I have been researching a topic and can not find a definitive answer.
The topic is whether or not the U.S. Constitution requires that Senators and Representatives be paid by the Federal government and not their respective states.
I am specifically looking for anything that bears on this in the Constitution and or the enabling statutes, regulations...
I will explain further inside.
I have been researching a topic and can not find a definitive answer.
The topic is whether or not the U.S. Constitution requires that Senators and Representatives be paid by the Federal government and not their respective states.
I am specifically looking for anything that bears on this in the Constitution and or the enabling statutes, regulations...
In researching the roles of the houses of Congress I came across a narrative that described Senators as Ambassadors from their respective states. This follows from the fact that unlike the Federal government, States are sovereign entities. It is from this fact that the notion of Senators being ambassadors stems.
So if Senators are Ambassadors (I am not saying they are) then it would necessarily follow that their compensation as well as their continued authority to act on behalf of their state should come from their state.
This view conflicts in part with the Constitution (article 1 Section 5) in as much as each house determines whether or not to seat, remove, or discipline members and members elect.
The waters are further muddied by the statements of various Congressmen that they are not beholding to vote the best interests of their state,but to vote the interests of the nation. Ironically many of the Senators who have aligned themselves with this point of view will not accept calls from anyone but constituents. Couple this with the amount of out of state money involved in every Congressional election and sorting out who works for whom becomes a none trivial problem.
Whether or not it would be a good idea for each state to hire and fire their "Ambassadors" is beyond the scope of my current inquiry.
In your comments please provide a citation, or bread crumbs to where the actual documents are to be found.
I know this is not a sexy topic, but it is motivated by my having lost faith like many of you that we have any way to hold our representatives to account.
The B.S. that we get from our elected officials that "They are held to account on election day" is nonsense.
At the state level most state have a method for the Citizens/legislature of the state to remove an elected official from office.
It is absurd that we have no such mechanisms for Congress.
Reasoning by proxy:
Imagine that you hire a salesman to call on your customers.
The salesman shows up and it is clear from early on that he/she isn't doing the job to your satisfaction.
You discuss the problems with your salesman and your salesman replies that he/she will continue to do the job as he/she sees fit.
If you are unhappy with his/her work you can take it up at their annual review.
Would this be acceptable or would you take action as required when and how you see fit?
All help is appreciated. Slings and Arrows, not so much.