As the federal government shutdown drags into its fifth week, Senator John Kennedy from Louisiana has put forth two bills aimed at changing the mindset of lawmakers by tying their pay to the government’s funding status. His intention is to ensure that Congress feels the same financial pinch as federal employees, who are currently working without pay. In a notable tweet, Kennedy emphasized, “None of our staff are being paid. No federal employees are being paid… we should lose our paychecks.” This sentiment resonates deeply given the ongoing frustration from the public regarding the shutdown.
The first bill, aptly titled the No Shutdown Paychecks to Politicians Act, proposes to eliminate congressional salaries whenever the government is not funded. Notably, this bill also stipulates that no retroactive pay would follow such lapses. The second proposal, the Withhold Member Pay During Shutdowns Act, takes a more cautious approach following constitutional guidelines. This bill would put congressional pay into escrow during shutdown periods, releasing it only when the next Congress begins, thereby adhering to the 27th Amendment, which prohibits changing lawmakers’ compensation during a term.
Rep. Bryan Steil from Wisconsin, who sponsors the companion measure in the House, articulated the logic behind these proposals: “If service members, men and women of federal law enforcement, and other essential employees are working without pay during the Schumer shutdown, members of Congress should not be paid either.” His remarks highlight a growing sentiment that lawmakers must share the burden with federal workers.
The impetus for such measures stems from a mounting public outcry as the current shutdown persists, which originated from disputes over budgetary matters linked to healthcare funding and tax credits. This deadlock has resulted in hundreds of thousands of federal employees, including key personnel such as air traffic controllers and active-duty military members, going without their expected pay. As these workers fulfill their responsibilities, members of Congress continue to receive their salaries due to protections in the Constitution.
There is significant bipartisan momentum for accountability on this front. Kennedy stated, “My bills ensure Congress feels the same pain as the folks we’re failing to pay — our troops, air traffic controllers, and federal workers.” This argument makes it clear that if Congress is unable to fund the government, they should not benefit financially.
Attempts to withhold congressional pay during shutdowns are not new, yet they have often run into constitutional challenges. The 27th Amendment presents hurdles, but Kennedy’s second bill aims to navigate these issues more effectively — deferring payments rather than canceling them outright. This strategy helps avoid potential legal disputes while holding lawmakers accountable.
As federal workers continue to face increasingly severe financial hardship, examples of this struggle abound. TSA officers are reporting higher absenteeism as they seek other sources of income, and spouses of Coast Guard members are organizing food drives to support their families. Meanwhile, many federal contractors, who are not assured back pay, face extended financial difficulties.
The political stalemate that initiated the shutdown remains unresolved. House Republicans passed a clean continuing resolution on September 19, yet opposition from most Democrats, who are advocating for extensions of Affordable Care Act tax credits and changes to Medicaid funding, has resulted in a deadlock that leaves much of the federal government without resources.
In addition to Kennedy’s proposals, other lawmakers are also advocating for financial accountability during shutdowns. For instance, Senator Bernie Moreno from Ohio has suggested a tax on congressional wages of up to 100% during shutdowns. Meanwhile, Senator Lindsey Graham from South Carolina has put forth a constitutional amendment that would permanently eliminate congressional salaries during such crises. However, the path for amendments is steep; they require the backing of two-thirds of both houses and ratification by three-fourths of the states.
Kennedy’s approach is designed to yield quicker action by coupling immediate measures with constitutionally sound solutions. He believes that lack of pay should not be seen as leverage, expressing during a floor speech that he does not consider unpaid salaries or empty dinner plates as bargaining chips.
Though some lawmakers have chosen to forgo their pay voluntarily, including Rep. Steil, who mentioned, “I’ve had my pay withheld and believe every member of Congress should do the same,” these actions lack binding authority over all members. Kennedy’s legislative proposals aim to create enforceable policies that would close this loophole.
This new push for reform adds urgency to the longstanding debate over the fairness of congressional privileges during shutdowns. Such proposals have surfaced during past major shutdowns since the 1990s, but few have garnered enough support to be enacted. As the current shutdown potentially approaches record lengths, public sentiment may be primed for a serious examination of congressional compensation practices under these circumstances.
While the fate of Kennedy’s bills remains uncertain, they hinge on garnering support not just from Senate Democrats but also from House members, many of whom view the current impasse as a failure of conservative lawmakers. The optics of Congress continuing to receive paychecks while their constituents suffer financially are difficult for many to defend. “Congress should not get special treatment,” Kennedy firmly stated. “If federal workers can go without pay, so can we.” This resolve reflects a significant shift in the dialogue surrounding accountability in government, as lawmakers must reckon with the implications of their decisions on those they represent.
"*" indicates required fields
