Constitution 101: Congressional Pay Clause

We have come to the juicy part of our Constitution, where members of Congress get paid.

Congressional salaries have come under great scrutiny since our nation was founded. Lately, with the administration’s appointments and confirmation hearings, some may say, “Congress spends too much time investigating the people when someone should be investigating how members of Congress went in poor and came out rich.”

There have been several recent examples of politicians claiming they were poor when they ran only to retire wealthy off their congressional salaries.

While this may be true, our Founders clearly believed members of Congress deserved to get compensated for their work.

The first sentence of Article 1, Section 6, Clause 1, reads, “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.” While this seems straightforward, there is actually a bunch of issues packed in here.

While our Founders knew that serving in Congress was not a full-time job, it would take a good deal of time away from other work, especially with travel. If the government did not pay congressmen, the fear was that the position would only be open to those wealthy enough to not need the money to serve. This argument did not go away, as early congressmen were paid so poorly. Congressional pay is even something debated still today.

Secondly, it was decided to pay them out of the national treasury. The alternative was to have each state pay its representatives out of the individual state treasuries. This idea was nixed for several reasons. One would argue that since congressmen worked for the federal government, they should be paid by the federal government. If congressmen were paid by their states, their primary loyalty would be to their state. They may be tempted to vote for their state’s interests instead of the good of the nation. Finally, if payments were left to the states, there could be a discrepancy between the salaries of congressmen.

The fear was that some states may not pay enough to incentivize anyone to run for Congress.

Our Constitution allows Congress to set its own pay. While one would expect Congress to abuse this clause, interestingly enough, they have not.

When Congress first met, they voted themselves a whopping $6 for every day Congress was in session.

Even at the time, this was not considered a great amount, and there were some complaints that it was not enough to attract good-quality candidates.

If it seemed low in 1789, it was even worse 27 years later when it had not changed. All during those years, there was squabbling about pay. Some felt it was not worth their time; however, others resisted a raise as it might attract the wrong type of person.

Yet after more than two decades, it was finally time to fix the situation when Congress changed how they were compensated and voted in an annual salary of $1,500.

The pay did not last long.

Americans were so outraged over the extreme salary that they voted out anyone who did not agree to repeal the law. Congress quickly reverted back to $6 a day.

While the pay did eventually rise to $8 a day, it took four more decades, until 1855, for Congress to go back to an annual salary, this time a measly $3,000.

It was said to be about the same as a government clerk. Over the next half-century, there were small pay raises so that by 1907, it had risen to $5,000 a year. Still not a great amount for the time.

A big change came after WWI when there was a push to professionalize Congress.

What had changed in the Progressive Era (1897-1920) was the growth of government. That growth meant more committees, more legislation, and more constituent demands. There was also the hope that more income would stop corruption and influence from outside sources. To accommodate these new demands, a more competitive salary of $10,000 was voted in.

The pattern did not last long, however. As government got even bigger in the 1930s congressional salaries actually dropped as low as $8,500 with the demands of the Great Depression, but they rebounded after WWII to $12,500.

By the 1980s, congressional salaries had jumped to $89,500 per year. While this number was still seen as low, it was a big jump from 1973 when Congress was making $42,500. Even more people were concerned about the money being made from speeches, books and mostly from special interest groups.

During the 1980s, University of Texas student Gregory Watson discovered that a bill proposed by James Madison did not have a ratification deadline date.

Watson began a grassroots movement to finish what Madison had started. The bill 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.”

Before the new Madison bill was considered, Congress passed the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, which raised congressional salaries to $125,100 by 1991 but also banned members of Congress, judges, and senior executive officials from being paid for speeches, lectures, or appearances. It was also supposed to bring more transparency and restrictions on gifts, meals, and travel funded by outside groups.

Following the Ethics Reform Act, in December of that year, Maryland got the ball rolling by ratifying Madison’s original bill and other states followed suit. Needing three-fourths of the states to ratify an amendment, Michigan became the 38th state in 1992, creating the 27th Amendment.

Even with this pay jump, there are still calls for higher congressional salaries.

Congressmen and women currently make $174,000 per year. While many would be ecstatic for that salary, the average salary of CEOs of S&P 500 companies is $17.1 million, $650,000 for surgeons, and $435,000 for lawyers in top firms. The idea is the same as when members of Congress made just $6 a day. With such low relative pay, it may be difficult to get the best of the best to be willing to take a cut in pay to run for office.

James Finck is a professor of American history at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma. He can be reached at HistoricallySpeaking1776@gmail.com. Thanks to Southwest Ledger for sharing his column.