What if you were told that there was a part-time job that provides excellent healthcare benefits? You'd be intrigued, no? What if you were then told that this part-time job would also provide healthcare to your family, and that this, too, would be free? You'd probably want to know how you can apply for this job. As it turns out, applying for this job is simple: collect enough signatures to run for town council in the Town of Mamakating. If you win, the aforementioned benefits would be yours, all on the taxpayer's dime.

And there can be no doubt that many taxpayers would take issue with such an arrangement. In fact, this issue has recently been the subject of much debate in the Town of Mamakating, as budget negotiators went looking for creative ways to cut spending in a time of severe economic turmoil. The most drastic of the proposals on the table called for the elimination of family benefits for elected officials. If adopted, it would have meant that elected officials would be responsible for paying the difference in premiums for the other members on the policy, and would have saved the town many thousands of dollars per year. The official, him or herself, would still receive the free benefits.

The health insurance situation takes on a different look in other nearby towns. In the Towns of Rochester and Wawarsing, for example, council members have the option of taking advantage of health insurance plans, splitting the cost with the town. Rochester's elected council members pay 15 percent, while the town pays the rest. But, these council members have to pay the full cost of insuring their families through the town's plan. The Town of Wawarsing also requires elected officials to pay something, in this case about 22 percent for single coverage and 31 percent of the cost for their families to be insured, with the town footing the bill for the rest of the coverage.

The Towns of Shawangunk and Crawford, perhaps the most austere examples in the ridge area, allow their council members to join the town's health insurance plan, but only if they pay for the coverage entirely out of their own pockets.

But councilmen and women are human beings, too. Some in Mamakating likely sought and took the job with the understanding that the position comes with healthcare benefits. And some of these elected officials have family members who no doubt need this care. But what about those Americans — nearly 50 million by the most recent count — who have no access to healthcare? Should a member of a town board be treated any differently than, say, a worker at a big-box retailer? The vast majority of these workers pay a significant percentage of their salaries toward health insurance premiums — that is, if they have insurance in the first place. And there are plenty of small-business owners and people who are self-employed who have no choice but to fork over enormous premiums, which currently amount to more than $1,000 per month for the average family. And then there are those homeowners whose local tax dollars ensure that elected officials, and their families, have health care, when they themselves can't afford it. What about them?

Part-time council members should lead by example; they should refuse to take these benefits. And town governments should follow the lead of communities like Crawford and Shawangunk. Or, like Rochester and Wawarsing, make elected officials and their families pay some percentage of health insurance costs. And while most wouldn't want to see the rug pulled out from under the feet of an elected official's family, thousands of people across the country lose their health insurance benefits every day. In times of economic turmoil, elected officials should forego these benefits and thereby help to ease at least some of the burden on the overextended taxpayer.