Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

former9thward

(31,947 posts)

5. The Senate won't pass the bill but it is not unconstitutional.

Reply to RB TexLa (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 23, 2013, 01:26 PM

Jan 2013

The 27th amendment says salaries can't be changed until the next congress. It doesn't say anything about the schedule of payment of those salaries. No one has a constitutional right to be paid on a specific schedule.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can someone explain to me this "No budget, No pay" bill that the House [View all] BlueIndyBlue Jan 2013 OP

... handmade34 Jan 2013 #1

Might as well do this crap instead of working on a budget, I guess. Buns_of_Fire Jan 2013 #11

Ask these GOP idiots to start with the DOD. Hard Assets Jan 2013 #2

yes, the Department of Defense will get no more money until they account for what they spent Fight2Win Jan 2013 #6

A waste of time. Unconstitutional under the 27th amendment RB TexLa Jan 2013 #3

They know that. It's all about the grandstanding. Redfairen Jan 2013 #4

The Senate won't pass the bill but it is not unconstitutional. former9thward Jan 2013 #5

You might want to reread it. It does not say "changed," it says "No law, varying" RB TexLa Jan 2013 #7

"Varying" means changing the compensation up or down. former9thward Jan 2013 #8

It's not the schedule of payments. They aren't debating a bill to chose biweekly or semimonthly RB TexLa Jan 2013 #9

wow how very convenient - just like everyone at their job - leftyohiolib Jan 2013 #10