Like you have to go move out of your house, what about your family, do your kids have to switch school and lose healthcare, plus it's wasting resources on someone who doesn't really need it other than to experience it.
  - yawpitch 4mo ago
    The kind of person who would take the job might actually be well-suited to it. Our current methodology is basically a form of natural selection towards who can promise the most while delivering the least, at the same time they extract maximum reward in exchange for some minimum appearance of competence.
    - isbvhodnvemrwvn 4mo ago
      The only people who is going to take it are people who are wealthy and don't give a flying fuck about earning money from it directly.
      - yawpitch 4mo ago
        They’d also have to not give a flying fuck about a healthy diet or medical issues, but even if we assume you’re correct, is that somehow worse than the only people who take the job being wealthy and obviously very intent on earning money from it directly?
giaour 4mo ago
Most state legislatures work under a similar model -- being a legislator is full time work for a couple months of the year, and the rest of the time, delegates/senators are expected to have other jobs. (This is "enforced" by legislator pay being something like ~$10K/year.) It's not a perfect system. There are very few jobs that just let you take off a couple of months a year, so legislators tend to have specific careers. Constituent services are required year-round, so legislative staff are full-time, year-round employees. And legislating has to happen quickly, so it's harder for citizens to interact and follow along with the process when they want to advocate for a bill.
the__alchemist 4mo ago
Remember the jet that went down over Iran a while back? People reading the articles were questioning why a Col was the isolated person. This is an example of this article's principle in action: If the bobs fly, they will have tacit knowledge about what's going on.
skyberrys 4mo ago
A few of the local politicians are also realtors. I couldn't imagine your run of the mill SWE job letting your employee take a 10 month break every year to be a politician on the side. Or are you imagining a corp that operates solely to give the politicians real work? Like you are a congress man part of the job is building walls for 2 months.
sloaken 4mo ago
In the US, I think it would be great to have them do a service type job, and to keep a camera on them. Keep their government pay, but this will document what a real person they are, or are not. Personally when I vote use the 'what job did you do' as a major criteria. Bottom to top: Politician (never a real job), Lawyer / lobbyist (practiced liar), Government employee or student or never worked (never facing market economy impacts), college professor, ex con - then a big gap - Used car salesman (hard working but a bad reputation), other sales Top for someone I vote for is Farmer, then any hourly worker that does a job I would not want to do, or physically cannot.
elevation 4mo ago
Even better: what if we made achieving elected office a felony offense punishable by life in prison with no parole? This would remove legislator’s motivation to use their power to accumulate personal wealth, as they could enjoy none of it. It’s found that their family benefited disproportionately, the family has to serve jail time as well. My guess is that a few true believers would be willing to serve prison time in order to achieve a moral good. But the stakes would dissuade grifters.
paganartifact 4mo ago
What if a legislator got a job at, say, Uber for $9 million a year and suddenly all their politics begin to magically align with their employer? It seems like you want the opposite right - as little meddling with private/govt as possible?
Blackstrat 4mo ago
Term limits. Congress was never intended as a profession. I wish the Constitution had included term limits from the beginning. Alas, everyone wants to get rid of someone else's senator/representative but are never willing to vote against their own.

11 points by ekoeko 4mo ago

I was just wondering if some variation of this idea has been tried before?

You'll need to be strict with your definition of 'regular', as the offers from companies you really don't want them working for will flood in.

ekoeko 4mo ago
sure, i'm imagining a predefined list of like 20 jobs that they get to choose from. like truck driver, cashier, food delivery or construction worker.
- b3ing 4mo ago
  They’d probably pay someone to do the work for them, like drive the truck while they sit in the cab. It’s a nice wish, but we don’t have that kind of power and they won’t put themselves in a situation like that by making a bill then voting on it. The fatal flaw of the constitution is it has no ethics or morals baked in, it should have things in there like employee handbooks do with a specification that amendments cannot change. Again wishful thinking.
  - HenryBemis 4mo ago
    I see the segregation of duties falling apart. "My company" would hire that politician, set him on a nice office, air condition, unfiltered internet, an assistant, 4 SBUX coffees and pizza every day. And once the 2 months are out, let the favors begin!

yawpitch 4mo ago

How about they have to live off the lowest provided level of food assistance, with the lowest level of provided health insurance, and they don’t get paid until after they’ve left office and their pay is determined by a public plebiscite?

skyberrys 4mo ago
Now this would be something. But who would take a job so disruptive to their daily life. Like you have to go move out of your house, what about your family, do your kids have to switch school and lose healthcare, plus it's wasting resources on someone who doesn't really need it other than to experience it.
- yawpitch 4mo ago
  The kind of person who would take the job might actually be well-suited to it. Our current methodology is basically a form of natural selection towards who can promise the most while delivering the least, at the same time they extract maximum reward in exchange for some minimum appearance of competence.
  - isbvhodnvemrwvn 4mo ago
    The only people who is going to take it are people who are wealthy and don't give a flying fuck about earning money from it directly.
    - yawpitch 4mo ago
      They’d also have to not give a flying fuck about a healthy diet or medical issues, but even if we assume you’re correct, is that somehow worse than the only people who take the job being wealthy and obviously very intent on earning money from it directly?

giaour 4mo ago

Most state legislatures work under a similar model -- being a legislator is full time work for a couple months of the year, and the rest of the time, delegates/senators are expected to have other jobs. (This is "enforced" by legislator pay being something like ~$10K/year.) It's not a perfect system. There are very few jobs that just let you take off a couple of months a year, so legislators tend to have specific careers. Constituent services are required year-round, so legislative staff are full-time, year-round employees. And legislating has to happen quickly, so it's harder for citizens to interact and follow along with the process when they want to advocate for a bill.

the__alchemist 4mo ago

Remember the jet that went down over Iran a while back? People reading the articles were questioning why a Col was the isolated person. This is an example of this article's principle in action: If the bobs fly, they will have tacit knowledge about what's going on.

skyberrys 4mo ago

A few of the local politicians are also realtors. I couldn't imagine your run of the mill SWE job letting your employee take a 10 month break every year to be a politician on the side. Or are you imagining a corp that operates solely to give the politicians real work? Like you are a congress man part of the job is building walls for 2 months.

sloaken 4mo ago

In the US, I think it would be great to have them do a service type job, and to keep a camera on them. Keep their government pay, but this will document what a real person they are, or are not. Personally when I vote use the 'what job did you do' as a major criteria. Bottom to top: Politician (never a real job), Lawyer / lobbyist (practiced liar), Government employee or student or never worked (never facing market economy impacts), college professor, ex con - then a big gap - Used car salesman (hard working but a bad reputation), other sales Top for someone I vote for is Farmer, then any hourly worker that does a job I would not want to do, or physically cannot.

elevation 4mo ago

Even better: what if we made achieving elected office a felony offense punishable by life in prison with no parole? This would remove legislator’s motivation to use their power to accumulate personal wealth, as they could enjoy none of it. It’s found that their family benefited disproportionately, the family has to serve jail time as well. My guess is that a few true believers would be willing to serve prison time in order to achieve a moral good. But the stakes would dissuade grifters.

paganartifact 4mo ago

What if a legislator got a job at, say, Uber for $9 million a year and suddenly all their politics begin to magically align with their employer? It seems like you want the opposite right - as little meddling with private/govt as possible?

Blackstrat 4mo ago

Term limits. Congress was never intended as a profession. I wish the Constitution had included term limits from the beginning. Alas, everyone wants to get rid of someone else's senator/representative but are never willing to vote against their own.