Is It Constitutional To Withhold Congressional Pay?

[DonViejo]

SAHIL KAPUR JANUARY 18, 2013, 3:25 PM

The GOP’s latest debt ceiling proposal to withhold pay for lawmakers if their chamber does not pass a budget may face a tricky hurdle: the Constitution.

The plan, as House Republican leaders described it Friday afternoon, would authorize a three-month debt limit increase in exchange for an ultimatum: Congress either passes a budget or congressman and senators have their pay withheld until they do.

But there is some doubt among constitutional scholars reached by TPM shortly after the GOP proposal was made public about whether it passes muster under the 27th Amendment.

The 27th Amendment to the Constitution provides: “No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.”

-snip-

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2013/01/gop-debt-ceiling-plan-27th-amendment.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

[Vic Vinegar]

1. It is not

This is public debt. It must be paid by the 14th amendment! Demand OBAMA to not take blackmail from the Tea Party!

[former9thward]

2. It is.

The compensation is not being changed. It would be withheld until the budget. They would get their full pay. There is nothing in the Constitution about what the pay schedule is.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

3. The Republicans seem like they're still trying to instigate a negotiation

They've just (temporarily) given the first hostage up and found a new one. Dems, hold firm! NO NEGOTIATIONS OVER THE DEBT CEILING! Call the Republicans out for trying to drag this drama out for another 3 mos!

[ancianita]

4. It's more political theater. Pay is supposedly handled by the Office of Personnel Management,

which is supposedly an independent body subject to no one's authority in government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Personnel_Management

Who actually appoints these people to perpetuate themselves is also a mystery. Apparently, being a quasi-independent body subject to none of the three legislative branches, probably noone but the AG could make them subject to any legal pressure to stop paychecks.

Like the Fed, they seem exist in some shaded area in a 'money tree' beyond clear lines of control. http://www.opm.gov/budget/

How can Congress represent 'The People' when The People can't clearly control whether or not they get paid. And Congressional Republicans know this.

[Recursion]

6. They handle everybody's clearances, so they have the dirt on everybody

They're basically guaranteed the bureaucratic upper hand in any contest.

[onenote]

8. You are totally mistaken or misinformed about OPM

OPM is not some secretive pseudo governmental body subject to no one's authority. It is an "independent agency" -- same as the FCC, the FTC, FERC, the Social Security Administration and numerous others. It is referred to as an "independent agency" because, while constitutionally part of the executive branch, it is headed by an official who, while appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate, is not subject to dismissal by the President as would be a cabinet office head. OPM was created by, and is governed by, a statute enacted by Congress that gives it specific enumerated powers, just as is the case with other independent agencies.

I have no idea why you would post the nonsense you posted, but hopefully people won't be misled.

[ancianita]

9. Very nice. Thanks for the lecture on independent agencies, a matter unknown to most people.

All knowledge and clarifications are appreciated. As you've described them here the structure of independent agencies blocks any direct public accountability for congressional performance.

Misled people are all over DU, which is hardly mine or anyone's intention.

At least I'm reposting what I'm reading, trying to make sense of WHO cuts the paychecks for Congress, and any possibility that the public might apply the same kind of pressure politics that Congress applies to those who clearly want constructive governance. To know who cuts the checks might help answer the OP's question of any congressional pay stoppage's being constitutional or not.

I say that what I've read gives no real answer.

You offer no better links or answers for the OP, even as you claim my thinking about my links is nonsense.

From what you say here, I would conclude that stopping Congressional pay is impossible, because the lines of authority that stop congressional pay are known, but not to the public, so the question here of its constitutionality is moot.

[Recursion]

5. The 13th Amendment comes to mind. Even Congressmen can't be made to work for free (nt)

[ancianita]

7. Hanging out and playing at working isn't payable work. They've gotten away with this bs

long enough. Obama is right. Enough, already. For being the most do-nothing Congress in history they've already been overpaid.