U.S. Constitution · Amendment XXVII · ratified 1992-05-07

Congressional Compensation

Create a free account or sign in to follow Amendment XXVII and get alerts.

Alerts when a new grade, SI Solution or Think Tank idea cites Amend. XXVII.

Amendment XXVII delays any law changing congressional pay until after the next election of Representatives has taken place.

Live in the VFA record

Cited in 1 Constitution Index grade this month.

2 public items cite this provision · 1 in October 2026 (last month: 0)

Citations per week, last 12 weeks

The text

No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.

National Archives transcription (public domain; original spelling and capitalization). archives.gov

SI explainer

What it means

Amendment XXVII provides that a law changing congressional pay cannot take effect until after the next election of Representatives has taken place. If Congress passes a law raising or lowering the pay for service as a Senator or Representative, the change must wait until voters have had the chance to elect a new House of Representatives. The sitting members therefore act before knowing with certainty whether voters will return them to office under the new pay level. The rule applies to laws that vary compensation for the services of Senators and Representatives. In ordinary use, that means pay for holding and performing the congressional office. It does not forbid Congress from setting pay, and it does not set any particular salary amount. It only controls timing by requiring an intervening House election between passage and effect. This amendment was proposed with other amendments in 1789 and was ratified in 1992. No later amendment has altered its words. It works together with Article I, Section 6, Clause 1, which provides for payment of Senators and Representatives from the Treasury.

Original meaning

The words meant that Congress could set its own pay under Article I, Section 6, but a law changing the amount last fixed could not operate until voters had elected a new House. Madison proposed this delay in his June 8, 1789 speech proposing amendments in the House of Representatives, using language that would add the restriction to the compensation clause. The mechanism reflected a founding-era concern with self-dealing: members should not be able to raise or otherwise alter their own pay for immediate personal benefit without facing voters. The proposal was part of the set sent to the states in 1789, was not then ratified by enough states, and entered the Constitution much later without change to its operative idea.

“That in article 1st, section 6, clause 1, there be added to the end of the first sentence, these words, to wit: "But no law varying the compensation last ascertained shall operate before the next ensuing election of Representatives."” James Madison, James Madison, Speech Proposing Amendments, House of Representatives, June 8, 1789 (Annals of Congress 1:448-60) (1789-06-08)

Two schools of interpretation

Originalist / textualist reading

Originalists and textualists read this provision according to the ordinary public meaning of its words at the time of adoption. On that reading, the operative command is a timing condition: No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened. A law that changes the legally fixed pay for congressional service therefore cannot produce legal effect before voters have chosen the next House, while a law that does not vary that fixed amount does not trigger the delay. Questions about scope are answered from the enacted words and their historical meaning, not from broader judgments about fairness or trust.

Living-constitutionalist reading

Living constitutionalists and pragmatists read this provision by starting with its text and then asking how its purpose applies under present conditions. On this view, the central purpose is to preserve democratic accountability by ensuring voters have a chance to respond at the next House election before a pay change takes effect. That purpose may guide application to newer forms of pay administration, such as automatic adjustments or other mechanisms that alter take-home pay without a fresh vote on an amount. This approach still treats the election requirement as a timing rule rather than a ban on pay changes, and it looks to practice and function to decide what counts as varying compensation for official services.

Open questions

Unsettled questions include what counts as compensation for official services, how the rule applies to automatic or indirect adjustments, and how to determine when the required election has intervened for a particular law.

SI-generated explainer · passed automated checks (Constitution citation, every quotation verified word for word against its public-domain source, every case from a verified case record, independent SI critic) · not individually reviewed by a person · published 2026-10-18 · methodology · Report an error: hello@valuesforamerica.com

Cited in the VFA record

“Where this provision is cited”

grades (1)

S.Res. 526: A resolution withholding the pay of Senators if a Government shutdown occurs.
2026-10-13 · Grade A (Constitutional)

roll-call votes (1)

Senate roll call 119 (2026): On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed on S.Res. 526
2026-05-13 · Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to · official record

Roll-call votes are listed when the measure voted on has a current Constitution Index grade citing this provision. Counts include only published items.

Cite this page

Values for America Constitution Explorer, https://www.valuesforamerica.com/constitution (text: National Archives transcription, public domain), Amendment XXVII, https://www.valuesforamerica.com/constitution/amendment-27

Data: this provision as JSON.