Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Hardly working: Congress in session 126 days next year

Posted by on Dec. 1, 2012 at 12:25 AM
  • 25 Replies

Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor released the new House calendar for the 113th Congress on Friday, and if you thought the 112th Congress was unproductive—just wait.

In 2013, the House will be in session for a grand total of 126 days. Congress will spend roughly two-thirds of the year not working. In January, Congress will be in session for eight days—which, compared to August where they will be in session for two days, is considered a “full month.” June will be Congress’ busiest month with 16 whole days of work.

If only we could all give ourselves 239 days off every year.

113thCongress1stSession

by on Dec. 1, 2012 at 12:25 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
29again
by Gold Member on Dec. 1, 2012 at 12:32 AM

They will be with their constituents during all that time off, though, right? 

And don't anyone laugh, I mean it!!  LOL



So, if we do go over the cliff, they won't have much choice about it, will they?  There won't be any money to pay them, right?  And dude who said that they EARNED their pay needs a good slap upside his face, imo. 

erika9009
by Silver Member on Dec. 1, 2012 at 1:38 AM

compared to how much the CA legislators  actually work, this is a slave schedule.


Now, go look at LA mayor and Democratic Convention chairman, Antonio Vilarigossa, or Tony Villar, or whatever he calls himself to get elected this week.  The LA times did a study on him and his work at city hall.............11 % of the time he worked.  The other 89% were spent doing, doing, doing???  well, no one knows, but I'm sure it had something to do with trimming the budget


____________________________________________________

Erika..

Children are a blessing and are never inconvenient.............

rccmom
by Gold Member on Dec. 1, 2012 at 9:35 AM
1 mom liked this

 

Quoting 29again:

They will be with their constituents during all that time off, though, right? 

And don't anyone laugh, I mean it!!  LOL

 

 

So, if we do go over the cliff, they won't have much choice about it, will they?  There won't be any money to pay them, right?  And dude who said that they EARNED their pay needs a good slap upside his face, imo. 

Oh, I am sure they will be paid, cliff or no cliff. They will make sure of that. Each time we have come up to a fiscal emergency that won't fund the military, it never involves not paying Congress either.

 

jcrew6
by Jenney on Dec. 1, 2012 at 12:45 PM
6 moms liked this

The original purpose for elected officials was not a full time jobs.  I say we slash pay, benefits, etc... 

itsmesteph11
by on Dec. 1, 2012 at 4:30 PM
1 mom liked this

 I'm not sure that's a bad thing.  I just wish they would get something done while they are there.

Pema_Jampa
by Celeste on Dec. 1, 2012 at 4:39 PM

SMH SSDD

GaleJ
by Member on Dec. 1, 2012 at 9:04 PM
1 mom liked this

As with all things there are two sides to every story. I'm not honestly sure we can afford to have them in session more, just think what mischief they might get into if they really apply themselves.

Natesmom507
by Member on Dec. 1, 2012 at 9:33 PM
1 mom liked this

Good, the less there in session the less they are coming up with new bills to put us in even more debt. I think they should take the whole year off.

Friday
by Platinum Member on Dec. 1, 2012 at 10:17 PM

That is absolutely ridiculous, we need to fire all of them.


Church of The Invisible Pink Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves)

DSamuels
by Gold Member on Dec. 1, 2012 at 10:38 PM
1 mom liked this

In 2009 when the dems were the majority they were to be in session 120 days which is even less.

2006 - 103 days



Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)