Twenty Seventh Amendment- Salary of Congress

"No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened."


In my opinion, the twenty seventh amendment is a way of deterring Congressional members from passing legislation solely to benefit their own pocketbooks. This is done by having any legislation that changes the compensation of Senators and Representatives not go into effect until the next term. I think this is good in theory but in practice it does not work so well. This is due to the fact that many of the Senators and Representatives that are voting on the raise increases will be back in office the next term. If this is not the case then they probably have friends that will be there next term.






My Opinion: I chose this video because I think it is very bold for a Congressman to speak out so boldly about this issue. I completely agree with Senator Buchanan's stance that Congress should only get a raise when the nations budget is no longer a deficit. This just makes sense. Almost everyone who has a job gets a raise based on performance. Even those who get yearly pay increases are unlikely to keep them if their performance does not stay equal or even improve. The performance of Congress is almost entirely based on how the nation is fairing. Right now the nation is not fairing well on many levels and by increasing the salaries of our leaders during a time like this we are not holding them accountable.



Congress Getting a Pay Raise- How About You?
By: Robert Longley
January 3, 2009

Some say they work hard for the money, and unless they pass a bill rejecting it, members of the U.S. Congress will get $4,700 cost-of-living (COLA) raise beginning in January 2009. The average member of Congress will realize a 2.8 percent raise, bringing his or her annual salary to $174,000. The raises for congress will cost taxpayers $2.5 million during 2009.

With passage of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, lawmakers authorized themselves the automatic – no debate, no vote – annual cost-of-living raise unless they specifically pass legislation rejecting or reducing it. Congress has voted to reject the automatic raise six times since then, most recently in 2007. In 2008, lawmakers accepted a $4,100 raise. So far, no legislation rejecting the 2009 COLA increase has been introduced.

Article 1, Section 6 of the Constitution requires Congress to set its own pay. From 1789 through 1968, Congress set its pay by passing stand-alone legislation, voting itself raises 22 times. By 1968, the first congressional salary of $1,500 (1815-1817) had increased to $30,000. While Congress can still pass stand-alone legislation to increase its own pay, and did so in 1982, 1983, 1989, and 1991, members have since depended on the automatic cost-of-living adjustment for their raises.

"The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States." -- U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 6

From 1789 to 1855, members of Congress received only a per diem (daily payment) of $6.00 to $7.00 while in session, except for a period from December 1815 to March 1817, when they received $1,500 a year. Members began receiving a regular annual salary in 1855, when they were paid $3,000 per year.

During the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin proposed that elected government officials not be paid for their service. Franklin’s proposal won little support. As you might guess, this year’s automatic raise for Congress coming as millions of American workers are giving up their cost-of-living raises in an effort to save their jobs -- if they still have them – has similarly won little support.


My Opinion: I chose this article because it points out a few of the ways that Congress can give themselves a pay raise. I find it very interesting that Congress answers to no one when it comes to their salaries. Most people get a pay raise from their boss. The American people are the boss of Congress and so I believe that we should be the ones deciding if and when their salaries are increased. The problem is not in the amount it is in who decides.