251
What is this supposed to do exactly? Hurt only the senators that aren't independently wealthy / doing insider trading?
We're supposed to pretend most of them are there for the paycheck and not the power?
Any senator not taking bribes, or insider trade, or already wealthy, are now financially stressed during a shutdown. More war on the working class by the wealthy. If you haven't noticed, the wealthy are driving changes they've long desired while they can.
Yeah, this sounds like a better idea than it may actually be.
I'm also no really appreciating the president that they'll get paid when they do what we want.
There's a fine point hidden in there that I don't Love.
And by "power" of course you mean "bribes"
I would rather a government shutdown result in a near immediate general election for every single senator, representative, and the president and vice president, but that would require a whole extra constitutional amendment and this fine for what is realistic.
This is not what a pay freeze achieves.
Almost all of them are independently wealthy stock traders.
This precisely weakens the senators who are working class enough to need the salary.
It gives the wealthier members leverage over the poorer ones. The more wealth you've accumulated the longer you can sustain an unpaid shutdown.
Real countries prevent shutdowns from happening. You could keep spending under the precious budget until the new one is agreed to, but the us is not a real country.
What if the law just said they have to resign? Lol
hahahah this is like when ceos take that 1$ salary... you know it aint about the fucking salary.
Now ban congressmen from stock trading
Does it also block them from executing stock trades and polymarket bets?
A meaningless gesture while that sweet lobby money keeps rolling in.
And is this shit supposed to make them look good all of a sudden? We're going to just forgive and forget the treason they commit/allow to happen on a daily basis?
No, I dont think so. Bunch of cockgobblers, riding a demented old fuck to hell and dragging all of the rest of us down with them. I bet the sycophants on Fox are praising them like mad too.
So they have to rely on the money they get from their sponsors instead?
People realize their income comes from bribes and not their salary right? This is like Trump "refusing to take a paycheck".
I was curious to see if I could find a breakdown of wealth for the senators and the above was all I could find with a quick search, but it does seem to point out two interesting things:
It's more likely for Democrats to have less wealth
and
I think I can understand why "Little Marco" Rubio really dug into the fascism. Seems he was in quite a bit of debt...
Yay! More leverage for the wealthier congress people and lobbiests who will support the less wealthy!
Gentle reminder that the US pays ~$100M/yr to their congresspersons. What an insane waste of money.
I mean between the House and the Senate you're looking at upwards of 500 people, or ~$200k per person per year. That's senior software developer money, which if anything is too low for the highest authority of the current global hegemon.
I disagree they should be paid that much. But software developers work significantly more than Congress. More days, more hours. In addition, when was the last time you were able to speak with your rep personally in recess? Never for me. My wife works 80 hrs at the peak of her busy season, and I'm supposed to pretend her job is worth less than Congress? A senior manager at her firm, one step away from partner, is worth less than a Congress person. I disagree.
It's not about worth; it's about opportunity cost. Worse paid people are easier to bribe. It just shouldn't be possible to buy off people with that much authority with a luxury cruise or a cushy K-street job. You can't do that with, say, the CCP and it shows.
If you're an anarchist then I guess the view is that they're all superfluous. And that money would be better spent being given to direct action.
I mean sure but "how to build the best possible society" and "how to build the best possible capitalist society" are different questions with different answers. The state is/can be superfluous under socialism, but under capitalism it's an unavoidable arena for fighting over political power, and the less political leadership is paid the more that arena is rigged in favor of the rich. Also you could multiply those hundred million dollars by ten and it'd still be a rounding error in the wider US government budget, so it's not like that money is actually competing with anything.
We're one step closer to, "put them in solitary and freeze their assets" people!
this post was submitted on 15 May 2026
251 points (100.0% liked)
politics
29884 readers
1848 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS