I would imagine that thousands of the recently unemployed would jump at the chance to go back to a 5 day work week.

In the current economic climate , the first complainers should immediately be targeted for a primary challenge.

Print a list of congresspersons who snivel about the 5 day week. Promise to resuscitate and circulate the list to all local and national newspapers just before the next election cycle. Crack the whip.
btr

Dear Mr. Kingston,

A couple of years ago, you said that the institution of a five day workweek for members of Congress meant that "the Democrats could care less about families." Without mincing words, you were wrong. The Democrats DO care about families. They care about families like mine: a hardworking middle class family who is struggling to survive in this economy. I'll tell you something else, congressman, we want more than "survival" in exchange for all our hard work and responsible choices - we want to be able to thrive and improve our situation.

The Democrats care about families who are doing everything right and getting nowhere. They care about families who want their kids to grow up in a clean world with lots of opportunities for peace and security. The Democrats care about families who need access to affordable health care, living wage jobs, and access to higher education without burdensome debt.

My family works hard, five days a week and sometimes more. The Democrats know that every day is vital right now, in order for Congress to address the extreme challenges facing our country, the economy first and foremost. We are paying you, sir, to address those problems. We need you and every member of Congress to be acting in our behalf and as quickly as possible. If, in order to accomplish these goals, you need to work an extra day, so be it. If spending an extra day away from your family means that my family can continue to have a roof over our heads, food on our table, and hope for a better, more secure future, so be it.

Sincerely,

An American Family

How 'bout we pro-rate their salaries? So someone who spends three days in DC gets 60% of the amount paid to someone who works five days.

Like in real life.

Well, I'm going to come to the defense of Congress here. I say they actually do work very hard. Most of them return to their districts each weekend and participate in all kinds of voter outreach events then return to Washington to start the cycle again.
I can't locate any right now, but I've seen articles by journalists who followed Congressmen on their rounds from committee, to floor votes, to meeting constituents, to flying home, to going to event after event, and then flying back. And the journalists remarked how exhausted they became following the representative around and couldn't imagine doing it on an ongoing basis.
So I say cut them some slack.
On the other hand, my congressman for a couple decades has been Henry Waxman and, great congressman that he is, he doesn't exactly make himself highly visible in the district. I caught a glance of him once browsing in a bookstore the day before Election Day and that's about it for the last twenty years.

If any of them want to whine about a five day work week, I'm sure there are about 322,000 people who found themselves with a 0 day work week in November who would be more than happy to take their place.

Hold on, here. I agree Kington was whining. I don't think it was bizarre whining. There are reasons behind what he said, in line with what santamonicamr said, but with additional details.

Being in Congress can be difficult on family life. I'm not thinking about Senators, that millionaire's club. I'm thinking about the more obscure, junior Representatives, especially in the Western states, who rely mostly on their Congressional salary. Yes, that's around $120 K, last I heard, but that gets eaten pretty quickly by maintaining two households--one in their district and an apartment in DC--and by frequent flights home. And who would want to move kids to DC halfway through the school year, and then--if you're not re-elected--back home halfway through the school year two years later? And can spouses just pick up and find new jobs in DC? (I think members of Congress can take military flights for free, but I'm not sure about that. If so, that mitigates the expense problem somewhat.)

Also, I wonder what exactly a five-day workweek means. If I were in Congress, I wouldn't want to spend five days a week in chamber. I'd want some time in my office, with my staff, going over proposed legislation, learning about issues from my constituents, and maybe in the Library of Congress doing some research (the kind I couldn't delegate to my staff) on issues. And in addition to needing a family life, I'd want some time in district to learn about the issues there firsthand. That was santamonicamr's point, and I agree.

No, Republicans don't care about real families. Kingston's remark is all about his own personal experience with his family, and ignores Republican policies that do hurt families (that would be pretty much all Republican policies). An American Family made some great points and I agree with them. We send people to Congress to deal with these issues, and they better know they'll have to make sacrifices. But he's not a complete idiot--there are reasons behind his whining.

The fact that Congress does its work in Washington, DC can't exactly be a surprise to these legislators, and nor can it be a surprise that they get elected to a full-time job. No doubt that these guys and gals have families and constituents back home, but if having to show up at your workplace for 137 days out of the year is unmanageable, then step down and send somebody who can manage the work.

It's stupid to have Congress on a two-year election cycle. Another way in which our Constitution's BODY (not the Bill of Rights) is outmoded, archaic and anachronistic.

Stop venerating the Constitution and let's amend the body of it, how it organizes our governance.

I thought that Caribou Barbie had proved that either a man or a woman could fulfill political responsibilities while raising a family. No watering down necessary.

Caribou Barbie proved that the only prerequisite for public office is a pulse. But she wasn't unique in that respect, was she?

Given the overall mediocre quality of their work, it's not clear more days in the office would improve things that much.

There's a difference between "working" and "working on site." I imagine that a fair number of representatives, even if they're not actually in D.C. five days a week, are still working the other days, even if they're not in their Capitol Hill offices. They do have district offices. This is the twenty-first century -- why can't Congress get on board with the telecommuting thing? Can't they have committee hearings via videoconferencing? Devise a secure system for members to cast votes remotely?

For the GOP up to 2006, there was no need for extra days since any important initiatives would be handed to them from the Unitary Executive (assuming Cheney was feeling generous and bothered involving the Congress at all). Then, once the Dems took over after the midterms, work in Congress was largely futile due to the inability to overcome GOP Senate filibusters or, if that were overcome, Presidential vetoes.

Now is different. We are in the midst of a full-blown crisis on multiple fronts, and have both an activist Executive and working legislative majorities (i.e. greater than one vote in the Senate). We have a chance to actually get something done besides naming federal monuments. They may well need five work days a week. And if they don't like it, nobody forced them to run for these jobs.

ThmoasC, santamonicamr,

Save your sympathy for those that deserve it (like the myriad unemployed). Our representatives, whether they're east coast,west coast, or no coast, should not enter the job lightly, and they should have realized that it's a 24/7 job. They punch in on inauguration day and don't punch out until they retire, either by choice or will of the voters. If that's too much for them to handle, then make way for those who can.

Take a step back and look at what you're defending. They're whining about spending five days in the chamber (two of which, Monday and Friday, would be less than half days by any reasonable standard) for a measly 11 weeks out of the entire year. Eleven weeks.

How many of weeks out of the year do they not even meet in the chamber AT ALL?

So get a grip. Eleven five day weeks is not unreasonable to ask of the people who we've tasked with fixing the mess many of them got us into in the first place.

Anyone who thinks it's an unreasonable schedule is an integral part of the problem that lead to an ineffective and undereducated congress in the first place.

Sorry, I don't have any sympathy here. Being in Congress is NOT a part-time job, and the majority of the time they spend in their districts is doing fund-raising for the next election. If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Let the quality of your work get you reelected, or if the work is too tough, resign or choose not to run for another term.

sorry ThomasC Kingston is a total idiot. First have you ever looked at the number of days off these schmucks get. Second if you can't do the job don't whine do something else. I'm sure there's tons of jobs and future for people as qualified as Kingston in the fast food industry. All apologies to fast food workers for putting you in a class with congresspeople like Kingston.

Get control of their spending,benifits and self imposed salary increases. Then I will be impressed!!

santamonicamr -- I think an important point that a good congressman is actually working a lot of the time when Congress is out of session (though of course there's nothing to require them to.) Contact with constituents is an important part of the job, and being out of session is frequently misrepresented as "Congress being on vacation." It seems like the real change from times past is air travel. Congressmen used to spend the entire session in Washington (making five-day work weeks no problem) and only travel home during real recesses. Bill Clinton also spoke on the Daily Show a couple of years ago about how he seriously believed that the sleep deprivation from constant travel was part of what had made politics worse. (And I suspect Steve's point about how spending more time in DC meant they got to know each other better is related, too.)

So it seems like a better way for the Congressional leadership to portray this (better framing, if you like) is rather than saying they're going to have five-day work weeks (implying you're a lazy bum if you disagree), say that the country is in crisis, so we're going back to how things were in the good old days (Greatest Generation blah blah blah), and everyone will be expected to stay in Washington full-time for the time it takes to deal with it. Express sympathy that it may be tough on lawmakers' families, but note that most people are working long hours and seeing less of their families these days (if they're lucky enough to be working at all), and reinforce in the public mind the notion that congressional recesses are for working back home, not vacation.

Who knows, maybe once the crisis is over, most of them will realize that Congress works better that way. (Hey, I can dream!)

Actually though, a four-day work week would be good practice for society as a whole. It would save so very much gas, money, and transit time. Change the straight-time 40h week into a 72h fortnight to allow more creative cycles and to encourage 4 x 9h weeks.

tyrannogenius

Aren't these the same people screaming about the autoworkers and automobile manufacturer's outrageous salaries, financial mismanagement, gold plated health care and pensions? If only we taxpayers could negotiate to get our money back.

To be fair, it's not as if they're doing nothing when they're home. The demands on their time is enormous.