The gimmick nature of this whole thing I won't elaborate on. It's been done before. The fact that this provision of withholding pay from Members of Congress is unconstitutional as it varies Members' pay is obvious. The argument that withholding pay for a year and a half or a year and three-quarters is not varying compensation. It is constitutionally laughable and beneath respect. Secondly, this is institutionalized bribery and extortion. It should never be considered. What this provision says is if you vote the way we think you ought to vote, you'll get paid. If you vote the way we think you should not vote, you will not get paid. That's why we have this provision in the Constitution. We should not be bribing Members. We should not say to a Member that if you think the budget before you is not good for the country, vote against it and you won't get paid; if you think it's not good for the country, you better vote for it because you have a mortgage payment coming due. How dare we. Finally, the last thing we want to do is say to people thinking of running for the Congress, if you're not a millionaire, don't run because there's no guarantee you'll be paid.
On the recordJanuary 23, 2013
Source
govinfo.govShare
More from Jerry Nadler
Sep 19, 2024
Let's be real. The reason these migrants are in New York is because they were bused there involuntarily by Governor Abbott of Texas. Mr. LaLota's bill would remove from New York all Federal funding for schools, all funding for…
Jan 23, 2025
I strongly oppose this legislation, which is not rooted in medical realities. Physicians do not abort babies after birth, period. Healthcare providers have always been legally required to provide appropriate care. Patients and providers…
Dec 12, 2024
On that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 236, nays 173, not voting 22, as follows: [Roll No. 501] YEAS--236 Aderholt Aguilar Alford Allen Amodei…





