Bill · H.J.Res. 128· House(119-HJRES-128)
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to prohibit Members of Congress from receiving compensation for any period during which a Government shutdown is in effect.
- Introduced
- 9/30/2025
- Last activity
- 9/30/2025 — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Sponsored by
- Ralph Norman
- Cosponsors
- - 20 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This joint resolution proposes an amendment to the United States Constitution. The amendment would prohibit Members of Congress from receiving compensation during a government shutdown. A shutdown is defined as a lapse in appropriations for any Federal agency or department caused by a failure to pass a regular appropriations bill or a continuing resolution. This amendment would become part of the Constitution once ratified by three-fourths of the States within seven years. Finally, Congress would have the power to enforce this new article through legislation.
Yes
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?+3
The bill aims to increase accountability and transparency by ensuring lawmakers face financial consequences during funding disputes.
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?+2
The bill reduces government spending by prohibiting the payment of salaries to Members of Congress during periods of a government shutdown.
Would high-income households be better off under this?+1
The bill may slightly benefit high-income households by reducing total federal expenditures through the cessation of congressional pay during shutdowns.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Prohibiting compensation during shutdowns: This provision ensures that a Representative or Senator may not receive pay when there is a lapse in appropriations for any Federal agency or department due to a failure to enact a regular appropriations bill or continuing resolution (Section 1).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No specific negative impacts are explicitly mentioned in the text: The provided text does not list any negative consequences or burdens resulting from the proposed amendment (Section 1 and Section 2).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Government Transparency+3
- Economy And Finance
- Reduces Government Spending+2
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For High Income Households+1
- 11/12/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/4/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/31/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/21/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/10/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/8/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/3/2025
- 8 Cosponsors added.
- 9/30/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 6 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Rick AllenRepublican · Georgia
Brian BabinRepublican · Texas
Jack BergmanRepublican · Michigan
Nicholas BegichRepublican · Alaska
Sheri BiggsRepublican · South Carolina
Andrew ClydeRepublican · Georgia
Elijah CraneRepublican · Arizona
Jeff CrankRepublican · Colorado
Russell FryRepublican · South Carolina
Dusty JohnsonRepublican · South Dakota
John JoyceRepublican · Pennsylvania
Robert LattaRepublican · Ohio
Cory MillsRepublican · Florida
Max MillerRepublican · Ohio
Ryan MackenzieRepublican · Pennsylvania
Jimmy PatronisRepublican · Florida
Derek SchmidtRepublican · Kansas
Jefferson ShreveRepublican · Indiana
Jefferson Van DrewRepublican · New Jersey
Ryan ZinkeRepublican · Montana