Like I get the whole moralistic bent about not wanting to pay representatives big incomes relative to their constituents because politician bad and “they should be doing it for the pride of serving”, or like term limits because “I don’t like these politicians and they keep getting reelected/ serve life terms.”
But realistically, if you want skilled professionals in a field, you need to pay them competitively and offer long term career prospects. Otherwise you’re going to only get people who take the job as a stepping stone to another position, like a high paying job at a big company they passed a bunch of laws to help, or who can make money in other ways.
As it stands right now, the whole stock trading thing is largely a result of how little congress people are payed relative to the importance of the position. Like, sure, it’s a six figure salary with a great benefits package, but, that’s peanuts compared to what a modern private sector executive make, even a mediocre one.
If anything, congress people should probably have their wages increased significantly.
Ok, but, like, no offense, are you skilled enough to properly analyze and dig through large complicated bills? Are you a skilled enough administrator to manage an office of staffers? Are you a good enough public speaker to campaign?
I’m not saying people should want to serve in congress because it pays well, but, if the same set of skills that make a good representative could earn you 4 million a year in the private sector, then it’s going to be really hard to get qualified professionals. Instead you’ll get incompetent ideologues, independently wealthy aristocrats, or corrupt individuals intending to abuse the position.
It needs to pay competitively or else you create a bunch of perverse incentives.