General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRomney Touts Presidential Salary Plan That Was Literally A Saturday Night Live Skit
Romney Touts Presidential Salary Plan That Was Literally A Saturday Night Live Skit
By Ian Millhiser on Jun 13, 2012 at 12:59 pm
In an interview with conservative radio host Neal Boortz, GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney floated an unusual profit-making opportunity for himself if he becomes president paying himself a higher salary if he performs well in the White House. In Romneys words, I do believe in linking my incentives and my commitment to the accomplishment of specific goals . . . . I wish we had that happen throughout government where people recognized they are not going to get rewarded in substantial ways unless they are able to achieve the objectives that they were elected to carry out.
This is not a new proposal, however. It was actually proposed in 1992 by billionaire presidential candidate Ross Perot or at least by someone pretending to be Perot. In a 1992 Saturday Night Live skit, Perot impersonator Dana Carvey outlined something very similar to the Romney plan for presidential compensation:
If Im President, we get 0% growth, you dont pay me nothing. 1% growth? Hell, a chimpanzee could run this country and make 1% growth! So you dont pay me dime one. Got my own plane, dont need Air Force One. State Dinners? Ill pay it, its nothing to me, sand on the beach! Now, dont worry about ol Ross Perot, I got $3 billion back at home.
Now, heres the deal. Heres what Im trying to tell you. 3% growth in our economy, $120 billion growth in our GNP I get a billion dollars. Now, think about it, thats a bargain! Youre up $119 billion. Im telling you, 2.99% growth, I dont see a penny, not one red cent. But dont feel sorry for me I got $3 billion. Im gonna be fine.
more...
http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/06/13/498933/romney-touts-presidential-salary-plan-that-is-literally-a-saturday-night-live-skit/
annabanana
(52,791 posts)Kadie
(15,369 posts)It is going to be interesting.
Indydem
(2,642 posts)You have to be rich to be president anyway. While in office, the government pays all your expenses, and once you leave office, you make a fortune on the speaking circuit.
Not one penny in salary.
Old and In the Way
(37,540 posts)I have no doubts that managing the numbers (aka cooking the books) becomes the top priority for maximizing compensation. Obviously harder to do that in the public sector, but when you want to run government like a business, you start re-engineering the organizational structure to make it work for you.
Gregorian
(23,867 posts)For example- Religious Liberty Referendum. This translates to making it legal to blow people up who you don't like.
Hilarious!
tularetom
(23,664 posts)There's no downside risk for him if his "objectives" are not met. And of course those "objectives" would be defined so vaguely that there would be no way to prove whether or not they were met. But there's a way to fix that.
In the unlikely event that this clown were actually elected president he should be put on a performance contract like the one "Ross Perot" proposed 20 years ago, with the additional clause that if the economy takes a shit, Romney has to cough up a percentage of the loss.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)like Cain did with his 9-9-9.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)LynneSin
(95,337 posts)and working at McDonalds.
What incentive would Romney even have to earn any of his paycheck? I mean if all of Romney's networth was invested in a 4% mutual fund the guy would still make $8 million a year. $400k is pocket change for him and an insult to think that the American voters would somehow think THAT is a reason we should vote for the guy.
tclambert
(11,087 posts). . . or if they go bankrupt, . . . or tank the entire economy, . . . or get bought out, . . . or pretty much any time the CEOs avoid going to prison. (I'm not sure about that last one, I just can't think of a CEO who went to prison and got a bonus.)