Calif. lawmakers keep vehicle perks

California lawmakers enjoy a perk that seems like luxurious amenity in a state that has been slashing billions of dollars from its budget: Taxpayer-provided cars. Full Story
George

United States

#1 Dec 3, 2010
"Calif. lawmakers keep vehicle perks"

Would we have expected anything less? Come on! Let 'em eat cake!
Patriot

West Sacramento, CA

#2 Dec 3, 2010
If they were part time, they would not need vehicles. DUH
Let them walk

Woodland, CA

#3 Dec 3, 2010
They chose to work in Sac. I don't get paid to drive to Sac to work every day, why should they? They accepted the job...if they don't like the pay or bennies, after we change them, they should quit.

“Off The Cliff They Go.”

Since: Dec 09

Duarte, CA

#4 Dec 3, 2010
Agree -

We need a part time legislature.

Just their salaries alone are a joke for the trash and burdens they dump on our lives.

Can someone put this on a ballot initiative?
Lon Rocke

Paradise, CA

#5 Dec 3, 2010
I have never understood why California legislators are provided with one free pair of jockey shorts and/or panties each month. It's an outrage. Do they take them off and put them back on so often while on the job that the wear and tear justifies this expense?
LateNight

Albany, CA

#6 Dec 3, 2010
This is one of the perks they get that I've been suggesting for years needs to be eliminated, along with all their other "royal" perks.

We need to eliminate their "per diem" which is supposedly to pay for living quarters in Sacramento... why do the legislators who represent Sacramento and the surrounding area need to be paid for living quarters... their PERMANENT home is right there. Rather than a per diem, provide each one of them a one-bedroom apartment in a state owned building where they can sleep at night... they don't need to bring their families to Sacramento at our expense. If they want to have a house instead of the apartment, let them pay for it out of their own pocket.

At the same time, if the entire legislature is housed in a state owned apartment building, why can't they ride a commuter bus run by the state? They won't need a luxury car, and it will be "greener" than driving their own car anyhow.

Further, we need to require that they be in their office or in session or committee not less than 40 hours per week... no more four day weekends every week. Many of them only work Tuesday through Thursday, but get their per diem for five days. And at the same time, cut the legislature back to three months out of the year and cut their pay accordingly. If they're only allowed to be in session three months a year, they won't have time to pass all the special interest legislation that makes things more difficult for the average person.
Tyrone

El Dorado Hills, CA

#7 Dec 3, 2010
Until we get a news media in California that is at least partially truthful and not totally supported of Liberal poliicies nothing will change. The so called news tv/newspapers reporters will not criticise such perks because they would be criticizing the same people that they voted for and whose liberal policies and beliefs they support.
Huh

Portland, OR

#8 Dec 3, 2010
The comments are expected but really don't make total sense. A part-time legislature. Cut salaries. Make them live in little cubicles. Ride a bus. All very popular criticisms and suggestions but are they really practical.

Part time legislators: So if they work only 3 or 4 or 5 months at reduced salaries...how do they make a living the rest of the year? Would companies be expected to hold their job while the legislator is off to Sacramento? Or will only the wealthy be able to afford to serve?
Lon Rocke

Paradise, CA

#9 Dec 3, 2010
Huh wrote:
The comments are expected but really don't make total sense. A part-time legislature. Cut salaries. Make them live in little cubicles. Ride a bus. All very popular criticisms and suggestions but are they really practical.
Part time legislators: So if they work only 3 or 4 or 5 months at reduced salaries...how do they make a living the rest of the year? Would companies be expected to hold their job while the legislator is off to Sacramento? Or will only the wealthy be able to afford to serve?
They could easily collect a salary as clowns in the Barnum and Bailey Circus for those long do-nothing months.
LateNight

Albany, CA

#11 Dec 3, 2010
Huh wrote:
The comments are expected but really don't make total sense. A part-time legislature. Cut salaries. Make them live in little cubicles. Ride a bus. All very popular criticisms and suggestions but are they really practical.
Part time legislators: So if they work only 3 or 4 or 5 months at reduced salaries...how do they make a living the rest of the year? Would companies be expected to hold their job while the legislator is off to Sacramento? Or will only the wealthy be able to afford to serve?
Nearly all of the people who run for public office at the state level ARE wealthy already; their state salary is just walking around money to them. And why do they need to maintain two homes for their family, one in their district, and another AT PUBLIC EXPENSE in Sacramento? Especially the representatives who live within commute distance of their job at the Capitol building.

The public (US) should not be expected to cover virtually all their living expenses year round when they're only working 6-8 months out of the year now. Between a summer break, Christmas break, and every other holiday they can give themselves, we're not getting our money's worth. Either that, or they're in their office in the Capitol forty hours a week, with 2-3 weeks vacation in the summer, just like most employees get with less than ten years on the job.
Navalator

Thailand

#12 Dec 3, 2010
My god some of these comments are vituperative and ignorant, bordering on the insane. Many of these comments clearly indicate people of severely diminished intellectual functioning. Of course they are expressed by the very people who vote into office the very people that they love to hate. Clean, rational and responsible government starts with the voters so if the legislature is corrupt and morally deficient so are the people who voted them into office. It is the Pogo syndrome at work: "We have identified the enemy and it is us!".
Paul

Davis, CA

#13 Dec 4, 2010
NPRIP wrote:
Agree -
We need a part time legislature.
Just their salaries alone are a joke for the trash and burdens they dump on our lives.
Can someone put this on a ballot initiative?
How about YOU? Stop just whining and complaining and do it yourself!

“Always questioning”

Since: Jul 10

Madison

#14 Dec 4, 2010
Navalator wrote:
My god some of these comments are vituperative and ignorant, bordering on the insane. Many of these comments clearly indicate people of severely diminished intellectual functioning. Of course they are expressed by the very people who vote into office the very people that they love to hate. Clean, rational and responsible government starts with the voters so if the legislature is corrupt and morally deficient so are the people who voted them into office. It is the Pogo syndrome at work: "We have identified the enemy and it is us!".
Agreed. I do have problems on some of the per diem for those legislators within an hour or so of Sacramento. Legislators should be able to pick up some expenses on their own but reasonable expenses should be covered.

Since: May 10

West Sacramento, CA

#15 Dec 4, 2010
Navalator wrote:
My god some of these comments are vituperative and ignorant, bordering on the insane. Many of these comments clearly indicate people of severely diminished intellectual functioning. Of course they are expressed by the very people who vote into office the very people that they love to hate. Clean, rational and responsible government starts with the voters so if the legislature is corrupt and morally deficient so are the people who voted them into office. It is the Pogo syndrome at work: "We have identified the enemy and it is us!".
There are no valid options, it is hard to vote someone into office when the machine feeds us who they back.....both parties are way too powerful and have the money to back up the candidate of their choice.
woody

United States

#16 Dec 4, 2010
An election lately is like trying to pick which mosquitos you like best out of a swarm.
Lon Rocke

Paradise, CA

#17 Dec 4, 2010
Hey, y'all. Stop being vituperative.
Adam

United States

#18 Dec 5, 2010
Hey here is an idea..No one held a gun to their heads to make them do this..they wanted to do it. We shouldn't have to pay for the way of life that they want to become accustomed to. I'm sure they had cars and jobs before they threw their hats in the ring for this. All the rest of us have to pay wear and tear on our own vehicles, why shouldn't they? If you can't afford to be in the legislature then don't get in on it.

If they are actually full time "employees", God I hate to use that word with eleced officials, then let them live and work like military. Barracks, tents, chow hall, communal bathrooms, bet they'd all agree more and get more done so they could go home with a few servings of SOS, and powered eggs.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Cadillac Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Problems & Solutions (Jan '06) Sun 99Cadillacsts 356
Barra Low-Balling GM Prospects For 2015 Jan '15 Solarman 1
A closer look at GM's solid December and 2014 s... Jan '15 John Jeffery 1
General Motors' Profitability Is Dependent On A... Dec '14 John Jeffery 1
5 elegant American cars Dec '14 e60m5_e46m3 1
Out of their league: 6 vehicles with shocking s... Nov '14 Solarman 1
Cadillac is making big mistakes Oct '14 John Jeffery 3
More from around the web