Congress Salary and Compensation Funded by State?

#1
NorthDallas40

NorthDallas40

Displaced Hillbilly
Joined
Oct 3, 2014
Messages
58,108
Likes
84,628
#1
So first off I know this is a pipe dream and is still born before it goes anywhere.

But can somebody tell me why the compensation package for Congress doesn’t come from the states they represent? I mean they don’t represent “the people” they represent their district or state. So why doesn’t their compensation package come from their state? And why doesn’t their state legislature control the package makeup? And why can’t each state set limits on gifts to their Congressional representatives. Don’t get me started on the crooks controlling their own salary and benefits package.

But why the federal budget? They’re supposed to work for their state. I mean... historically people pay attention to who writes their paycheck right? 🤷‍♂️
 
  • Like
Reactions: assembler, Orangeburst, SpaceCoastVol and 5 others
#2
#2
So I found this on touching on the subject. But frankly I’m not sure I agree with the premise. They purposely wanted to narrow the states power over their representatives? Why? They work for the damn state!

U.S. Senate: Congressional Pay

Here is another one

Who Decides How Much Congress Gets Paid?

The general reasoning seems to be that they want the Congress members not beholden to the states. I don’t get that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#4
#4
NorthDallas40 said:
So first off I know this is a pipe dream and is still born before it goes anywhere.

But can somebody tell me why the compensation package for Congress doesn’t come from the states they represent? I mean they don’t represent “the people” they represent their district or state. So why doesn’t their compensation package come from their state? And why doesn’t their state legislature control the package makeup? And why can’t each state set limits on gifts to their Congressional representatives. Don’t get me started on the crooks controlling their own salary and benefits package.

But why the federal budget? They’re supposed to work for their state. I mean... historically people pay attention to who writes their paycheck right? 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...

Their pay and benefits should come from the states they represent and it should be a part time job. Paid accordingly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb, tbwhhs, AM64 and 1 other person
#5
#5
volfanhill said:
Easier to give themselves raises this way
Click to expand...
But as much as we laud the founding fathers in this case they explicitly set the Treasury as the source of funds supposedly to not let the states have as much control over them. That doesn’t seem intuitive to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#6
#6
hog88 said:
Their pay and benefits should come from the states they represent and it should be a part time job. Paid accordingly.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. That’s what makes sense to me. But even all the way back to when the Constitution was written they purposely pointed to the US Treasury. That seems like it doomed the compensation to failure at the beginning.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#7
#7
NorthDallas40 said:
But as much as we laud the founding fathers in this case they explicitly set the Treasury as the source of funds supposedly to not let the states have as much control over them. That doesn’t seem intuitive to me.
Click to expand...
I agree. Not something I had ever thought of to be honest. Going to need to read up on it some. Thanks for the interesting topic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, hog88, Orangeslice13 and 1 other person
#8
#8
volfanhill said:
I agree. Not something I had ever thought of to be honest. Going to need to read up on it some. Thanks for the interesting topic.
Click to expand...
I’d really like to hear arguments for and against. At least this topic seems to not be partisan as I don’t see it to be party defined unless partisan in this case is citizens against the crooked bastards. I’m hoping since it isn’t Red vs Blue that will mute the politics on it quite a bit.

Maybe there is a clear specific reason. But right now I don’t get it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#10
#10
Why would the state government pay the salary of someone who works for the federal government? This thread is stoopid.
 
#12
#12
Pay initially defined in Article I Section 6 and not modified again until the 27th amendment

Section. 6.

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. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.


27th Amendment

No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.[4]
 
#16
#16
Tyler Durden said:
Idk I think it has to do with the Constitution
Click to expand...
Correct. I linked it above. Article I Section 6 set the source of their pay as the US Treasury. Do you think that makes sense if they are supposed to represent their district or state.

Look I’m not trying to argue with you and I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer as we’re just expressing our own opinions here.
 
#17
#17
volfanhill said:
I thought they worked for the people in the states they represent?

Lol.....lol...sorry...
Click to expand...
They're elected by the people in their states/districts, but their job is to create, vote on, and enact laws that will affect the entire nation.
 
#18
#18
NorthDallas40 said:
Correct. I linked it above. Article I Section 6 set the source of their pay as the US Treasury. Do you think that makes sense if they are supposed to represent their district or state.

Look I’m not trying to argue with you and I don’t think there is a right or wrong answer as we’re just expressing our own opinions here.
Click to expand...
See above
 
#19
#19
Tyler Durden said:
They're elected by the people in their states/districts, but their job is to create, vote on, and enact laws that will affect the entire nation.
Click to expand...
No doubt. However in the laws which they debate and negotiate on where do you think their main focus should be? Their constituents and state or no specific focus what so ever?

Do you agree with my premise that you tend to pay attention to the person/people that write your paycheck?
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfanhill
#22
#22
volfanhill said:
That’s not the question. We are well aware as to how it was set up. ND is simply asking if it makes sense. Not something I had considered before. I think he has a a good point.
Click to expand...
I think when they are working in a federal capacity, making decisions, and creating policies that affect the entire nation, not just their constituents, then it makes sense that they are paid as federal employees.
 
#23
#23
NorthDallas40 said:
No doubt. However in the laws which they debate and negotiate on where do you think their main focus should be? Their constituents and state or no specific focus what so ever?

Do you agree with my premise that you tend to pay attention to the person/people that write your paycheck?
Click to expand...
Pretty sure their main focus is always on getting reelected, so they're always keeping their constituents in mind. That's why a lot of the Republicans today and Democrats under Obama have/had a hard time going against the president.
 
#24
#24
Tyler Durden said:
I think when they are working in a federal capacity, making decisions, and creating policies that affect the entire nation, not just their constituents, then it makes sense that they are paid as federal employees.
Click to expand...
So if I infer that the states send them to Congress you don’t want any special focus on their home state and to weigh all states equally and by separating their compensation from their state legislature they are not needlessly hindered in their legislative debates ? Is that a reasonable way to state your stance?

I am not trying to trap you I give you my word I’m just trying to expand on and infer from your post. We are just comparing opinions.
 
#25
#25
NorthDallas40 said:
I agree with you. That’s what makes sense to me. But even all the way back to when the Constitution was written they purposely pointed to the US Treasury. That seems like it doomed the compensation to failure at the beginning.
Click to expand...

The FFs set it up to be a part time job so my guess is they never envisioned what congress would evolve into.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb, tbwhhs, Smokey X and 2 others
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top