[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 6]
[Senate]
[Pages 7405-7406]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




      REPEALING AUTOMATIC PAY ADJUSTMENTS FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

  Mr. REID. The recently passed Omnibus appropriations bill completed 
unfinished business from the Bush administration, which funded the 
Government to provide critically needed services for the American 
people. The omnibus that was signed into law last week also eliminated 
the congressional cost-of-living adjustment for 2010.
  During debate on that bill, I sought unanimous consent of this body 
to take up and pass freestanding legislation to permanently end the 
automatic cost-of-living adjustment and instead require Members of 
Congress to vote for or against all future adjustments.
  Especially in this hour of economic crisis, the overwhelming majority 
of Democrats and Republicans would agree that we should end this 
practice of automatic adjustments. Senator Feingold has championed this 
cause for a long time, 17 years to be exact. I applaud him for his 
leadership. Others have tried to take this issue from Senator Feingold, 
but it is his issue and has been, I repeat, for 17 years. This should 
have passed last Tuesday when I asked unanimous consent for the bill to 
pass. One week later, let's see who objects to passing this bill. It 
should have been done last week.
  An overwhelming bipartisan majority of Senators is undeterred by the 
obstruction that took place last week. Passing this legislation to 
permanently end the automatic cost-of-living adjustment for Members is 
the right thing to do.
  Absent any further objections, we should do so right now and pass it.

[[Page 7406]]

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the 
immediate consideration of S. 620, introduced earlier today.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 620) to repeal the provision of law that 
     provides automatic pay adjustments for Members of Congress.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be 
read three times and passed; the motion to reconsider be laid upon the 
table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related 
to this bill be printed in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The bill (S. 620) was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, 
was read the third time, and passed, as follows:

                                 S. 620

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF AUTOMATIC PAY ADJUSTMENTS FOR 
                   MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 601(a) of the 
     Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 31) is 
     repealed.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--Section 601(a)(1) 
     of such Act is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(a)(1)'' and inserting ``(a)'';
       (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) as 
     paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), respectively; and
       (3) by striking ``as adjusted by paragraph (2) of this 
     subsection'' and inserting ``adjusted as provided by law''.
       (c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on 
     December 31, 2010.

  Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, I commend our majority leader for moving 
this legislation through the Senate. I have introduced legislation like 
this for the past six Congresses, and am delighted that, because of 
Senator Reid's leadership, this proposal has finally passed the Senate.
  Congress has the power to raise its own pay, something that most of 
our constituents cannot do. Because this is such a singular power, 
Congress ought to exercise it openly, and subject to regular procedures 
including debate, amendment, and a vote.
  But current law allows Congress to avoid that public debate and vote. 
All that is necessary for Congress to get a pay raise is that nothing 
be done to stop it. The annual pay raise takes effect unless Congress 
acts.
  That stealth pay raise mechanism began with a change Congress enacted 
in the Ethics Reform Act of 1989. In section 704 of that act, Members 
of Congress voted to make themselves entitled to an annual raise equal 
to half a percentage point less than the employment cost index, one 
measure of inflation.
  On occasion Congress has voted to deny itself the raise, and the 
traditional vehicle for the pay raise vote is the Treasury 
appropriations bill. But that vehicle is not always made available to 
those who want a public debate and vote on the matter. As I have noted 
in the past, getting a vote on the annual congressional pay raise is a 
haphazard affair at best, and it should not be that way. The burden 
should not be on those who seek a public debate and recorded vote on 
the Member pay raise. On the contrary, Congress should have to act if 
it decides to award itself a hike in pay. This process of pay raises 
without accountability must end.
  I was pleased to join with the junior Senator from Louisiana, Mr. 
Vitter, in offering an amendment to the Omnibus appropriations bill 
recently. That amendment received strong support, support which was all 
the more remarkable because many of the amendment's potential 
supporters felt constrained to oppose it in order to keep the 
underlying legislation free of amendments. I commend Senator Vitter for 
his efforts to end this system. Now, thanks to our majority leader, we 
have a real chance to do so.
  This issue is not a new question. It was something that our Founders 
considered from the beginning of our Nation. In August of 1789, as part 
of the package of 12 amendments advocated by James Madison that 
included what has become our Bill of Rights, the House of 
Representatives passed an amendment to the Constitution providing that 
Congress could not raise its pay without an intervening election. On 
September 9, 1789, the Senate passed that amendment. In late September 
of 1789, Congress submitted the amendments to the States.
  Although the amendment on pay raises languished for two centuries, in 
the 1980s, a campaign began to ratify it. While I was a member of the 
Wisconsin State Senate, I was proud to help ratify the amendment. Its 
approval by the Michigan Legislature on May 7, 1992, gave it the needed 
approval by three-fourths of the States.
  The 27th amendment to the Constitution now states: ``No law, varying 
the compensation for the services of the senators and representatives, 
shall take effect, until an election of representatives shall have 
intervened.''
  I honor that limitation. Throughout my 6-year term, I accept only the 
rate of pay that Senators receive on the date on which I was sworn in 
as a Senator. And I return to the Treasury any cost-of-living 
adjustments or pay raises during my term. I don't take a raise until my 
bosses, the people of Wisconsin, give me one at the ballot box. That is 
the spirit of the 27th amendment, and at the very least the stealth pay 
raises permitted under the current system certainly violate that 
spirit.
  This practice must end, and I am delighted to say that thanks to 
Majority Leader Reid, we have a real chance at ending it. I urge the 
House of Representatives to take this bill up and pass it right away, 
so we can assure the American people that we are serious about ending a 
system that was devised to provide us with regular pay increases 
without any accountability.

                          ____________________