They get it for life so that they are less influenced by outside sources. It would be a bad idea to remove that balance (even though, practically speaking it means not much right now, that can change with other changes to government elsewhere, this is a battle not worth fighting).
Yeah, how has that worked out for us?
Just ask Newt! He's totally against lobbying, a stand up role model... oh... wait... never mind.
Simple math, if you are unable to do multiplication then I suggest you go back to school. There are 535 members of Congress, it is possible for all 535 members to be voted anew every 4-6 years (depending on Senator vs Rep) over a 80 year span that Could possible mean there are 10,700 possible congresspeople who are still alive and collecting 175,000 each year. 10,700 X $175,000 = $1,878,000,000. Currently there are 535 congresspeople currently serving. 535 X $175,000 = $93,625,000. Math...it proves itself.
How much influence does a Rep who served 20 years ago have? Almost none since they have no vote.
80 years? that is pushing it, you are better served with 50 years as there are age requirements for holding office.
Other changes could help prevent such corruption. That's one of those battles not worth fighting because if these other changes were made it might actually help and do as intended to some degree. Of course there will always be corruption in government, which is why it's a good idea to limit their powers in the first place.
It's to help prevent payoffs after the fact. Reduce the incentive by taking care of those who serve.
You cant dictate to someone what they do in their private lives. Besides, they could open a taco stand and get orders of 1,000,000 per year from company x and you couldnt prove it was a payback.
I am sure he is going to have to change the carpet too, to get that smell outta there! LOL
