Payment of Elected Officials

Article one, Section 6 of the U.S. constitution says, “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.”

I believe that is a good way to pay them for their service. That arrangement gives the legislators a sense of connection and responsibility to the Federal Government because it pays them. But, since they make the law, it also gives them control over their own pay. The nation’s founders thought such self-control might lead to abuses and proposed an amendment (along with other amendments – 10 of which became The Bill of Rights) which stated, “No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.”

Unfortunately, the bill wasn’t passed at that time and languished as an unratified amendment proposal until sufficient abuses accumulated to stir the states into action. Finally in 1992 it was passed becoming the 27th amendment to our constitution.

Initially, at the Constitutional Convention, the debate was whether the Federal Government should compensate the legislators or leave the matter to the states. The question was essentially, "To whom would the legislators would owe their allegiance?" The concern was they might not represent their states so well if they were paid by the federal government.

I believe that enough abuses have accumulated that it is time to reexamine the issue. First, I would refine the amendment so that Senators are constrained in the same way as the Representatives – that they also must go through an intervening election. I assume the original amendment was written the way it was because Senators were not, at that time, elected by popular vote.

Second, I would propose an amendment that would limit the Legislators to receiving only their personal compensation from the Federal Treasury with all other perquisites and payments being paid by the state that elected them.

The “other perquisites and payments” would include such things as office expenses, travel, staff, meals, medical and dental costs etc. Such an amendment would place the activities of the legislators under the watchful eye of those who elected them. Such an amendment would encourage legislators to more closely represent their state in the federal mix. And such an amendment would put restraints on things like an unnecessarily large staff or an extravagantly furnished office or apartment. It would also limit villas in the Bahamas, unnecessary jumbo jets for transportation and expensive, non-productive junkets to foreign countries.

Such a proposal does not go to the question of, “Can our nation afford those expenses?” Rather it addresses the question, “Should our legislators distance themselves so far, at public expense, from those whom they represent that they no longer represent them?”

Why not contact your representative and ask him/her if they would like to sponsor such legislation?