Order Code 97-1011 GOV
Updated April 14October 31, 2005
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Salaries of Members of Congress: A List of
Payable Rates and Effective Dates, 1789-2006
Paul E. Dwyer
Specialist in American National Government
Government and Finance Division
Summary
Congress is required by Article I, Section 6, of the Constitution to determine its
own pay. Prior to 1969, Congress did so by enacting stand-alone legislation. From
1789 through 1968, Congress raised its pay 22 times using this procedure.
Congressional salaries initially were $1,500. By 1968, they had risen to $30,000.
Stand-alone legislation may still be used to raise Member pay, as it was most recently
in 1982, 1983, 1989, and 1991, but two other methods are now also available, an
automatic annual adjustment procedure and a commission process.
In January 2005, Members received a 2.5% increase under the automatic annual
adjustment annual adjustment
procedure, increasing their salary to $162,100. They are scheduled to
receive a 1.9%
increase under the procedure in January 2006, to $165,200.
Background
There are three basic ways to adjust Member pay. Stand-alone legislation has
frequently and primarily been used to raise Member pay throughout most of U.S. history,
1789 to the present. However, two other methods are also available.
The second method by which Member pay can be increased is pursuant to
recommendations from the President, based on those made by a quadrennial salary
commission. In 1967, Congress established the Commission on Executive, Legislative,
and Judicial Salaries to recommend salary increases for top-level federal officials (P.L.
90-206). Three times (in 1969, 1977, and 1987) Congress received pay increases made
under this procedure; on three occasions it did not. Effective with passage of the Ethics
Reform Act of 1989 (P.L. 101-194), the commission ceased to exist. Its authority was
assumed by the Citizens’ Commission on Public Service and Compensation. Although
the first commission under the 1989 Act was to have convened in 1993, it did not meet.
The third method by which the salary of Members can be changed is by annual
adjustments. Prior to 1990, the pay of Members, and other top-level federal officials, was
tied to the annual comparability increases provided to General Schedule (GS) federal
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress
CRS-2
employees. This procedure was established in 1975 (P.L. 94-82). Such increases were
recommended by the President, subject to congressional acceptance, disapproval, or
modification. Congress accepted five such increases for itself — in 1975, 1979 (partial),
1984, 1985, and 1987 — and declined 10 since this method was authorized (1976, 1977,
1978, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983, 1986, 1988, and 1989).
The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 changed the method by which the annual adjustment
is determined for Members and other senior officials, based on a formula using changes
in private sector wages and salaries as measured by the Employment Cost Index. Under
this revised method, annual adjustments were accepted ten times (those scheduled for
January 1991, 1992, 1993, 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005) and denied
five times (those scheduled for January 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1999).
The annual adjustment automatically goes into effect unless :
(1) Congress statutorily prohibits the adjustment;
(2) Congress statutorily revises the adjustment; or
(3) the annual base pay adjustment of GS employees is established at a rate less than
the scheduled increase for Members, in which case Members would be paid the
lower rate.1
Pending January 2006 Member Pay Increase
The pending January 2006 salary increase of 1.9% is of 1.9%
The pending 1.9% pay increase, based upon the formula
mandated under the annual adjustment procedure.2
Recap of January 2005 Member Pay Increase
Under the annual adjustment procedure, Members were scheduled to receive an
increase of 2.5% in January 2005.3 This increase became official when President Bush
issued an executive order on December 30, 2004, containing his allocation of a 3.5% pay
increase for GS federal employees — 2.5% for base pay and 1.0% for locality pay. The
3.5% increase had been approved earlier by Congress as a provision in the FY2005
Consolidated Appropriations Act, signed into P.L. 108-447 on December 8, 2004.
Congress did not specify an allocation between base and locality pay.
adjustment procedure, is scheduled to take effect January 2006.2 Its implementation is in
question due to the Senate’s recent move to deny the increase. The Senate agreed on
October 18, 2005, to an amendment (No. 2062), by a vote of 92 to 6 (No. 256), offered
by Senator Jon Kyl to forgo the Member pay adjustment.3 The amendment was offered
during consideration of H.R.3058, Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban
Development, the Judiciary, the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies
Appropriations Act for FY2006, and would not apply to top-level executive and judicial
branch officials. The House version of the bill does not include this provision, and the
differences will be resolved in conference.
Should the 1.9% increase survive conference, it appears that it would not be
adversely affected by the pending 3.1% average increase in the base pay of GS employees.
As stated above, if the annual base pay adjustment of GS employees is less than the
1
Base pay is the pay rate before locality pay is added.
2
The annual pay adjustment was determined by a formula using the Employment Cost Index
(private industry wages and salaries, not seasonally adjusted), based on the percentage change
reflected in the fourth quarter (ending December 31) of the two preceding years, minus 0.5%.
The 1.9% adjustment was determined by taking the percentage increase in the Index between the
quarters ending December 2003 and December 2004, which was 2.4%, and subtracting 0.5%
3
Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 151, no. 132, Oct. 18, 2005, pp. S11458-60.
CRS-3
scheduled Member increase, Members would be paid the lower rate. The base pay
component of the pending 3.1% adjustment likely will be greater than 1.9%.4
Should the 3.1% increase be approved by Congress, the President, if he accepts it,
will issue an executive order allotting a percentage for base pay and a percentage for
locality pay. In the past, 1.0% typically has been allocated for locality pay. In the case
of a 3.1% adjustment, this would leave the base pay allotment at 2.1%, thereby not
adversely impacting the scheduled 1.9% Member increase. In the unlikely event that the
President allotted locality pay at a higher rate, for example, 1.3%, and allotted 1.8% for
the base pay component, Members would then receive the lower rate of 1.8%.
Recap of January 2005 Member Pay Increase
Under the annual adjustment procedure, Members were scheduled to receive an
increase of 2.5% in January 2005.5 This increase became official when President Bush
issued an executive order on December 30, 2004, containing his allocation of a 3.5% pay
increase for GS federal employees — 2.5% for base pay and 1.0% for locality pay. The
3.5% increase had been approved earlier by Congress as a provision in the FY2005
Consolidated Appropriations Act, signed into P.L. 108-447 on December 8, 2004.
Congress did not specify an allocation between base and locality pay.The annual pay adjustment was determined by a formula using the Employment Cost Index
(private industry wages and salaries, not seasonally adjusted), based on the percentage change
reflected in the fourth quarter (ending December 31) of the two preceding years, minus 0.5%.
The 2.5% adjustment was determined by taking the percentage increase in the Index between the
quarters ending December 2002 and December 2003, which was 3.0%, and subtracting 0.5%.
CRS-3
Members could have received an increase less than 2.5% if the GS base pay had been
lower than 2.5%. By law, Members are limited to an increase no greater than that of the
base pay of GS employees (P.L. 103-356). The base pay component of the GS annual pay
adjustment had to be 2.5% because that is what annual adjustment law mandated. The
percentage amount could have been changed if the President had issued an alternative pay
plan providing for a base pay increase different from the legally mandated 2.5% increase.
His plan specifying such a change had to be sent to Congress by November 30, 2004.
The President did issue an alternative plan to Congress on November 30, 2004, but
it did not change the 2.5% base pay increase. He submitted an alternative plan solely
because of a locality pay issue. Although his plan did not contain a locality pay increase
recommendation, the President needed to issue an alternative plan because otherwise a
higher locality pay percentage would have automatically become effective. The higher
locality pay percentage was required by law and could have been changed only through
an alternative plan and executive order.
4
The 3.1% average GS pay adjustment is contained in both House and Senate versions of
H.R.3058, Transportation, the Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, the
District of Columbia, the Executive Office of the President, and Independent Agencies. The bills
are in conference.
5
The annual pay adjustment was determined by a formula using the Employment Cost Index
(private industry wages and salaries, not seasonally adjusted), based on the percentage change
reflected in the fourth quarter (ending December 31) of the two preceding years, minus 0.5%.
The 2.5% adjustment was determined by taking the percentage increase in the Index between the
quarters ending December 2002 and December 2003, which was 3.0%, and subtracting 0.5%.
CRS-4
The President’s plan of November 30, however, assured that Members would receive
their scheduled 2.5% annual adjustment because of the link between Member pay and GS
base pay. Members do not receive locality pay.
The President did not address the pending 3.5% increase (for base and locality pay
combined) in his November 30 plan because he had not yet received the legislation
containing the increase (H.R. 4818). He subsequently received and signed H.R. 4818 into
law on December 8 (P.L. 108-447). The President then was required to issue an executive
order officially allocating the 3.5% between base pay and locality pay. As a consequence
of the President’s action, the base pay increase was 2.5%, leaving 1% for locality pay.
Table 1 provides a history of the salaries of Members of Congress, 1789-20052006. For
each salary rate, both the effective date and the statutory authority are indicated. From
1976 to 1983, the salary actually paid to Members was less than the salary to which
Members were entitled. This was so because Members were entitled to salaries
authorized pursuant to the annual comparability pay procedure (P.L. 94-82). However,
on several occasions Congress did not appropriate funds to pay any or some of the new
salary increases mandated by P.L. 94-82. Accordingly, the salaries shown in this table are
the payable rates, the salaries actually paid to Members of Congress.
CRS-4
Table 1. Salaries of Members of Congress, 1789-20052006
Payable Salarya
Effective Date
Statutory Authority
$1,500b
March 4, 1789
1 Stat. 70-71
(September 22, 1789)
$1,500b
March 4, 1795
1 Stat. 70-71
(September 22, 1789)
$1,500b
March 3, 1796
1 Stat. 448
(March 10, 1796)
$1,500
December 4, 1815
3 Stat. 257
(March 19, 1816)
$1,500b
March 3, 1817
3 Stat. 345
(February 6, 1817)
$2,000b
March 3, 1817
3 Stat. 404
(January 22, 1818)
$3,000
December 3, 1855
11 Stat. 48
(August 16, 1856)
$3,000c
December 23, 1857
11 Stat. 367
(December 23, 1857)
$5,000
December 4, 1865
14 Stat. 323
(July 28, 1866)
$7,500
March 4, 1871
17 Stat. 486
(March 3, 1873)
$5,000
January 20, 1874
18 Stat. 4
(January 20, 1874)
$7,500
March 4, 1907
34 Stat. 993
(February 26, 1907)
$10,000
March 4, 1925
43 Stat. 1301
(March 4, 1925)
CRS-5
Payable Salarya
Effective Date
Statutory Authority
$9,000
July 1, 1932
47 Stat. 401
(June 30, 1932)
$8,500
April 1, 1933
48 Stat. 14
(March 20, 1933)
$9,000d
February 1, 1934
48 Stat. 521
(March 28, 1934)
$9,500
July 1, 1934
48 Stat. 521
(March 28, 1934)
$10,000
April 4, 1935
49 Stat. 24
(February 13, 1935)
$12,500
January 3, 1947
60 Stat. 850
(August 2, 1946)
$22,500
March 1, 1955
69 Stat. 11
(March 2, 1955)
$30,000
January 3, 1965
78 Stat. 415
(August 14, 1964)
$42,500
March 1, 1969
81 Stat. 642
(December 16, 1967)
CRS-5
Payable Salarya
Effective Date
Statutory Authority
$44,600
October 1, 1975
89 Stat. 421
(August 9, 1975)
$57,500
March 1, 1977
81 Stat. 642
(December 16, 1967)
$60,662.50
October 1, 1979
89 Stat. 421
(August 9, 1975)
$69,800
December 18, 1982, for
Representatives;
July 1, 1983
, for Senators
96 Stat. 1914
(December 21, 1982)
97 Stat. 338
(July 30, 1983)
$72,600
January 1, 1984
89 Stat. 421
(August 9, 1975)
$75,100
January 1, 1985
89 Stat. 421
(August 9, 1975)
$77,400
January 1, 1987
89 Stat. 421
(August 9, 1975)
$89,500
February 4, 1987
81 Stat. 642
(December 16, 1967)
$96,600e
(Representatives)
February 1, 1990
103 Stat. 1767-1768
(November 30, 1989)
$98,400e
(Senators)
February 1, 1990
103 Stat. 1767-1768
(November 30, 1989)
$125,100
(Representatives)
January 1, 1991
103 Stat. 1768-1769
(November 30, 1989)
$101,900
(Senators)
January 1, 1991
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
$125,100
(Senators)
August 14, 1991
105 Stat. 450
(August 14, 1991)
$129,500
(Reps. and Sens.)
January 1, 1992
103 Stat.1769
(November 30, 1989)
CRS-6
Payable Salarya
Effective Date
Statutory Authority
$133,600
(Reps. and Sens.)
January 1, 1993
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
$136,700
(Reps. and Sens.)
January 1, 1998
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
$141,300
(Reps. and Sens.)
January 1, 2000
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
$145,100
(Reps. and Sens.)
January 1, 2001
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
$150,000
(Reps. and Sens.)
January 1, 2002
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
$154,700
(Reps. and Sens.)
January 1, 2003
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
$158,100
(Reps. and Sens.)
January 1, 2004
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
$162,100
(Reps. and Sens.)
January 1, 2005
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
CRS-6
(Pending: $165,200
Reps. And Sens.)
January 1, 2006
103 Stat. 1769
(November 30, 1989)
a. From 1976 to 1983, the salary actually paid to Members was less than the salary to which Members were
entitled. This was so because Members were entitled to salaries authorized pursuant to the annual
comparability pay procedure (P.L. 94-82). However, on several occasions Congress did not
appropriate funds to pay any or some of the new salary increases mandated by P.L. 94-82.
Accordingly, the salaries shown in this table are the payable rates, the salaries actually paid to
Members of Congress.
b. Per diem rates have been converted to per annum rates based on a hypothetically possible 250-day
session. From 1789 to 1856, Senators and Representatives received a per diem pay rate while
Congress was in session, except for the period December 1815 — March 1817, when they received
$1,500 a year. First established at $6 a day in 1789 ($7 for Senators from March 4, 1795 — March
3, 1796), the per diem was raised to $8 in 1818 and remained there until 1856, when Members of
Congress were placed on annual salaries.
c. In 1857, Congress provided for pay at the rate of $250 per month while in session, or a maximum of
$3,000 per annum.
d. The act authorized the restoration of pay as of February 1, 1934, and the restoration of pay as of July 1,
1934.
e. The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (103 Stat. 1767-1768) increased pay for Representatives and Senators
at different rates. The pay of Representatives was increased to reflect the previously denied 1989 and
1990 pay adjustments (4.1% and 3.6%), compounded at 7.9%, effective February 1, 1990. The act
further provided for a 25% increase in Representatives’ pay, effective January 1, 1991. As a result,
the pay of Representatives increased from $89,500 to $96,600 on February 1, 1990, and increased
to $125,100 on January 1, 1991.
The pay of Senators was increased to reflect the previously denied 1988, 1989, and 1990
comparability pay adjustments (2%, 4.1%, and 3.6%), compounded at 9.9%, effective February 1,
1990. As a result, the pay of Senators increased from $89,500 to $98,400 on February 1, 1990. The
Ethics Act did not provide for any other pay increase for Senators, as it did in providing a 25%
increase for Representatives. The reason is that Senators elected to deny themselves the 25% increase
while retaining the ability to receive honoraria. Subsequently, the Senate voted to increase its pay rate
to that of Representatives and to prohibit receipt of honoraria by Senators, effective August 14, 1991.
As a result, Senate pay increased from $101,900 to $125,100 per annum.