E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe House of Representatives yesterday passed a Republican debt-ceiling proposal providing that if either chamber of Congress hasn't passed a budget resolution for the upcoming fiscal year by April 15, the congressional payroll office must withhold the paychecks for the members of that body.
In other words, they wouldn't get paid until they act or until the current session of Congress ends in 2015.
But is that provision constitutional?
The 27th Amendment, added to the Constitution in 1992, is intended to prevent members of Congress from giving themselves a raise. But it doesn't merely say that any raise can't take effect until the next Congress. It says members cannot vary their own pay.
Here's the entire text of the amendment: "No law, varying the compensation for the services of the senators and representatives, shall take effect, until an election of representatives shall have intervened."
The debt limit bill, said House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, "was carefully crafted to comply with the requirements of the 27th Amendment."
"The amount that members are paid will not be reduced nor will it be raised," Camp said during Wednesday's House debate. "There is no requirement in the 27th Amendment which states that members have to be paid weekly, biweekly, monthly, or bimonthly, or what have you, only that the pay that they receive will not vary."
Not so, said Rep. Robert Brady, a Pennsylvania Democrat, who believes putting the money in escrow, as the House bill provides, doesn't solve the issue. "If you aren't getting a paycheck in a month and you're going to wait for 18 months, that's varying. So it could be -- and, in my opinion, it is -- a constitutional problem," he said.
Who's right? Does holding the checks, but ultimately giving members their money, avoid a constitutional defect?
Professor Michael Froomkin of the University of Miami School of Law doesn't believe it's constitutional.
"I don't think this is even a close question: In my view, the escrow provision clearly does not [avoid the constitutional defect]," Froomkin said.
"The prohibition on varying the compensation seems pretty clear to me. It means no changes in amount and no changes in time of payment, because there is a time value to money. Anyone who gets a salary would think it a very material change in the terms if the money were escrowed for more than a year and a half instead of being made available to pay the mortgage," he added.
The opposite view came in a statement released by the House Ways and Means Committee, written by conservative lawyers David Rivkin and Lee Casey. "It is creative, it is fiscally responsible, and it is attentive to the text and structure of the Constitution," they said.
Some consideration was given to putting the deferred paychecks into an interest-bearing account, but Republicans rejected that idea, concluding that it would increase members' pay in clear violation of the 27th Amendment.
The Supreme Court has never interpreted the amendment, and no member of Congress has yet come forward to suggest suing over the escrow provision. Given the Supreme Court’s narrow view of who has legal authority to sue, it’s likely only a member of Congress who had a paycheck withheld would have the proper standing to challenge it.
Leave a Comment:
It's a sham, anyway. It would have been better if they had passed a bill requiring that they spend at least 40 hours per week in session and at least 48 of 52 weeks annually in D.C.--otherwise their pay would be docked.
It was simple political grandstanding to appease low information voters. Congressional pay can't be withheld. At most, it is put into interest bearing accounts and paid at some later date.
Another dog & pony show for the stuck on stupid crowd to nibble on!
Move along folks... nothing to see here! ☺
Better articles:
Nah, the Progressive media wouldn't touch those with a ten foot pole.
Another "dog and pony show" article by the Progressive media.
Move along folks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ahhhhh, the Obama campaign continues.
Actually, the annual BUDGET is required by law ! So, if Obama gets off his financially inept gluteus maximus and MAKES Harry Reid do his job to get a budget actually passed .... then we are not having this discussion are we ?
Obama will not cooperate, however, since "growing government at every opportunity" is at the heart of his extreme liberal mantra. Obama prefers to whip out the charge card, leave the debt to future generations and in the process, he contradicts his own words from 2006 ! What a hypocrite Obama proves to be !
Great post at #1.3 by Ido !!!!!
Ido - you are a truly pathetic idiot. But, you're good for a chuckle every day. The sad thing is you parrot what Beck and Hannity lie to and don't realize why people listen to you, shake their head, then walk away.
Please - try to grow a brain!
interesting how the far left wants to evaluate what is 'constitutional'.
Fisty do move along, you're vitriol is stale and tiresome
SeekingSanity......
Time for you to "muster" in the Social Welfare line for those Obama Bucks.
jim-1455434....."Actually, the annual BUDGET is required by law !"
Yep, and this Senate has FAILED to have a National Budget signed by Mr. Obama for the past FOUR YEARS. And, Pocket Veto Reid wants to eliminate any Congressional procedure on the debt limit.
Think anyone will be held responsbile ? Nah. Just look at the Secretary of State.
It sounds as if it is unconstitutional to this person but I am glad to see members of Congress trying to get things done. That said, it is time that our lawmakers revise the amendment to stipulate that they can not raise their salaries but that their pay can be withheld until a budget is approved.
There are very few working people outside of elected politicians ever receive pay for no performance. Those who perform below expectations soon find themselves unemployed.Wouldn't it be nice if EVERY politician suffered the same consequences?
Ido - from your posts you show you don't have the intelligence to hold down a job so I guess you are the one receiving handouts.
Pay my own bills because of a nicely lucrative job. You should try to get one - oh wait - no one would hire the likes of you!
Oh and as for the Secretary of State - you'd have to reach up to touch the soles of her shoes!
From the article above:
Oy vey!
Seems to me, House Republicans can’t do their jobs, so they come up with yet another cockamamie scheme to cover their butts and hold our country hostage again.
How about they pass a proposal which states if they can’t do their jobs by April 15th, then they’re all fired!
Simply put, Boehner and Cantor are the most incompetent representatives in this nation’s history and the Teapartypoopers are distroying our great democracy.
Salud
Jack in Portsmouth
and make them pay for their evil gubernment health insurance as well.
No the most incompetent and inept are Nancy Peolsi, Harry Reid, O "wasn't me" bama, Biden. Get a clue or do they not allow you lapdogs to do your own research.
CA --How much money will it cost the taxpayer if this garbage is tossed to the courts?
This being a free country and all....
My two cents is precedent has been set as to timing (vary) of Congress' pay.
And for the record - Jack's proposal is a far better solution!
How about a provision that says;
"If a Budget is not passed on a timely basis, the Senators must stand for re-election within 60 days".
There's nothing like a threat of losing their job if they don't do what they're supposed to do to motivate people. Then Harry Reid would finally do his job.
Really? Democrats haven't passed a budget in almost 4 years which IS required by law, disregards and shrugs off the Constitution constantly, and you're going to play the "is it constitutional" card?
You do realize the budget has passed the house every year but stalls in the Senate, right? They're all sitting on Harry Reid's desk.
And this is what self proclaimed Democrats think of not having a budget as long as they're the party in power. Keep piling on the debt for the children to have to give up their own needs in order to pay off to satisfy your own greed, but at least own up to being the party adding more to the debt than all other administrations combined.
whatever it takes to get these idiots to do there job! also take away there subsidise housing and plane rides, make them sleep in there offices and work !
So what if it isn't. They would have to spend the time and money to take it to SCOTUS, if they would even hear them. I would imagine that there are constitutional lawyers on both sides of the issue. What this does do though is point out once and for all that the Senate has NOT been doing their job. This is not a case of being obstructed by Republicans...they have not even presented a budget since 2009. The House has passed a budget each of the ensuing years...but Harry Reid refuses to take it up. Perhaps a law should be passed that defines what "vary" means in the Constitution and then pass a law that says that if Congress fails to abide by the Constitutional duty, they will not be paid....not just pay being withheld, but not paid.
ldo
show me anything that is banning you from having weapons...unless you are talking about nuclear weapons..
Bayllie,
Yes, that above all!
DCIA - Great to see ya! Missed your posts.
Oh and Ido - since your reading comprehension skills are clearly lacking, it was the Pentagon Chief - Defense Secretary Leon Panetta who lifted the ban on women in battle after careful and long discussions with military leaders. You soooooo don't know anything but are soooooo eager to post it for all to see!
Funny - even John McCain is in favor of lifting the ban!
bayllie - Ido parrots what she hears from Beck, Hannity, Rush - and anything FOX news spews. She doesn't have a lonely little brain cell in her head!
TomasGrande "How about they pass a proposal which states if they can’t do their jobs by April 15th, then they’re all fired!"
Perhaps you're confused. The Republican House has passed a Budget on time for each of the last 3 years - it's the Democratic Senate that has failed to pass a Budget, or even consider the ones passed by the House - Harry Reid is the problem, not Boehner and Cantor.
Jack in Portsmouth
all the Congressmen who fought Universal Healthcare should have had given up their taxpayer sponsored benefits but these hypocrites won't do it.
Ido -
Since nobody is confiscating guns people already own, the Supreme Court has already ruled it is Constitutional for Congress to regulate the sale of firearms. Thus, there is no National Grenade Launcher Appreciation Day.
Since the Constitution doesn't say squat about the sexual makeup of the country's soldiers, yes.
Well, Mr. Obama has nothing to do with it, so yes, since Congress can bypass any of its own procedures. Derrr!
Yes. The War Powers Act explicitly gives him that ability. Perhaps you forget he is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. Also, we may be involved via the State Department diplomatically.
Well, since he never did that, it is not an issue. He instructed a law to be enforced how he saw fit, which is perfectly legal as the head of the Executive branch.
SeekingSanity
who in their right 2013 mind would be against lifting the ban????
I know. The fact that they repeat this crap is evidence that they are brainless parrots repeating garbage. And anyone with half a brain would recognize that it is garbage.
Beck got demoted to selling pants. What will Hannity do when he follows Beck's footsteps? Sell underwear?
Yeah Ido....go out and sell some of those 5 year ARMS that seeking pushed...that's where the real money is.....So what if she conned people out of their money.....
As Hillary said...at this point what difference does it make?? I mean really...it was only 4 people who died......
Cutting pay on the Congress critters won't do anything. Most of them don't depend on their Congressional pay for existance anyway. They are wealthy for the most part. Those who may need assistance are sure to have some corporate backer who could foot the bills for them for something in return. Docking pay simply won't work especially if the escrow account gives them interest on money held. Such a deal, don't work, pay put in savings account and erns interest. Gosh where do I sign up to not work and not only get paid for it but with interest?
Pressure from the electoate will straighten them out. A corporation is but one entity in the mix but thousands and possibly millions of votes from the electorate is quite another. Enough pressure will make it clear that it is not money that will keep them in office but doing the work of the people who voted for them.
@Jack in Portsmouth - Great idea. Please go to whitehouse.gov and create that as a petition. I would imagine most people would vote for it and it would result in congress getting things done. Nothing people value more than their time.
jim-1455434 "Actually, the annual BUDGET is required by law !"
You are correct - The problem is that there is no 'consequence' if the Senate doesn't comply with the Constitution, which allows Harry Reid to ignore his constitutional duty, and his 'constituents' in Nevada continue to reelect him anyway.
It would be like Obama taking a permanent vacation, surfing in Hawaii every day instead of doing his job, delegating the work to his personal secretary through 'Executive Orders' - If the voters reelected him anyway, then what could be done?
Jim
Obama is required by the constitution to propose a budget. That he has done.
It is established House and Senate rules that require those entities to pass a budget, not the constitution.
The reason the democrats do not pass a budget is because it forces them to put their names to a spending plan that when it is or is not achieved they can be held responsible for in elections.
Sorry, but if republicans can't pass a budget in the house that can pass the senate, they have a problem too. It's called compromise, and for 4 years they have not been willing to do it.
ROY WILSON-336103
you need 51 Senate votes to pass a budget resolution
But for that budget resolution to TAKE EFFECT, it must have either the cooperation of the house, or at least 60 votes in the Senate.
So please show me the list of Republicans who voted to pass the budget.
Thank you
John Mack-
Yet.
I'm thinking early August. I could use another paid holiday.
Nice post, John.
Salud
Excellent reply John Mack...Ido is obviously one of the low informed voters.
Ido - If I were president I would have shipped your ass, along with Boehner, Cantor, and McConnell to Guantanamo Bay to enjoy full blown socialism, where your meals and healthcare are free, and you don't have to work a day in your life.
ROY WILSON-336103
Roy, you know you are only telling half the story.
Can't you post the reasons WHY there have been budget battles between the House and Senate? What did the House tack onto those budgets that Senetor Reid and the Democrats objected to?
You're side has certainly gotten alot of milage from that same-old, lame-old talking point over the last 2-3 years.
This is why I keep saying that Rush and Faux sNewzzzz have done enormous damage to this country by perpetuating things that aren't true, AND don't tell the whole story on purpose!
You have created an enemy that simply doesn't exist.
Salud, Roy
Here is the actual budget process...note that what the president actually signs are appropriations bills, not the "budget resolutions" that have not been completed in many years on time (before October 1, the beginning of the new fiscal year.) Congress has failed to actually pass full authorization bills based on the budget proposals submitted by the administration for not just the last four years, but for several years before. They have operated on "continuing resolutions" instead to keep the government running. The first appropriations that each body of Congress does pass each year is their own budget authorization so that they and their staff can get paid.
http://nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/federal-budget-process/
Jack -- Great to see you too!
Bayllie -- You wrote:
Haven't ya heard? He's moved on. He's now trying to build a "theme" park where kids can go to play ball and be deprogrammed! LOL
TomasGrande
You can have 10 Fox News but people like Roy are still free to do their own research before spreading the garbage.
How about pay for results...
What I find so funny about all these posts it that the right is trying to support the lies of the Republicans and the left is trying to support the lies of the Democrats. Until everyone on these board and other boards are willing to be just as hard on their own party as they are on the other party nothing will ever change in Washington. Washington knows that if they keep the American population arguing against each other that they will be able to get away with any and everything.
We the people are allowing ourselves to be lied to by both sides. And we try and support those lies. No one wants to step up and call everyone in Washington a liar. Which they all are.
Until we all start holding everyone in Washington accountable nothing will change. Until we all start telling the side we support to come clean nothing will change. Until we all start telling the side we support to stop playing politics with our lives nothing will change.
Call me names, try and defend your position. The sad fact is all of you know you can lie to everyone else but you cannot lie to yourself. Look at what you are supporting. Look at the big picture. Then ask yourself how long will you allow the lies from both sides the ruin the lives of all Americans.
I too am guilty of what I just wrote. However as of yesterday, before I post anything on any of these boards the first thing I do is send an email to my U.S. Senators and Representative. I don't care if they are Republican or Democrat. I want them to know how I feels about all the B/S coming out of Washington. I also send emails to the President and Vice-President. I don't use some of those sites that send emails for you. I want all of them to know that I as individual can speak for myself. I want all of them to know what I as an individual want them to do. And I plan to send them all emails daily. I want them to know I will find to time in my life to let them know daily what I think.
I don't need AARP to speak for me which I am a member. I don't need the NRA to speak for me which I am a member. I don't need NCOA to speak for me which I am a member. I don't need Oathkeepers to speak for which I am a member. And I can continue. Each and every one of you on these boards need to do the same. If Washington starts getting emails daily from the American people things will change. Coming voting time if everyone stops believing that their vote don't count and go vote things will change. Let's get rid of the electoral college. Let's let the people votes mean something.
So to everyone posting unless you are doing the same, then your comments on these boards will result in nothing changing in Washington. Your name calling and rants will not change anything. It might make you feel good but it will not change a thing.
I want both side to stop showing us how well they can twist the words of the English language to hide the facts. Put the facts out and I mean all the facts not just what supports their agenda.
I want a standalone amendment to the Constitution that make it the law that Congress and the Presidents pay is voted on by the people. They should not be able to give themselves pay raises when neither side is getting anything done. The proposal that only side not get paid is B/S. Neither the House, Senate and President gets paid if there is not budget.
Last but not least, everyone needs to understand that according to the Constitution, which a lot of posters want use to support their positions, the House is task with coming up with a budget. They must be willing to compromise with the Senate and the President in order to get one put in place. And so must the Senate and the President be will to compromise. This our way or no way is not helping the American people. Compromise is not a bad thing.
Semper Fi
TomasGrande,
Good points in #1.36. It's so tiring to hear these folks trot out the same old half-truth/half-lies when they should know better. Roy Wilson appears to be one of those low-information voters who only pays attention to views that coincide with his own.
Ret_MSgt 1.41
Nice post especially when it comes to faults of BOTH parties, however, that isn't likely to happen here anytime soon as folks simply thrill at putting each other down. I hope you have a nice day! *smiles*
@DB Akron #1.30, It is also the President's job as chief Executive (see oath of office) to make sure the laws of the country are carried out. That is where Obama's so-called "leadership" has been AWOL ... no push at all for Harry Reid to get it done !
@ BAY LIE #1.32, Really a ridiculous post by you ... Harry Reid has not allowed House-passed BUDGETS to even come up for a vote ! Harry controls, Harry obstructs .... Harry is a "tool" of Obama !
Is the GOP plan to withhold congressional pay constitutional?
====================
The mere notion that this is even a question that is being asked of the group who otherwise acts like they themselves wrote the thing, seems telling enough.
I mean heck, who presented the Bill? I thought the new order of business was that every Bill needed to be accompanied with a Constitutional justification. Shouldn't this question have already been resolved when it was introduced for debate and/or vote?
WOW Jack, you kinda busted IDO (shorthand for Idiot?) with that last post! His post looks much more ridiculous when you actually gave him answers to his stupid questions! I guess if I looked up "low information voter" I would probably see his picture? Typical TPGOP'er!
What a non issue. They don't need the money. Most are millionaires. Many are multi millionaires.
They are making a mnimum of $174,000 per year, if the new non millionaire members are not able to secure a loan to tide them over, they are unqualified for the job.
Caesar Augustus-
"interesting how the far left wants to evaluate what is 'constitutional'.
Fisty do move along, you're vitriol is stale and tiresome"
What's REALLY interesting is how Sleazer Gobustus appears to think the constitution is a right-wing instrument in the same breath where he waxes misogynistic and degrades a woman in an exceedingly crude way in a desperate attempt to support the second half of his empty insult... I dig him because fossils like that are sometimes worth money!!
If I didn't know better I'd think this crass, impotent excuse for a man was barking orders as a means of avoiding having to face his own crassness and impotence.... The way a dog takes to chasing its tail when no one pays attention to it anymore.
The sad thing is the followers of the Republican Party lack the simple character trait of common sense. Everyone with active brain cells knows the old "Obama Bucks-free stuff," is a cooked up extreme right wing excuse as to why Romney lost. The truth is Romney was a bad choice and the majority of Americans rejected him because of that known fact.
Actually, the majority of people that voted for Obama are more educated and have more wealth through higher paying jobs than the folks that voted for Romney. Also, more of the welfare folks favored Romney.
Spare me Femme Portfolio. Fisty is hardly lady like in any sense of the word. Quit trying to defend the Female truckers in here in some sort of attempt to come off less sexist. Look at your moniker tool. Sure it was in 'jest'.
As for the Constitution Femmy (you said you were a dude right?) it is an instrument for the people. I see how you dont disagree however that you pick and choose what is constitutional. So speaking of chasing tails, let me know when you're done with your circular reasoning to promote your posts.
I frankly have no idea why liberals take issue with this provision when the way to get around it is for the senate to simply do their job. Now that pay is on the line liberals sound off about constitutionality and not the fact that Democrats have failed to produce a budget for almost 4 years. Lets finally see the Democrats version of what is fair and reasonable spending by our government. Lets finally see a plan by the Democrats to get our fiscal house in order. These people have a part time six figure job with lavish perks and benefits while the country is hemorrhaging money and amassing debt it simply cannot sustain. The very least any taxpayer should expect is that members of Congress either do their job or don't get paid. Let the courts settle the constitutionality issue and in the meantime why not have everyone demanding they do their job for a change.
ROY WILSON-336103
That would only work if it was a threat that we would issue with no intent to carry out. Otherwise, the expense of additional elections would far outweigh the benefits I'm afraid. How much does an election cost again with our spiraling debt?
I thought we were happiest when they do what they do best - nothing.
Those of you who still have a job, let's see a show of hands from all who would be fired if you failed to do that job...
Now, let's see a show of hands from all of you who would like to see Congress fail to be paid because they have failed to do THEIR job....
Whether or not you agree with the republicans, at least they're doing something, at least they are concerned about the finances of the country. The democrats aren't concerned at all, including the democrats on these forums.
Once again, all they can do is parrot lib sites like huff, nbc, etc. Their party can do no wrong at all, ever.
Ironically, they are exactly what they say the republicans are, and they can't see that.
TomasGrande "Roy, you know you are only telling half the story....Can't you post the reasons WHY there have been budget battles between the House and Senate? What did the House tack onto those budgets that Senetor Reid and the Democrats objected to?"
It's not the responsibility for the House to pass only what they 'think' the Democratic Senate will agree with. Here's how the process normally works;
1 - The House passes what THEY want in a Budget and sends it to the Senate for consideration.
2 - The Senate reviews it and amends it to include/exclude what THEY want.
3 - A Joint Conference Committee meets to resolve their differences, and the revised Budget is then passed by both houses of Congress and sent to the President for signature (or veto).
The problem over the last several years is that the Republican House HAS passed a timely Budget and sent it to the Senate for consideration. At that point, it has been effectively kept in the drawer of the Senate Majority Leader (Harry Reid), who says - "I'm not even going to allow the Senate to consider it, much less amend it".
Normally, the government would be required to shut down everything except emergency operations, but what happens is that they are forced to pass 'continuing resolutions' to keep federal departments from closing down at the last minute, with no cohesive long term plans or budgetary constraints. That's nice for those bureaucrats that don't want to 'change the status quo' (Harry Reid), but it's an incredibly wasteful way of doing business and prevents departments from making longer term plans.
By the way - trying to 'Blame the Republicans' because they control the House of Representatives is just a convenient 'excuse' - In 2009 and 2010, the Democrats controlled the House, the Senate AND the Presidency, and they STILL couldn't find the will to pass a Budget.
ROY WILSON-336103
you mean like the Ryan budget for FY2012 that cut programs like Medicaid while offering potentially huge tax cuts for the rich??? The one that would turn Medicare into a subsidized set of private insurance plans? That kind of budgets?
Don't forget Romney/Ryan was rejected by the voters for a reason.
Come on people, think! If this had anything to do with getting work done in congress, it would be tied to all bills, not just the Paul Ryan budget. The senate will counter by passing their own budget which the house won't pass, and we'll be back to square one. This is just grandstanding, and only stupid people can't see that.
I think we voters should have a say in when or how much any member of congress or all of congress gets paid. They surely over the years have not earned their pay...but have had no problem voting themselves better benefits of one kind or another....while pushing for cuts to everyone and every thing else..but all should notice that no bill asking for cuts in any way effects anything that has to do with congress itself.
Make Mexico pay for any and all damages and or expenses incurred by the United States or
any of its institutions or citizens by Mexican national who entered the United States illegally or
remained in the United States after their visas expired or
caused a person, such as a child to be in the United States unlawfully, or
gave birth to a child while inside the United Stated in order to defraud, or
encouraged a person to enter the United States unlawfully, or
used a non-profit organization, charity, or religion, to aid and/or abet a person who is in the United States unlawfully.
Unconstitutional in every way. Every legal scholar knows this. The intent of the 27th ammendment was to ensure that governmental pay cannot be altered in ANY WAY through ANY LOOPHOLE to prevent sleaze. This violates the Constitution. Period. And the best the republicans could come up with in its defense is that its, "creative?!" I don't mind their intent. Hold feet to the fire until the job gets done. But this is clearly unconstitutional. They need to move on.
Pay will be withheld regardless once the budget fails to pass because the GOP run house will not want to accept more taxes on the rich from the Democratic run Senate, and the Democrats have already promised a budget in the senate, and that it will include new revenue from the rich. So once the Tea Party blocks it, the government will shut down and the paychecks will stop. For everyone. Then something will get done. The GOP is entirely right.
Thus, this bill is completely unnecessary. It has no fathomable purpose other than to make the GOP look ignorant/stupid at best if they don't understand the constitution and its intent, or law-violating criminals at worst if they do understand the constitution and still seek to violate it.
They need to move on.
If the Democrats and Obama proposed a perfect budget the Republicans in the Senate would filibuster it while the Republicans in the house would reject it because Democrats proposed to pay retirees Social Security.
The Republicans in congress are a joke simply because they gave G W Bush a rubber stamp to cut revenue by passing a tax cut that greatly benefited the wealthy then spend as he wished and now the Republicans want the debt to be paid off the backs of the needy and retirees. Republicans have not come up with one dime of defense spending even though the major fighting has ended yet they want more tax cuts for the wealthy. Pathetic.
The reason the house budgets have not been passed by the senate is because they are a joke.
Holding their pay hostage.
If they can do that, they can set the example for private sector employers to treat their labor force the same way.
"You don't get paid for all of your hard work until one day, you convert over to my beliefs. Sign this contract in blood, that you agree to these terms."
I actually think that members of Congress shouldn't even be paid to begin with. Being a congress person shouldn't be a career.
Agreed theCavalier. The low intelligence crowd doesn't understand that though. The senate could pass a budget bill that states that all conservative right wing house members be immediately arrested and imprisoned, their assets seized and sold off, and that by virtue of them taking office, they retroactively agreed to those terms. The house would refuse to address the bill, as they should, and we still end up in gridlock.
The house passed "budgets" are a budget bill in name only. They are more along the lines of deregulating all businesses, punishing all who aren't white males, and filled with blatant pork for the right at the expense of the poor and middle class. Until the time that the house passes a competent budget bill that does not give free rein to only the republicans, they are guilty of abusing the intent of the law just as much as the senate is.
Grow up and do the jobs they were elected to do, or GTFO of office so that someone else can take the position who IS willing to do the job correctly. The low intelligence crowd is just as much a part of the problem as they claim that the senate is.
I consider myself a liberal, but I agree with this law. They don't work, they don't get paid. If you try that in private business the next day you will be applying for unemployment. Since they cannot be fired (until the next election), that is a nice way to put them against the wall. For those who think it is unconstitutional, the resolution does no increase nor decrease the salaries of the congressional personnel, it only states that they won't get paid. Would you pay the plumber to sit down in your house and do nothing, and still expect pay? I don't think so.
Obama, Biden & Hillary - your post 1.59: Please do not drive while drinking. We can see that you are drunk beyond the legal limit. I will second your motion with the Mexicans when all the "American" bankers who bankrupted the USA return the money they took from the tax payers, and/or including bonuses, parachute clauses, money transferred to tax heavens and covered under tax loopholes. Also, when the same "American" bankers return the lost profits caused by their actions and reimburse those affected by their greedy policies. And I will second your motion when all the "American" companies bring their off-shore operations back to the US, instead of paying cheaper labor abroad only to get higher profit margins at the expense of the American worker.
At least you can't say they're doing it for the money.
bayllie "Don't forget Romney/Ryan was rejected by the voters for a reason."
Yes - Here's the reason - Obama won because he increased the number of people getting food stamps by 17 million to 47 million (+57% in 4 years), and then his campaign told them that greedy/rich Romney was going to take away their food stamps. An estimated 13 million of them then voted for Obama vs only 3 million for Romney, and Obama won by less than 5 million votes.
It cost the taxpayers more than $40 Billion per year to subsidize Obama's campaign message, but then who cares about the Deficit?
The Supreme Court based on their recent rulings would necessarily HAVE to find this constitutional. They are not changing the wage of the congresspersons which is what is covered in the 27th amendment, they are simply changing when they get paid. One could argue that withholding pay IS changing pay, but the Court as recently as the Obamacare ruling have reasserted that when there is a question of the constitutionality of a law, deference goes to Congress. I personally don't agree and think the Courts have basically ruled themselves out of relevancy by abdicating their roll as interpreters of the Constitution to a whimsical Congress, but that's neither here nor there,
Of course Congress could steal a page from Obamacare and make passing a budget a mandate (which constitutionally it already is supposed to be) and then make the penalty for non-compliance a tax on all their wages. That BS ruling obviously would make it impossible for the Court to overrule in light of their recent decisions.
Just another GOP political move that is meaningless. To put meaning into it instead of putting it off cancel the payment! All Congressmen and women are so wealthy going without a payday won't affect their life style any and I'm sure because they propose to put it off instead of cancelling it they will pay themselves interest at 9% until they get paid.
Why do you even interject when you so obviously have no clue about what you're talking about? It only makes you look like a fool. Takes notes because here's how the budget process works. The President sends a budget request to Congress. Each house of Congress individually is required BY LAW to come up with their own version of the budget. These two versions of the budget then go to conference to resolve differences.
Contrary to your ridiculous rhetoric, there have been NO budget battles between the House and the Senate. There couldn't be because the Senate -- illegally -- has refused to participate in the budget process...at all. Even though they are required to BY LAW, the Senate Dems haven't even managed to put an annual budget resolution to their own floor for a vote in nearly 3 years. The House has absolutely no role in that failure. There can't be a battle because the Dems in the Senate (again, illegally) staunchly refuse to produce anything to battle about.
I'm saying this to help you...so that maybe next time you feel the urge to respond, you step back, think a second and ask yourself "Do I really have any clue to what I'm talking about?" When you do, it makes you look intelligent. When you don't, as in this case, it makes you look unintelligent, uninformed and like somebody who deserves to be looked at with contempt...who is content to just regurgitate thoughtless rhetoric.
Since when have legalities stopped the GOP from passing bad policies trying to make them laws?
Hahaha, it's obvious Teapublicans used Glenn Beck's chalkboard when trying to "reason" this out.
I think it would be more interesting to take away other "benies" like health care and pension plans.
I'm sure it was. They're still going to get paid for their time, just not timely. Are they seriously thinking the American public voted such idiots into office that they have to give themselves incentives? Me thinks this is a bit of grandstanding to try and prove they are serious about something other than repealing the AHA.
Oops, we had the same basic comment. Should have read you post first, Layton!! I like Jack's train of thought .. with the caveat, they must stay in session until a debt ceiling is passed.
RedDev ... I think we're all thinking along the same lines on this subject! :)
The ACA is no longer a discussion. That monstrosity is going to hit people hard when it is fully implemented and then everyone is going to wonder why it was passed before anyone knew what was in it. But why anyone would call it grandstanding that Republicans in the House want Democrats in the Senate to do their job is beyond me. Democrats have spent almost 4 years avoiding anything that might prove they have no interest in controlling either the debt or the deficits. So let the nation finally see the Democrat plan, of which a budget is the first most logical step to a fiscal solution.
The congressional Republicans continue to prove that they do not want to govern. This is just another ploy to divert attention from the fact that they haven’t passed ANY job legislation. For the next two years all we will see is more and more Republican obstruction and never ending Republican political theater.
If we don’t rid ourselves of this Republican/Tea Party disease in the 2014 election this country will be in for a very nasty economic and social ride. Until the American people wake up to the fact that Republicans do not give a damn about them, America will continue on a downward slide.
It should be obvious to everyone by now that the right wingers want the country to fail so that their puppet masters like the Koch brothers can buy up everything they can for pennies on the dollar…………. Wise up people.
Ignorance of the issues displayed by right leaning people like Rick-3416939 proves that Fox News has perfected the art of spreading lies, misinformation and hate.
My Congressman, Jim Cooper is a Dem and he's sponsored the bill for around 16 years. And this redneck congressman is also a Rhodes scholar so before you make a redneck joke check your credentials.
If the Senate and Democrats had been doing there jobs since 2009 this wouldnt be an issue.
Whats really pathetic is the House of Representatives having to hold the Senates feet to the Fire to get them to do their frigging job.
David Noah oh please...
I guess that House's pay should have been suspended for all of the obstructionist behavior. Or at least a cut in their salaries for purposely lowering the country's credit rating.
We all know how HARD the Republicans have been working, don't we? Look at the work schedule published by Cantor for 2013 and tell me that's not insane.
So please tell us all Chip .... Who has been obstructing the passage of a BUDGET which is required by law ?
Is it Harry Reid ? Is it Obama himself, who has not provided the needed leadership to push Harry on this ??
Budget resolutions aren't laws. The president doesn't sign them. They're often not worth the paper they're printed on — yet they can come back to haunt a lawmaker.
Instead, they set out congressional priorities for taxing and spending. While the Budget Control Act of 1974 instructed both chambers to pass the resolutions, there's no penalty for failure. Indeed, since 1999, several years have seen Congress fail to pass the resolutions.
More important than the resolutions is legislation that appropriates money to federal agencies and programs. As anyone who has been paying attention knows, the lack of resolutions obviously hasn't stopped the government from functioning.
JH, thanks for (trying) to put some light on the topic for jim.
What the right has been passing off as a budget (Ryan's fairy tale) has been a joke which is why it has gone nowhere.
You also have a misunderstanding of the roles that the executive and legislative branches play in the budget.
If Obama getting everything he wants is "obstructionist behavior", I think you need to look up the meaning of the words.
Health care purchase mandate - check
Bailout $$ to the 1%ers because they're BROKE (failing) - check
Taxes on the 1%ers because they're RICH - check
Skimming funds to make ACA "fully funded" - check
Raising taxes on the middle class for funds skimmed - check
Raising the debt ceiling to run the bill up on children - check
Skip going to budget negotiations to take the default cuts in National Security & lay off tens of thousands of engineers - check
Slap the face of immigrants who did so legally by allowing illegals to stay, not have to get an ID (hard to collect taxes on millions of fake names) - check
He's getting everything he wanted and we're still going down the drain. His solution? More spending proposals?
Chip, You are so disingenuos ... you do not have a clue what was in those budgets passed by the House !
Harry Reid tucked them under his butt and has been sitting on them forever since ! Has any President before Barack Hussein Obama gone a full term without ever getting a single budget passed ???
Our country is $16.5 trillion in debt with NO BUDGET, NO PLANS and NO CLUE for the future !
why do i feel that allen and jim had no problems as bush ran two unfunded wars and slashed revenue, causing most of the debt that theyre talking about under obama? keep using his middle name, jim. might as well put a "FOX Brainwashed" sticker on your forehead. HusseinHusseinHusseinHussein. so fun!
People call the act grandstanding.... I call it: listening to what the average US citizen has been saying for years!!!
And now we know why it was worded the way it is. While they can't give themselves official raises... they also can not get their pay taken away. They've guaranteed their high wage no mater how much, or little, they do.
Must be nice to have that kind of security.
Capn-1,
Members of Congress are like lawyers, they get paid whether they accomplish anything or not.
That is why we need a federal pay commission like a couple of the states and territories have, where a non-partisan commission is appointed every four years to set the pay for all levels of that government (federal in this case). In the case of the federal government, the commission would have to meet at the beginning of the election year (January/February) and would have three months to set the pay levels of all federal officials for the next four years. This commission would have the right to raise or lower all salaries and benefits for all elected AND appointed officials, including members of Congress, and all staff members of the administration and Congress. Congress would have NO say in their own salaries or staff salaries/benefits. It would require a Constitutional Amendment to create this commission, but it is just another example of the type of amendment that the Popular Amendment Movement concept could work towards.
Normally the GOP swings too far to the Taliban right for me, but I like this idea of withholding pay until the required job is done. Who ever approved the notion of getting paid before the job is done ?
Agree anti-trust, no elected official should be allowed to determine their own salary
Yeah, I hope the conversation here escalates above the normal, polarizing R vs D issue. Term limits via amendment and pay for performance seems the only logical way to start getting this country moving forward to appease the middle. Since we all have had to make changes to our lifestyle to manage through trying economic times, shouldn't we hold all of our representatives accountable regardless of the letter behind their name?
If they were somehow to enact this moronic proposal it would put the poorer legislators at a political disadvantage compared to the more wealthy ones who don't need the pay check.
It would put the House at a disadvantage relative to the Senate since most senators are millionaires, and it would put ethical senators (like Russ Feingold who's no longer in the Senate) at a disadvantage relative to corrupt senators like David Vitter and John McCain.
Who says the House should be punished if they have done THEIR job ? It is Harry Reid that has taken every House passed budget thus far and tucked it under his butt !
The House has NOT done it's job if the bill is unacceptable to pass the Senate. Similarly the Senate has not done it's job if the bill is unable to pass the House.
jim-
Just because you repeat something after every post does not make it a fact.
1) President Obama has submitted a budget request to Congress every year, as required by The Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
2) Congress creates the Budget Resolution which is supposed to set spending limits on discretionary government programs for the next 5 years. This is an internal congressional document that the president does not sign.
Contrary to your repeated posts, Harry Reid did not "sit on" all of the House budget resolutions. The Seante has voted on several over the last few years, but none of them passed due to partisan disagreements. Several of the House resolutions contained "posion pills" like repealing Obamacare.
3) The US Constitution mandates that spending bills based on the budget resolution must originate in the House. If/when both houses of Congress pass the annual spending bills, the president either signs them into law or vetos them.
So contrary to your posts, neither the President or the Senate have broken any laws or ignored the constitution. Congress as a whole is disfunctional, but the refusal of House Republicans to consider bi-partisan compromises and their repeated attempts to ram through unacceptable items like the repeal of Obamacare are the main reasons for the delay in the budget resolution process.
TNSEVOl-You make jim sound like a complete idiot with your post. But, then again, I guess it wasn't real hard to do! Maybe the rest of the knuckle-draggers that keep repeating the same Fox/Hannity/Beck mantra will be able to understand it now (but I doubt it!). Good post!
TNSEVOL, Nothing you say is relevant ! I have ben looking for a long time and you show no knowledge of financial matters while claiming to be a CPA.
The President as Chief Executive of this country is entrusted to see the laws of this country are carried out. Annual budgets are REQUIRED BY LAW ! Now you can make all the half-assed excuses you want to for him (seems to be a liberal thing ... make excuses or blame others), but Obama HAS FAILED TO SEE A BUDGET GET DONE. Obama also conveniently ignored the existing immigration laws of this country when it did not suit his political needs. Then there was the duly-passed DOMA law he chose to ignore.
Ignoring existing laws he disagrees with seems to be a recurring theme for Obama.
Just an FYI, federal budgets are essentially meaningless since they're advisory only and the actual appropriations are made through a multitude of individual appropriations bills.
Obama has submitted a budget every time. It's not his fault that the House is controlled by ignorant teabaggers who can't agree with the Senate to pass a budget.
Reading is fundamental ... R.I.F. Budgets are required by law ! As Chief Executive of the U.S., Obama is responsible for seeing the laws are carried.
Obama's "budget submissions" have never gotten even 1 Democrat to vote in support ! Care to explain that one genius ??
Withholding pay basically makes some congressmen/women more susceptible to bribery and corruption. A special interest lobbyist could come up and say "having trouble making your house payment? We can cover that for you if you put us on your favoritism list." Sometimes I think the repub party is becoming like a country (good examples are China and some arab ones) that like having a branch within it that is crazy and threatening even violently, so the leaders can have that wild card to scare people into believing they may get that crazy and shut everything down (one senator out of 100 who may represent less than 0.5% of the population can stall any vote and cause a bill to die in Senate, and the Speaker can stop anything from being voted on in the House).
Oh please. They're all millionaires and benefitted from insider trading before it was finally made illegal recently. You honestly don't believe people spend millions of dollars campaigning for something that just pays $100-$200K a year, do you? They're so arrogant about it being acceptable for them that even Nancy Pelosi responded with "Are you KIDDING ME?" when confronted with questions about it.
Ever hear of the politician who went broke because he made bad investments? yeah...me neither.
if these ahsshoes in washington can't do their job they shouldn't receive a dime in pay......that goes for the house, the senate, and the ass in the white house...
I thought the Congress was paid for by special interest groups. You mean they are actually government employees? Who would have thought.....!
Do any of you get paid if you don't do your job?
Ok - so you can't take their pay, but as citizens can't we petition to reduce their pay to start the process of reducing government spending. Can we petition our government to reduce their retirement that we all pay the bill for many, many years. The private sector has seen their wages and retirement reduced while insurance continues to rise. If this group of people don't feeeel what we've experienced then how can we follow them.
I know they have frozen their pay raises but lets see if they are really committed to getting our house in order. Many of us have made those hard choices in our homes and businesses.
Yes you can. Wasn't there already a petition to reduce salaries of elected officials to only 75k to assist in deficit reduction? I may have gotten the numbers wrong.
However, such things would go into effect the next congressional session due to the amendment. I would also say that this proposal of withholding the pay isn't quite constitutional. I think that's a problem with the wording of the amendment and they should have been more careful when writing it.
Republicans propose that nobody in Congress, including themselves, gets paid until they all do their job and the Democrats are up in arms???? ....not surprising.......how will the media spin this one??
House repubs should start by giving back half their pay the last two years, they had more recess than any congress in history and stopped any progress just to stop Obama and the dems who did not ask for all that recess, plus last the world judged who was at fault they got the blame for dropping our credit rating with the last debt ceiling fight of 2011. Does that mean they increased our deficits and debt more with higher risk they placed on our US Treasury bonds? Where do they invest, foreign companies and China?
What exactly did they stop? Seriously - I know MSNBC tells you that all the time, but do you actually KNOW of anything that was blocked? It's a poorly designed smokescreen to cover for the fact the Senate hasn't done their job since Harry Reid took control.
Allen-I believe the 2012 Congress was the most inefficient, and accomplished the least of any in history, so besides passing the "Eliminate Obamacare" bill 30 some times (the very definition of insanity), what exactly did they accomplish? You know, since they didn't "stop" anything like you say. But I guess you could be right though, as if you never start anything, you certainly can't be held accountable for stopping anything.
I believe the intent of the 27th Amendment was to prevent Congress from RAISING their compensation except at the beginning of another two year term. This is something all lawyers will argue until a Federal Court puts it to rest. I doubt if it would ever get to the Supreme Court. IMO it is more Congressional deflection from the real issues and more for political purposes than anything else.
Does anyone think the other 311,000,000 or so of us could care less if it is unconstitutional to hold back their pay?
I sure don't. Dock the bas****s, and dock 'em good.
And the Grand Obstructionist Party continues their charade.
Is the bill just introduced by Diane Feinstein regarding guns constitutional?
Yes. Read Scalia's majority opinion to District of Columbia v Heller, 2008, Supreme Court decision.
Sounds good to me. If they aren't doing their job either fire them or they don't get paid.
And the progressive continue to bitch about it because someone might take something away from them that they haven't earned in the first place.....
"At this point what difference does it make???"
Much like the no tax pledge so many signed it should be perfectly fine to sign a mass resignation pledge in lieu of an agreement and publish the pledge.
If the debt limit does not get raised, due to the Democrats in the Senate being unreasonable and the U.S. reaches it's spending limit, don't see why pay couldn't be withheld. Why should Congress members get paid if other bills need to be put on hold.
Democrats in the Senate need to quit their obstruction tactics, or the U.S. will turn into GREECE sooner than expected.
Is it just me or do all these conservative neo-con, teaparty, republicans, sound like they are big baby's since they lost the election...Waaaaaaahhhh. Dang get over it... All of your BS didn't work to make the President a one term President...You lost, you are losers, the republican party is going down the tubes...You sound so pitiful, repeating the same things that didn't work before. You were wrong, you are still wrong... I know you so fear change but you are just going to have to deal with reality now.... poor little publicans...
Damn Tim, I couldn't have said it better myself!
Grow the hell up Timmy ! Our country is $16.5 trillion in debt and Obama has nver had a freakin budget as required by law.
How do you pay your bills Timmy Boy ... minimum payments, raising your credit limit, or waiting for your welfare check to come rolling in ???
The reality issssssss..... Debt, more debt, some more debt, and some more debt, raise some taxes, but don't cut spending, and RAISE THE DEBT.
Is this what you are talking about Tim? Are you saying just to ignore the fact that the debt is increasing faster and faster every day, and we are spending more and more every day? We should just ignore it, because you don't care, as long as you get yours? This is the absolute definition of INSANITY.
Is the DNC plan to not have a budget constitutional?
I agree with this strategy. There is very little we can do with only the House. Best is to stop Obama from passing anything meaningful without getting destroyed in the process. Hold the House in 2014 and Obama's damage will be minimized.
Is the Republican Plan to subvert the popular vote in Presidential Elections Constitutional? Progressives pay attention! The GOP is trying to steal elections right before our very eyes.
Oh no, the republicans trying to steal elections, hilarious. In the meantime libtards work endlessly to ensure illegals are able to stay and collect the freebies that keep them voting for progressives. Of course that's when they aren't busy making sure nobody suffers the humiliation of having to provide proof of their identity when voting, because of course that would be discriminatory, just like when they're discriminated against when asked to provide ID to buy alcohol, cigarettes, etc. Of all the libtard websites MSNBC has to be the funniest; they have the least intelligent and least informed group of progressive morons available, it's great comedy to read their comments. Now go ahead and whine about my comment libbies, and you still won't be a fraction smarter than a cornflake.
DEMOCRATS being obstructive !? That is so rich from the party of NO !
Wake up buddy. Replicans crow about what the American people want and then vote against it. Look at the poles. They play to their (less than majority) base and say thats what we want we want.