Darrell Issa raises constitutional question about GOP’s new debt-ceiling plan
Issa notes in a statement provided to The Hill that the 27th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits Congress from varying its own pay.
The amendment was designed to prevent Congress from raising its own pay before an election has happened.
“I have not read the legislative text of the ‘No Budget, No Pay’ proposal and how it approaches historically difficult questions about Congressional compensation. I would note that there has even been legal action taken challenging the current system that gives Members of Congress an automatic pay-raise,” he said.
He said that Congress can “certainly withhold pay,” under the Constitution. This may mean that members would have to be paid before the end of the 113th Congress even if they have not passed a budget — raising questions about the effectiveness of the act.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
A member of Congress reading the Constitution! They are so few and bar between.
gophergirl on January 20, 2013 at 1:31 PM
Just go home, go home GOP but most especially YOU Issa. You represent Mexifornia, and let Holder skate.
The GOP should not engage in this charade and sham of a government anymore.
Hairy Reed breaks the law four years running and the nation rewards the democrats, go home.
Give the people precisely what they voted for, I have enjoyed living in a Republic I am certain that at best a Robesperreian Democracy will be a joy and at worst an Empire must be peachy.
harlekwin15 on January 20, 2013 at 1:34 PM
Congressional pay doesn’t even amount to a grain of sand on the beach of the out of control budget.
But hey, talk about everything except how the federal government is borrowing 40 cents for every dollar spent.
Rebar on January 20, 2013 at 1:42 PM
Issa, what is this ‘constitution’ thing you speak of? NOT much of that going on from bho/team/dc now days it seems! Is this a new word that comes up every now and them with you guys?
L
letget on January 20, 2013 at 1:43 PM
^then
L
letget on January 20, 2013 at 1:44 PM
See, classic example of the GOP shooting themselves in the foot on messaging. All they had to do was say they’d raise the debt ceiling with the Senate passing a budget resolution.
But no, the idiots had to stick some nonsensical gimmick like not paying Congress and it takes center stage. No one is talking about the Senate passing a budget, but everyone is talking about this stupid idea of not paying Congress.
ButterflyDragon on January 20, 2013 at 1:47 PM
No, Issa is misunderstanding. It requires a Congress to stand election before the amount of pay can be changed. They aren’t proposing that the rate of pay for members of Congress be changed, they are proposing a change in WHEN they are paid. That does not require Congress to stand election. Currently they are paid every month. This proposal would simply delay payment until after a budget produced. It doesn’t change the salary for Congress.
crosspatch on January 20, 2013 at 1:53 PM
The amendment does not say a change in the amount, it says any variation in compensation. Withholding pay could definitely be considered a variation.
AngusMc on January 20, 2013 at 2:20 PM
When Heller backed this in 2011, the language was that it wouldn’t take effect until February 2013 precisely because of this constitutional question, so now that would have to be pushed back to 2015. The point loses some of its punch if you acknowledge the delay, which is why Heller doesn’t ever mention it.
theperfecteconomist on January 20, 2013 at 2:36 PM
Besides, these Congress critters don’t depend on their Congressional pay so much. They dip into their campaign funds and have lots of other places to suck money out of. Stopping their pay doesn’t do much to really hurt them.
The move is to shut down the feral government, not some rinky-dink game with Congressional pay (which they’ll get eventually, anyway). But, the Weeping Boner thinks that he can do this to shut up the people who want him GONE. WRONG, Boner-head. You need to go. You don’t know jack about how to run the House and you are nothing but a doormat for the Indonesian and his lunatic dem junta. This idea is as pathetic as the rest of things you’ve done. Useless and stupid, just like you.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on January 20, 2013 at 2:55 PM