I think part of the point was that senators would have better incentives
to reform the system if they participated in it.

- kevin

On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Daniel Reeves wrote:

> This is a vanishingly small amount of money we're talking about -- pennies
> per taxpayer, if that.
>  Contrast with Iraq which costs each of us hundreds of dollars. (yes, you)
>
> That said, I don't exactly disagree that congress should do away with
> their elitist retirement plan, mainly on principle.  But it's equivalent
> to a call for a salary cut for congress members.  I have no real opinion
> on that.
>
> More importantly, this should serve to point out how outrageous it is that
> teachers are paid so little.	The positive effect on society from paying
> teachers more would be huge:	higher salaries => more prestige => attracts
> the top people & motivates them to work harder at what they do, namely
> teach and inspire the next generation and get them excited about their
> respective fields of study, etc
>
> Danny
>
> ps, I deleted the obnoxious "forward this to everyone you know" rhetoric
> in the quoted copy below...
>
> --- \/   FROM Kevin Lochner AT 05.10.04 16:01 (Today)   \/ ---
>
> >
> > just a little something to provoke govt irritation . . .
> >
> > -----
> >
> >   ----------------------------------
> >
> >   SOCIAL SECURITY:
> >
> >   Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years.
> >
> >   Our Senators and Congresswomen do not pay into Social Security and, of
> > course, they do not collect from it.
> >
> >   You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of
> > their rare elevation in society.They felt they should have a special
> > plan for themselves. So, many years ago they voted in their "own"
> > benefit plan.
> >
> >   In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change
> > it. After all, it is a great plan.
> >
> >   For all practical purposes their plan works like this:
> >   When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die.
> >
> >   Except it may increase from time to time for cost of living
> > adjustments..
> >
> >   For example, Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may
> > expect to draw $7,800,000.00 (that's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred
> > Thousand Dollars), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last
> > years of their lives.
> >
> >   This is calculated on an average life span for each of those two
> > Dignitaries.
> >
> >
> >   Younger Dignitaries who retire at an early age, will receive much more
> > during the rest of their lives.
> >
> >   Their cost for this excellent plan is $0.00. NADA....ZILCH....
> >
> >   This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I
> > pick up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan
> > come directly from the General Funds;
> >
> >   "OUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK"!
> >
> >   From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid)
> > into, - every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our
> > employer)-we can expect to get an average of $1,000 per month after
> > retirement.
> >   Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000
> > monthly benefits for 68 years and one (1) month to equal "Senator" Bill
> > Bradley's benefits!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made.
> >
> >   That change would be to:
> >
> >
> >   Jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and
> > Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us
> >
> >
> >   then sit back.....
> >
> >
> >   and see how fast they would fix it!
> >
> >   - David A. McNally -
>
> --
> http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves  - -	google://"Daniel Reeves"
>
> 6 weeks in the lab will save you a day in the library.
>