UnNews:Congressional Budget Office Thinks Realistically About Expenses
|
This article is part of UnNews, your source for up-to-the-picosecond misinformation. |
10 December 2007
New York- In light of recent taxpayer protests and allegations that the Monopoly manual has been thus far been utilized by the Congressional Budget Office as their definitive resource on the subject of accounting, the Congressional Budget Office has decided to set mending the national congressional debt as their number one priority. Prior to this bold resolution, the Congressional Budget Office had been focusing most of their energy and resources on surveying the amenities of luxury hotels frequented by overworked congressional officials. “It is evident that the time for change is ripe and that we must start thinking realistically about expenses,” said the one leading director of the Congressional Budget Office at a secret press conference held in New York at the Plaza Hotel. “The road to change will be difficult, and there can be no doubt that trading in our privately escorted senator limo service for one-hundred Mazeratis will be trying, but we are interested in doing what is best for the American public. What with inflation and the cost of a salon appointment with a Beverley Hills hairstylist being what it is, we want to make the burden on the average American taxpayer as small as possible.”
In order to downplay accusations of buying too much property before passing Go, Congressional officials are now limited to putting only one vacation home on the congressional tab, revealed the director, who wishes to remain anonymous in order to prevent Dilbeck Realtors from trashing his home with confetti eggs. Failure to comply with such measures will result in the confiscation of additional homes. Already Massachusetts senator John Kerry has lost his modest five bedroom getaway on Maui, which has since been converted into an office building for the US Department of Homeland Security.
Other revolutionary measures to help curb the congressional debt include halting exotic fruit basket and trundle bed delivery during Senate filibusters, capping Congressional fine dining expenditures at one million dollars per entrée, and limiting the number of House of Representative indentured servants, whose passage to the Americas is becoming increasingly expensive. A recent pamphlet has also been issued to all congressional officials by the Budget Office entitled “The Congressional Idiot’s Guide to Managing Money,” which offers a multitude of money saving suggestions for unsavvy officials such as “write memos on standard legal paper as opposed to scented, professionally monogrammed notepads.” Whether the manual has been written for or by congressional idiots has yet to be determined.
“While we believe that all of the [above] new measures will dramatically help reduce the congressional debt, we know that it is important to not be satisfied with a merely adequate solution that only skims the surface,” said the director, when asked about the expected impact of these resolutions. “This is why we have decided to further curb expenses by using a new statistically randomised approach to resolving all questions of national significance put before the House of Representatives.” This new system, the centrepiece of the Congressional Budget Office’s reforms, allows House members to bypass costly research and oratorical preparation expenditures associated with the debate of issues before they are put to a vote. Instead of spending hours arguing over the validity of abortion or gun control, now House members can simply consult a random digit table in the back of one of the numerous statistics textbooks provided for their use. If the 12th digit from the right of the third row is even, then a measure is passed; if the digit is odd, then the measure is denied; and if the digit is zero, then the measure is given to the Senate to worry about for the time being. While some Americans remain sceptical of this new seemingly Lady and the Tiger approach to justice, the director of the Congressional Budget Office insists that it is just as effective as the old system. “There has always been an element of chance in House voting, depending on uncontrollable external factors such as how intoxicated the Representatives were at the time of the poll and how many had succumbed to the courting of lobbying organizations, so nothing has changed really. After an internal audit, we found expenses incurred because of lengthy voting protocol to be the least cost effective, and we introduce this new system only with the wallet of the taxpayer in mind,” said the director in his concluding remarks.
