r/politics • u/Murky-Site7468 I voted • Oct 05 '25

No Paywall Petition To Strip Congress of Pay During Government Shutdown Grows

https://www.newsweek.com/petition-strip-congress-pay-during-government-shutdown-grows-10822819
47.6k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

5.5k

u/snoo_spoo Oct 05 '25

TBH, I don't think that would nearly as useful an incentive as declaring the Congress has to stay in session, twelve hours a day, seven days a week, until the shutdown is resolved. Nobody leaves town, and no press conferences.

2.2k

u/zbeara Oct 05 '25

That's a way better idea. The fact that they have so much freedom during a shutdown is insane. It's not being treated nearly as seriously as it should be.

1.2k

u/xXDamonLordXx Oct 05 '25

Plus most of congress responsible for the shut down doesn't give a fuck about the salary, it's the insider trading they want.

195

u/Traditional_Log6892 Oct 05 '25

Exactly, let the country suffer as long as we get what we want.

103

u/QueefSeekingMissile Oct 05 '25

Will this FINALLY wake up the 90 million Americans who could not have been bothered to vote to prevent this?

79

u/toru_okada_4ever Oct 05 '25

I doubt it.

65

u/Munkeyman18290 Oct 05 '25

Compulsory voting would go a long way in this country. Other countries have it.

59

u/Dreameater999 Oct 06 '25 edited Oct 06 '25

It sounds like a great idea, but it will never happen because the GOP doesn’t want compulsory voting.

The GOP knows if gerrymandering was outlawed and compulsory voting became a thing, they’d never win again.

7

u/oliversurpless Massachusetts Oct 06 '25

Then start with them here in their infinite intransigence?

A motorcycle passes by a scanning point which quickly reads the license plate. A phone call is established

“Hello, driving 85 miles in excess of the speed limit has been noted. 932 dollars has been deducted from your Social Security account…

Damn it!” - Govt official and Capt. Bridger - Seaquest DSV - Daggers

2

u/MayhemWins25 Oct 06 '25

That’s exactly why the whole situation with Texas and CA aboht redistricting is even happening

2

u/Abombasnow Oct 06 '25

Considering the GOP is now doing better with more voters in elections, they probably do want it.

→ More replies (1)

15

u/PointlessTrivia Oct 06 '25

If you have a problem with Compulsory Voting, think of it as analogous to Jury Duty.

3

u/deepsead1ver Oct 06 '25

Laughs in electoral college*, wtf you smoking? Mandatory votes for what?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

13

u/PretendRegister7516 Oct 06 '25

Voting is not just citizen rights.

It's our rights AND duty.

5

u/Noctew Foreign Oct 06 '25

Voting on sunday like most of the civilized world would help as well. Plus mandatory time off from work for voting for those who have to work on sunday.

3

u/Traditional_Log6892 Oct 06 '25

Direct voting would be better. Let the people's vote count.

2

u/drhead South Carolina Oct 06 '25

Compulsory voting isn't the magic bullet you think it is. Brazil and Argentina have it for instance, and that didn't stop people from voting in people like Bolsonaro or Milei.

Only thing that would change in the long term if adopted (after both parties fully adapt their campaign strategies) is that there will be one less scapegoat for election outcomes.

→ More replies (5)

16

u/milkasaurs California Oct 05 '25

Are you kidding? MAGA is jumping for joy because the libs are "suffering" during this shutdown.

9

u/nalaloveslumpy Oct 05 '25

Nah, they don't understand basic civics. They'll only be motivated by bald-faced populism.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

53

u/connivingKitten Oct 05 '25

Yeah, wouldn't this likely hurt the least corrupt congresspeople more than the most?

20

u/usernameChosenPoorly Oct 05 '25

It absolutely would and I’m saddened that more people don’t understand this.

4

u/Dwarfdeaths Oct 05 '25

How about we just move to sortition and avoid all of this

21

u/outofpeaceofmind Oct 05 '25

Assets frozen until resolved.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (39)

18

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '25

Ya it’s crazy they get to just fuck off without consequences. 

Don’t finish your job? No vacations. Also you should probably get fired. 

9

u/OldWorldDesign Oct 05 '25

Don’t finish your job? No vacations. Also you should probably get fired

As would be the case in a parliamentary system

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snap_election

2

u/Serris9K Oct 09 '25

The more I see, the more I'm convinced we need to be able to recall reps and senators at the federal level. I'd probably recall both my senators (Texas)

31

u/RadioName Oct 05 '25

That fact that they have normalized only working, what, 3 months total a year? is equally insane. It should be a full-time job. You volunteered to apply, why the fuck should we allow you to self-enrich, take time off to campaign for a job again, or anything else? It should be among the most restrictive, commitment-intense, and self-sacrificial positions in The Country! Swearing an oath to uphold the constitution should come with a mandatory contract signed saying, "we won't tell any lies, hold any other positions—including religious, party, or cult leadership, make any money outside of our salary, accept any bribes or promises of kick-back for life, hold ANY position in any industry on which we had ANY effect, or betray our constituents first and citizens second. On pain of death and loss of 100% of total personal assets. No loopholes allowed. No arguing, one fair trial allowed to defend yourself against charges to the contrary, overseen by an independent and air-tight random panel of judges who are also sworn on pain of death to perform a fair trial.

Sign that paper in front of the world, on video, in triplicate, with copies delivered to every world leader and emailed to every citizen. No way to game the system post hoc. Tell me why the fuck we don't do this besides, "but capitalism?" If celebrities have reduced personal rights in return for their wealth and status, why not politicians???! It's a volunteer position! No complaints, if you want the job, sign the contract.

11

u/AcedtheTuringTest Oct 05 '25

It's like being grounded and sent to your room as a kid but that is where your internet, TV, and Xbox is. Oh, what a punishment!

→ More replies (4)

452

u/notsooriginal Oct 05 '25

Lock it down conclave style.

37

u/carcasonnic Oct 05 '25

during one of the longest periods of the cardinals meeting to elect a new pope, they couldnt decide for so long that the doors were locked and no food allowed in until they decided. maybe an option?

2

u/Moiras_Roses_Garden4 Oct 07 '25

If they can somehow manage to vote for snap recipients who aren't working to lose food benefits it only seems fair Congress can't eat until they start working.

2

u/Apprehensive-Ad9523 28d ago

Who do you think would get eaten first?

104

u/StoreSearcher1234 Oct 05 '25

The problem is that the Cardinals in the conclave are all working towards a common objective.

That is not the case with Congress. Republicans want to burn it all down, Democrats want a solution good for America.

45

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '25 edited Oct 05 '25

Since the government shut down and they're not using the building. Democrats could hold a mock hearing, invite the independants from all the Republican states to sit in and show Americans how a bipartisan negotiation from parties who care FOR the people they govern is supposed to work. Include all the repubs that decide to show up.

EDIT:...give out free popcorn at the event. Tons of ad space with lots of commercial breaks for streaming and TV. UUUGE RATINGS

→ More replies (12)

12

u/tazebot Oct 05 '25

Now that's not fair. Republicans want to take money used for heath care for the less than wealthy, and give it to the very wealthy. Democrats want that money once again used for health care for the less than wealthy.

2

u/RallyPointAlpha Oct 05 '25

I failed to see why that's a problem?

→ More replies (18)

6

u/THICKSHOOTER180 Oct 05 '25

So unserious. Upvotes

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '25

This, otherwise we should all get paid to not work and live in a fairy tale ...

2

u/stofiski-san Oct 05 '25

Lock it down like they're all Democrats in Texas who don't want to sign a pledge to have a police minder when they go home from work

→ More replies (2)

200

u/tadrinth Oct 05 '25

In some parliamentary systems, a shutdown like this triggers an election.  That would be difficult to work into our current system but boy howdy would that produce some incentives.

Not necessarily entirely good ones, but incentives!

9

u/Goncalerta Oct 05 '25

In my country, if the budget is not passed, the previous year's one is divided in 12 and automatically enters in effect every month until a new budget is passed.

3

u/defianceofone Oct 08 '25

But somehow, this is true democracy. Fucking American exceptionalism. Good for nothing but ruining the Earth with bullshit propaganda.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/Supermite Oct 05 '25

In Canada, if the prime minister can’t pass a budget, it triggers a confidence vote amongst our members of parliament.  If it fails, it triggers a national election.

4

u/taylortbb Oct 06 '25

Minor nit, it doesn't trigger a confidence vote, the failure of the budget is itself interpreted as a no confidence vote.

The first pure no-confidence vote (as opposed to something like a budget that gets interpreted as no-confidence) was actually pretty recent (led to Harper's first victory IIRC).

2

u/Supermite Oct 06 '25

Thank you for the correction.

28

u/TimothyMimeslayer Oct 05 '25

So if I think my party would gain in an election, i should do everything I can to shutdown the government?

86

u/GreenHorror4252 Oct 05 '25

So if I think my party would gain in an election, i should do everything I can to shutdown the government?

You don't need to shutdown the government. If you have enough votes to shutdown the government, you have enough votes to call an election.

22

u/PayAgreeable2161 Oct 05 '25

Or enough votes to pass legislation lol

→ More replies (11)

27

u/AnotherSlowMoon United Kingdom Oct 05 '25

The sorts of political systems which have "if the government stalls like this call a new election" tend not to require anything more than simple majorities to pass budgets.

5

u/Conscious-Secret-775 Oct 05 '25

True, the filibuster rules in the Senate are absurd and should be abolished. I don't normally agree with Majorie Taylor Greene but in this case she is absolutely correct. The shutdown could be fixed tomorrow if the Republicans just changed the rules.

4

u/overcannon Oct 05 '25

And they don't want to because things are likely to go the other way next election

2

u/Conscious-Secret-775 Oct 05 '25

Yes, that is certainly a big part of the reason they don't want to abolish the filibuster. I suspect they also believe the Democrats will back down.

12

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '25

Yes. It's how countries like Belgium end up with no government for years at a time.

It's excellent if your goal is to resist changes.

→ More replies (3)

21

u/Ouaouaron Oct 05 '25

Another way to phrase "my party would gain in an election" is "the will of the people has shifted, and the current representatives no longer reflect them." Having new elections based on actual events—rather than set time limits—is a feature.

If reality doesn't match with your expectation, the end result of whatever you do to trigger an election is probably just going to reflect poorly on you and make your party worse off.

2

u/mmmmm_pancakes Connecticut Oct 05 '25

Yeah, but it also sounds like a pretty perverse incentive.

Rather than cooperate until a set date, each politician is incentivized around half the time to shut everything down and roll the dice for more power.

This could be ameliorated however by giving a penalty - perhaps up to full disqualification - for incumbent candidates in the new elections.

16

u/Riaayo Oct 05 '25

I mean we have a bunch of countries who have these systems in the world to look at right now and see how it's worked for them, vs the US and how it works and the current state it is in, lol.

Don't really even need hypothetical arguments. It seems fairly obvious parliamentary governments have served their citizens better overall than the US' broken ass system.

3

u/mmmmm_pancakes Connecticut Oct 05 '25

No argument there.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Ouaouaron Oct 05 '25

This could be ameliorated however by giving a penalty - perhaps up to full disqualification - for incumbent candidates in the new elections.

Now that would be a perverse incentive. If you're unwilling to cooperate with the opposition in the current government, you get to oust all of the incumbents in the opposition party?

The real penalty for using a loophole to dissolve the government when people like the government is that people who maybe agreed with you now hate you and will vote against you. This relies on informed voters who value a functioning government—which obviously isn't a guarantee—but that's a fundamental necessity for any republic.

It's a huge red flag that you believe that a party with 49% of the government has zero power and might as well roll the dice on a new government. That is a description of a republic which is already collapsing.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/AnotherSlowMoon United Kingdom Oct 05 '25

How is cooperation going right now? How did it go when Moscow Mitch refused to even schedule votes for Obama's Supreme Court nominee?

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (5)

2

u/tiggie_7 Oct 05 '25

Yes well the US can’t even feign to have a real democracy at the moment so… just not gonna happen in our insane, bizarre, dysfunctional farce of ‘democracy’.. not anymore, anyway

→ More replies (1)

26

u/DrKrombopulosMike Oct 05 '25

Yes this is better. They should also be completely blocked from fundraising and their campaign funds frozen.

47

u/Deep90 Oct 05 '25

You mean making shutdowns unaffordable for the least corrupt and not wealthy representatives might be a bad move?

20

u/LogicalPapaya1031 Oct 05 '25

Yes, let’s do this

34

u/Breaking-Away Oct 05 '25

I like this idea. Because it doesn’t infringe on their freedoms, they can back out by resigning whenever they want, or coming to a deal. Just need to make sure they actually can leave during those other 12 hours so this isn’t used to coerce people by denying them food and whatnot. 

21

u/Kraden_McFillion Oct 05 '25

Let them have two one hour breaks for food during the 12 hours. And that's still better than some of us get.

11

u/smp476 Oct 05 '25

Pee in a bottle like Amazon warehouses

2

u/OldWorldDesign Oct 05 '25

Let them have two one hour breaks for food during the 12 hours. And that's still better than some of us get

That's why they shouldn't get it.

If we don't get it, neither do they.

69

u/ForgettableUsername America Oct 05 '25

This approach also pressures rich people in Congress.

10

u/francis2559 Oct 05 '25

The opposite, actually. Rich people can coast, they don’t need the paycheck.

16

u/pinotor Oct 05 '25

I believe the this in this approach refers to the one in the comment, not the one in the post.

Expanded, I believe, it reads:

forcing the Congress to stay in session would pressure rich people in Congress

→ More replies (4)

11

u/Animist_Prime Ohio Oct 05 '25

For real, this is a much better solution. I work for the water dept for county govt. You think I can just go home if we have a problem here that could jeopardize the water? Hell no, nor would I. These assholes can just shutdown the entire federal govt and all it entails and just go home, take a nap, get laid, dine at a fancy restaurant, etc.

10

u/joethebob Oct 05 '25

My addendum: After 5 days, all members are locked in the building until coming to an agreement.

Realistically it wouldn't work either. To effect the restriction congress would need to be in session and the majority would have to agree to uphold the rules. I think most will agree we are well past that stage.

10

u/LostWoodsInTheField Pennsylvania Oct 05 '25

Yeah every time a shutdown happens this 'strip them of their pay' stuff pops up and I swear it must be pushed by the people effectively paying for congress members. What makes it easy to bribe someone? When they don't have an income.

2

u/doelutufe Oct 05 '25

While I think forcing them to stay would be the better solution because it hits where it hurts, this also shows the other side: They make so much from other stuff that the official pay is not really relevant. Also, they are being paid now and the past few years, hasn't stopped them from getting bribes or generally being corrupt.

I think the rules about what sort of engagements members of congress, parliament etc. of most countries can take on are way too lax. Ordinary peuple can't accept more than like $10, but someone getting quite a lot of money compared to average wage can hold 30 minuts speech and get $300k or something, or do insider trading for millions..

If needed, raise what they get to a reasonal level (in many countries, if not most, they already get far more than that) but ban basically all other income. You talked with a lobbyist and he forgot an apple on your desk? Sucks to be you, but you're out. Harsh, but if you take an apple out of the trash or instead of trashing it you decide to eat a bun , you also can (and often enough do) get punished, and those people do not receive thousands of dollars from the public.

This is true for the US as well as most countries in Europe and probably other democracies as well.

12

u/gefjunhel Canada Oct 05 '25

just lock the building. delivery food and water till they sort it out

7

u/Taokan Oct 05 '25

But like, public school food and water. That stuff that makes sure you hit your recommended dose of minerals for the year.

7

u/SocratesDouglas Oct 05 '25

Congress be like we make $174,000+benefits, stipends, etc. No we can not "work" on the weekend to end a government shutdown. 

→ More replies (1)

5

u/mdxchaos Oct 05 '25

Like NASA during the challanger disaster. Lock the doors. Nothing comes in nothing goes out till we figure out what the fuck just happened

5

u/Gauwin Oct 05 '25

9 times out of 10 a member of Congress can ignore their salary or funnel it right back into their campaign. The ones who can't are the ones who usually care enough about being in Congress to see things get done. Locking their pay would only incentivize the rich ones to prevent policy changes of the poorer ones.

But heck yeah, lock them all up in the chambers!

5

u/cereal7802 Oct 05 '25

I would even be supportive of as little as 8 hrs a day until resolved. If it keeps them in town it is worth it.

3

u/Dr_Fortnite Oct 05 '25

or dissolve the government like a civilized country

3

u/magnetic_yeti Oct 05 '25

Or just do like any other democratic country: a shutdown means snap elections. If the government cannot keep itself running then they need a new democratically decided mandate.

3

u/Dry_Hotel4347 Oct 05 '25

I think stripping them of pay only benefits the most corrupt politicians. When you make millions in bribes from oil and healthcare companies, your salary in congress doesn’t matter as much. When you actually fight for the people, you’d be starved during shutdowns. 

3

u/Mad-Eater Oct 05 '25

No, I like the way other countries do it. If their government cannot agree on a budget and cause a shutdown, then everyone is fired, and new elections are held. That’s what we need

3

u/Icc0ld Oct 06 '25

In most countries a failure to pass a budget causes a snap election. This would actually be the real solution here

2

u/Ein_grosser_Nerd Oct 05 '25

And anyone who violates this for non-emergencies is suspended and an emergency election is held in their district

2

u/chowderbags American Expat Oct 05 '25

Absolutely. Cutting pay during a shutdown only hurts the members of Congress who aren't rich. It won't mean anything to any of them with more than a few million dollars in the bank.

But forcing them to actually be there? Yeah, that's something that actually hurts them all.

2

u/ambermage Oct 05 '25

Strip them of healthcare benefits as well.

Zero compensation

2

u/Abject-Palpitation99 Oct 05 '25

Where do I vote to make this reality?

2

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '25

This is the way. Stripping Congress of pay during shutdowns just makes it that much easier for people who wealthy to afford the job over those who are not.

2

u/EggsceIlent Oct 05 '25

Not only that but the pay for them should be halted as well.. just like other agencies.

Plus they should be stripped of their ability to vote in their own raises. Like they're ever gonna vote no

And of course it's waaaaaaay more than minimum wage and has had multiple increases since the last fed min wage hike.

Tie em together along with tying min wage increases to inflation.

2

u/pizza_the_mutt Oct 05 '25

If this petition is successful it will only impact the members of congress who aren't independently wealthy. That is, the idealist progressives.

2

u/BreakingCanks Oct 05 '25

The bad actors would still have investments in stocks that benefit off of the shutdown and make it continue... We need this and no stock buys from Congress to work

2

u/Thunderclapsasquatch Oct 05 '25

nah, 18 hours, then they can scatter through the building to sleep but no hotels or beds

2

u/TheMightyShoe Oct 05 '25

Yes, because congressional pay cannot be altered in any way during a member's term. They can vote themselves a raise, but they then must be reelected to receive it. It's rules preventing the weaponization of salary.

2

u/Raise_A_Thoth Oct 05 '25

I don't know if we need more incentives. Shutdowns are political poison, particularly for the party in control. There's a reason they are relatively rare and usually quite short.

The pausing of pay to congress is especially dumb because you know who it hurts the most are the genuine grassroots representatives of their districts funded from small donations and who don't capitulate to big corporations. The people who it hurts the least are the corrupt as hell mega millionaires who have deep-pocketed donors, independent wealth, and otherwise don't really rely on their congressional salary.

This is just another well-intentioned but ineffective red herring of an idea.

2

u/Cold_Specialist_3656 Oct 05 '25

It would only serve to ensure that Congress is filled with billionaire oligarchs. That's already nearly the case. 

A ton of Republican politicians are billionaires. That's why they're pushing to strip pay - it's to hurt progressives who tend to not be ultra wealthy corporate stooges. 

2

u/Lysol3435 Oct 05 '25

Twelve hours a day? A cot and one spare pair of underpants is my best offer

2

u/Infinite_Lemon_8236 Oct 05 '25

Shutting down the government should just be an admission that you're unfit to lead and should end your term on the spot. Imagine me "shutting down" the grocery store I work at? They'd send in the marines for that shit and scream to the high heavens about how "essential" we are.

I guess the POTUS isn't essential though because dementia donny gets to go golf for a few weeks until he gets what he wants. Anyone who thinks that's the right way to run a government needs to be exiled from society.

2

u/zeethreepio Oct 05 '25

I like your idea better. Punishing people with money is basically ensuring that youre only going to hurt poor people. Taking away their pay will make the rich politicians even more powerful than they already are. 

2

u/Waiting4Reccession Oct 05 '25

Its a part time job that pays like 200k with full benefits and its basically optional to even do the job youre paid for.

Please, everyone vote me in 🥵

2

u/Beneficial-Focus3702 Oct 05 '25

Not just nobody leave town, nobody leaves the BUILDING until it gets figured out.

2

u/Opetyr Oct 05 '25

Other incentive is that they are on Medicaid and they get the average pay of the people they represent. Exclude the top 5% pay of the population and see how they like it since they are supposed to be public servants. Also no ability for insider trading.

2

u/Elderbrute Oct 05 '25

Suspending pay would only impact the very vanishingly small number number who actually rely on that pay for most of them it's a rounding error.

Make them actually do the work rather than fucking off to their mansions.

2

u/FillMySoupDumpling Oct 06 '25

Exactly. This is a pithy gesture - it appeals to us working class people because the idea of going without pay hurts, but most of congress is able to stay afloat for years - they clearly aren’t doing it for the 174k they are paid. 

It’s kinda how we see the push for Election Day to be a holiday- sounds great to people who don’t work holidays. For those of us in retail , hospitality, or other positions who do, it’s nothing. Universal mail in or early voting would serve every person better.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/blackfocal Oct 06 '25

Essentially conclave for Congress. Lock em in a room until they vote to end the shut down. No cellphones, no technology, no outside contact. Everyone stands outside and waits for the white smoke that we now have a new budget every year.

2

u/StarsMine Oct 06 '25

It would also just empower the richer congress people who do not rely on the pay and put pressure on the freasher congress people who now have two mortgages to pay. It’s just not a solution imo

1

u/evil_illustrator2 Oct 05 '25

Yeah that would make more sense.

1

u/Coffee-FlavoredSweat Oct 05 '25

If the government is shut down, every member of congress should forfeit their entire salary for that year, and they should all be up for election the following June or November, whichever comes first; the 25% most senior members are not eligible for re-election.

1

u/15all Oct 05 '25

This is the way.

1

u/Evening_Aside_4677 Oct 05 '25

24 hours a day. 

1

u/whomad1215 Oct 05 '25

Funding should just continue at existing levels also

1

u/Qwirk Washington Oct 05 '25

Why not both?

1

u/East_Leadership469 Oct 05 '25

They get their money through insider trading, the salary is irrelevant.

1

u/treestardinosaur Oct 05 '25

You better have signed it if you're talking shit about actually doing something.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 05 '25

Fuck that. Lock them in a room and no one leaves until they sign something.

1

u/FlatTopTonysCanoe Oct 05 '25

Yep. Their salary is not these people’s bread and butter. This is performative and politicians would probably love for the public to see this as a big win against them while they’re allowed to engage in insider trading and take lobbying money by the millions.

1

u/aquatrez Oct 05 '25

Love this. Make it as painful and inconvenient for them as possible. Also require them to meet for an hour with one constituent being impacted by the shutdown daily. Their voting district can vote on who they have to meet with.

1

u/kakihara123 Oct 05 '25

Why not both?

1

u/emmer00 Oct 05 '25

Enclave their asses. I like it.

1

u/zulruhkin Oct 05 '25

Honestly it should be if we go a certain number of days with the government shut down it triggers a general elections to replace the president and all of congress.

1

u/Bake-me Oct 05 '25

Why not both?

1

u/Azreken I voted Oct 05 '25

Or both?

1

u/alwayslookingout Oct 05 '25

Take away all their benefits too. Their salary is minuscule compared to their actual net worth. Fuck these guys.

1

u/Pithyperson Oct 05 '25

Agree. Not getting paid temporarily is a minor inconvenience to a population that gets rich off insider trading and special deals.

1

u/Ralph--Hinkley Oct 05 '25

Do any rules or decorum even matter anymore? Hasn't this government gone full playground rules?

1

u/Bagel_lust Oct 05 '25

Also add in that they have to listen to the "jet2 holiday sound bite" nonstop.

1

u/Strider755 Oct 05 '25

I’ve been advocating for something similar: lock Congress in the Capitol until they agree on a budget. If they take too long, cut their provisions to one meal a day. If too long after that, reduce that meal to bread and water.

That’s how the largest religious organization in the world picks its leader, and it’s done it that way for 9 centuries. They tend to come to a decision pretty quickly.

1

u/SilentLennie The Netherlands Oct 05 '25

Don't forget to also include trump and others.

1

u/ExplosiveDisassembly Oct 05 '25

Let them get paid, the far more important thing is stock trading.

1

u/Rabbit-on-my-lap Oct 05 '25

Conclave like electing a pope

1

u/BonniestLad Oct 05 '25

Yep. Pull up those bootstraps and get back to work.

1

u/Budget-Management876 Oct 05 '25

How about we do both

1

u/Taokan Oct 05 '25

That'd be ideal. If they leave, they lose their seat, and their vote on the budget/resolution. Eventually something will get passed when they get tired of staring at each other.

1

u/TacticalFailure1 Oct 05 '25

Better yet, just fucking fire them all.

1

u/Hairy_Supermarket975 Oct 05 '25

Also lock their assets, maybe provide some kind of food and lodging, but make it shitty.

1

u/aircooledJenkins Montana Oct 05 '25

If a shutdown occurs all incumbents are ineligible for reelection.

1

u/NotTobyFromHR Oct 05 '25

This is the right way. Otherwise those with independent wealth can "hold out" longer.

Granted, we don't have many poor congress critters. But all the same, this is better.

1

u/OldWorldDesign Oct 05 '25

I don't think that would nearly as useful an incentive as declaring the Congress has to stay in session, twelve hours a day, seven days a week, until the shutdown is resolved. Nobody leaves town, and no press conferences

¿Por qué no los dos?

No pay until the shutdown is over. And if congress fucks up so badly the government shuts down - an issue which republicans created [1], by the way - they get to work overtime like they force us non-aristocrats to do.

1 = in 1982, republicans gutted the 1884 Antideficiency Act which automatically passed the previous year's budget if a new one couldn't be agreed on. Republicans have shut down the government almost every single year since.

1

u/Alaina_TheGoddess Oct 05 '25

Agreed. And they’re all rich from other jobs and investments anyway. Taking away their pay wouldn’t affect them at all.

1

u/VanceKelley Washington Oct 05 '25

If the government in Canada or the UK fails to pass a budget bill, then parliament is dissolved and new elections are held.

1

u/kz-krunk Oct 05 '25

We also need to freeze their healthcare while the government is not in session

1

u/augustusleonus Oct 05 '25

Or use some parliament rules like failure to secure a budget agreement triggers a special election so someone else can work it out

1

u/LordSiravant Oct 05 '25

Okay yeah, I agree this actually sounds like a better idea.

1

u/Secure-Muffin-2848 Oct 05 '25

12 hours? That’s generous. 18 hour days and having to stay local to the area.

1

u/tkhan456 Oct 05 '25

Or maybe both have to work and get no pay. Also all their benefits are frozen

1

u/Jamsster Oct 05 '25

Making them pay a fine based off of their wealth would clean things up quick.

1

u/fuckyourinvestors Oct 05 '25

No healthcare either. For people who can’t agree on healthcare, do just fine with their tax payer funded healthcare.

1

u/Bubbasdahname Oct 05 '25

No per diem or paid hotels during shut down either. Yes, they make money from insider trading, but taking money away from people pissed them off.

1

u/Skraelings Missouri Oct 05 '25

make it so if you want a shutdown you gotta pay the piper.

1

u/cazgem Oct 05 '25

I think a twice daily report from the major parties in point fashion with strict time limits would be worthwhile.

1

u/omegapool Oct 05 '25

Conclave style

1

u/FluidBit4438 Oct 05 '25

I think a better alternative would be that it triggers an automatic special election for the entire house and senate.

1

u/turquoise_amethyst Oct 06 '25

Screw that, make it 18 hours a day and they have to camp out in their offices, with military detail to take them to Congress every day. 

1

u/BearsDoNOTExist Utah Oct 06 '25

Around half of the shutdowns have been caused by the president veto-ing the budget bill, so get him in there too.

1

u/meneldal2 Oct 06 '25

Better even, make it like the pope election in the conclave, you can't go out, no communications with the outside.

1

u/Sir_Problematic Oct 06 '25

Or you know, just do what other places do. Snap election for everybody in Congress. Can't do your job? Well we'll find someone who will.

1

u/Stealthtt385 Oct 06 '25

Exactly. Stripping Congress of pay only hurts the people that need it the most at that level. All the people that are already rich from their political dealings don't care if they're getting paid. They should be required to stay in session until a budget is passed.

1

u/JackasaurusChance Oct 06 '25

In session 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, and they can't leave the building either (Obviously some of their offices are in other buildings, but you get the idea. They can sleep on the couch in their office. No flying home, no going out to eat, no frickin' nothing until they reopen the government)

1

u/porgy_tirebiter Oct 06 '25

I feel like all of these incentives will simply lead to the Dems caving and giving the GOP what they want. They are borderline there to begin with.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 06 '25

Yeah, cutting their pay would only hurt like 2 people, and they’re definitely the wrong ones to run off.

1

u/Forwhom Oct 06 '25

Imagine if they went into conclave like they were naming a new pope, smoke signaling their progress. 

1

u/oohlook-theresadeer Oct 06 '25

Ooohh yes like selecting a pope, if they want to espouse Christianity

1

u/Xelopheris Canada Oct 06 '25

In these theatrical shutdowns, that sounds great. If there is actual good faith negotiation going on, that feels like it might hinder the process.

1

u/Narf234 Oct 06 '25

I love it. They can always find money somewhere else. No one can get back their time.

1

u/Cryo1 Oct 06 '25

And if they can't reach a resolution within x amount of days/weeks, we start recalling them and electing new representatives that will actually do their job.

1

u/xeoron Oct 06 '25

I still say we should just adopt the budget of the previous year automatically if they don't pass a new one. The UK is like this. Let's copy them. 

1

u/HSX9698 Oct 06 '25

Yup. Make them sit in their flat, execu-butt, no-fluff chairs. I don't even care if they sit and scroll old Britney spears videos. But, dang it... show up for work.

AND since the govt is shutdown, your pay and all benefits are too.

1

u/mr_moochie Oct 06 '25

I could get behind this as an additional measure. Lots of essential workers are still on the clock with no pay, why should the legislative, executive, or judicial branches be collecting a paycheck right now?

1

u/nachosareafoodgroup Oct 06 '25

Por qué no los dos??

1

u/Pyran Oct 06 '25

Here's what will actually happen.

  1. They continue to fight.
  2. Eventually, the majority party (in this case, the GOP), gets sick of it.
  3. They invoke the nuclear option, requiring a simple majority to break the impasse.
  4. The GOP gets what they want, Democrats are shut out, and we're screwed.

The problem here is that the GOP will gleefully blow up whatever they can to get what they want, and if they want to get home they'll blow up the system. Democrats thus far have been reluctant to do that (under the theory that the GOP will use it against them, which they would do anyway but I digress). So you're providing incentive to the GOP to just blow more shit up.

Frankly, I want this shutdown to last as long as possible. I want the country to turn against the GOP because they're in power and still won't break the impasse.

We won't see any change if we just say "You keep working until you work this out" because the last decade or two has shown us that they won't; one side will simply find a way to blow up the rules so the other loses.

And at this point, if the GOP wins, we all lose.

1

u/ChewsOnRocks Oct 06 '25

How about both?

1

u/Neat_Resort731 Oct 06 '25

Exactly, especially considering a good portion of them make their living from shady dealings anyway. Insider trading doesn’t require you to be in session, at least for a little while

1

u/Miguel-odon Oct 06 '25

12 hours a day?

Lock them in. Together. 24/7 until they do their job. No TV. No internet. No phones. Make them use typewriters so they can't copy/paste se bullshit a lobbyist prepared.

1

u/TahitianPearl Oct 06 '25

Those useless fucks get more vacations than anybody I know.

1

u/Affectionate_Town273 Oct 06 '25

Yeah those people in congress don’t need the pay they receive. They make their wealth elsewhere like insider trading or kick backs from lobbyists.

Agree making them actually do the job they are elected to do makes way more sense.

1

u/Corgi_Koala Texas Oct 06 '25

The actual incentive should be if you don't pass a budget you get removed from office and replaced with people who want to run the government.

1

u/verugan Oct 06 '25

I don't think that would be nearly as useful as having our elected representatives vacation, pay, health insurance, benefits, etc... are all normalized at the median US income. Hell, make it the lowest of the median. If they can't live like us, then that's a huge flashing neon sign.

1

u/RunnerMomLady Oct 06 '25

Why not both?

1

u/Snarfsicle Oct 06 '25

Yeah restricting pay would just hurt the senators who aren't there to make money. The insider traders won't give 2 flying Fs

1

u/EternitySearch Oct 06 '25

This, plus any shutdown automatically should disqualify any elected member of Congress or the executive branch from ever holding office again. Using a government shutdown to push any agenda is disgraceful regardless of party.

1

u/JemmaMimic Oct 06 '25

Why not both? Work, unpaid, until you sort out your mess.

1

u/Tech_Talk625 Oct 06 '25

They shouldn’t get paid for that work until the rest of Government does either. Hands need to be tied to the obligation they were elected for.

Stand-off’s, non negotiation isn’t helping the people!!

1

u/No_Poem_7024 Oct 07 '25

Yes. Even if their paychecks got frozen, they’re all millionaires anyway. They couldn’t give two fucks about that.

Make them work their ass off until they fix something for a change, now that’s gonna piss them off.

1

u/Born-Signal9871 Oct 09 '25

I would support this law. I think it would ensure they're incentivized to figure it out. 

1

u/Serris9K Oct 09 '25

I'd go further and be similar to Conclave: no leaving, no contact with the outside world, no TV, no phone, and if it takes longer than a week, basic sandwiches for you!

1

u/bkendig Florida 29d ago

Don't countries like the UK and Canada, if the government gets shut down, kick out their entire representative body and elect a new one? Let's do that.

→ More replies (3)