Fact check: Do senators and representatives continue receiving salaries in a federal shutdown?

1. What claim reporters keep repeating — Congress still gets paid during shutdowns

Multiple recent reports assert the same core claim: senators and representatives continue to receive their salaries during a federal government shutdown. News outlets reference Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution and a permanent appropriation put in place in 1983 as the legal mechanism ensuring continuity of pay, meaning congressional compensation does not require annual appropriations and therefore is not interrupted by funding gaps that trigger furloughs for many federal employees ^{[1] [2] [3]}. Coverage notes the practical consequence that while many civilian federal workers are furloughed or work without pay until Congress acts, members of Congress collect paychecks on schedule, with statutory salary levels—often cited as $174,000 for rank-and-file members in earlier coverage—remaining in force absent separate legislative change ^{[5] [6]}.

2. Constitutional and statutory foundations that matter right now

Reporting and commentary point to two legal anchors: Article I, Section 6, which protects congressional compensation by barring salary diminution during a term, and the creation of a permanent appropriation that under current law funds congressional pay regardless of the annual appropriation process. Analysts explain the 27th Amendment’s role in preventing immediate self-enacted pay increases, but the practical effect during a shutdown flows from statutory funding architecture dating to 1983. Those arrangements mean that suspending pay would require affirmative statutory change rather than occurring automatically during a lapse of appropriations—an important legal distinction that limits the immediate effect of political pressure to withhold pay ^{[1] [3] [7]}.

3. Recent reporting shows both confirmation and political friction

Coverage through late September and early October 2025 reiterates the baseline legal fact while documenting political responses that complicate public perception. CBS News and NBC News reported that members still get paid during the shutdown and noted members publicly asking their pay be withheld in solidarity with furloughed workers, which is a voluntary, not systemic, remedy ^{[1] [2]}. Separate accounts show an uptick in legislative proposals and public vows by some lawmakers to forgo pay or introduce bills to withhold pay automatically during a lapse—moves that indicate momentum for change but which do not alter the existing rule without passage into law ^{[8] [4]}.

4. Proposals on the table — momentum versus legal reality

Several lawmakers have introduced bills or publicly pledged to strip or halt congressional pay during funding lapses, and outlets report that such efforts are gaining traction in the public debate. Those proposals reflect political pressure and an attempt to align incentives, but reporters emphasize they remain proposals: they would require passage and likely face constitutional scrutiny and logistical challenges given the 27th Amendment’s constraints and the permanence of current appropriations mechanisms. Coverage suggests that while moral and political arguments fuel these bills and pledges, the legal pathway to automatic suspension of pay during shutdowns is not straightforward and would demand legislative and possibly judicial resolution ^{[8] [9] [4]}.

5. Why the distinction matters for public accountability and messaging

The distinction between the legal status quo and voluntary or proposed changes is central to public understanding: the law currently ensures pay continues, but politics may produce exceptions or reforms. Reporting highlights that individual lawmakers can elect not to accept pay or can support bills to change the system; however, absent enacted statutory change, the default remains uninterrupted salaries. This nuance shapes accountability debates: critics argue uninterrupted pay during shutdowns undermines fairness, while defenders point to constitutional safeguards intended to protect legislative independence. Both sides use the factual baseline—pay continuity—to press competing narratives about responsibility and reform ^{[5] [4]}.

6. Bottom line and what's next to watch

The factual bottom line is clear in multiple recent reports: congressional pay persists during shutdowns under current constitutional and statutory arrangements, and any change requires legislation or constitutional action. Watch for two developments: whether proposed bills to suspend pay secure traction in committee or floor votes, and whether voluntary pledges by members to forgo pay become a widespread practice or catalyze durable statutory change. Coverage through early October 2025 documents growing political pressure but no legal change as of those reports, so claims that pay automatically stops in a shutdown remain incorrect; the only confirmed mechanisms today are voluntary forfeiture or enacted statutory amendments ^{[1] [8] [4]}.