Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Did any governors or members of Congress publicly refuse pay during the 2018-2019 shutdown?
Executive Summary
During the 2018–2019 federal government shutdown, more than 100 members of Congress publicly refused or pledged to donate their paychecks, while reporting shows no evidence that state governors collectively refused their pay; governors expressed concern and sought relief for affected residents but did not widely forfeit salaries [1] [2] [3]. Reporting from January 2019 catalogs lists of senators and representatives who declined pay or announced donations as gestures of solidarity, and contemporaneous pieces note the legal mechanics that required congressional pay to be held in escrow and paid once the shutdown ended [1] [4] [2].
1. Lawmakers Walked the Talk — Over a Hundred Rejected Paychecks, Publicly Documented
Coverage in early January 2019 compiled lists showing about 102 members of Congress — roughly 20 senators and 82 representatives — announced they would reject, forfeit, or donate their pay during the shutdown, a mix of Democrats and Republicans and including some freshmen lawmakers; outlets published names and, in many cases, where donations were sent [1] [3]. Reports emphasized these actions were largely symbolic because of the 27th Amendment and administrative payroll rules that put congressional salaries into escrow during a lapse in appropriations; members could announce refusal or pledge donation, but pay was typically released once funding resumed unless they arranged otherwise [4]. The mainstream tally and the named participants are consistent across multiple contemporaneous outlets, establishing the core factual claim about congressional refusals.
2. Governors Spoke Out, But Did Not Join Pay Refusals in Any Documented, Widespread Way
State governors, through collective statements such as the National Governors Association letter calling for a swift end to the shutdown and offering assistance to affected states and residents, publicly pressured for resolution and described local harms but did not appear in records as refusing their state or federal salaries [5]. Reporting that focused on individuals refusing pay lists congressional members only and repeatedly notes the absence of governors from those lists, indicating no prominent or widely reported governor-level pay-forfeit movement during that shutdown [1] [2]. Governors were politically active on relief and intergovernmental coordination, but evidence points to their actions being administrative and advocacy-oriented rather than personal pay refusals.
3. Legal and Practical Context — Why Congressional “Refusal” Was Often Symbolic
Journalistic accounts explained that legal payroll mechanics meant pledges to refuse pay functioned more as political statements than immediate salary withholding; the 27th Amendment and Treasury procedures led to pay being held or escrowed and ultimately released after the shutdown ended unless members made explicit donation arrangements [4]. Reports described members arranging charities to receive funds or stating they would donate after pay release, highlighting the distinction between refusing an immediate paycheck and committing future pay to charity [6] [2]. This legal context is essential to understand the practical impact: the pledge had messaging value and, in many cases, resulted in donations, but it did not universally prevent eventual payment without further administrative steps.
4. Numbers, Partisanship, and Motivations — A Cross-Section of Congress Took Part
Contemporaneous lists show that participants came from both parties and included senior members and newcomers, indicating the refusals were not confined to a single caucus; motivations cited publicly combined solidarity with furloughed and unpaid federal workers, political pressure, and calls for structural fixes like automatic pay docking during shutdowns [2] [1]. Some lawmakers introduced or supported legislative remedies to make pay consequences automatic for members if a shutdown occurred, reflecting a policy angle beyond the immediate symbolic gesture [1]. Coverage presents this as a mixed political calculation and moral signal, with follow-up reporting noting some members later donated their escrowed paychecks to charities supporting affected workers.
5. What the Record Leaves Out — Small-Scale or Unreported Actions and the Bigger Picture
The media tallies capture public pledges and named donations, but the record does not preclude isolated or private arrangements by governors or local officials to refuse or donate salary that went unreported; mainstream reporting, however, consistently shows public refusals were concentrated in Congress [1] [2]. The broader outcome: the refusals drew attention to hardships faced by roughly 800,000 federal employees and spurred debate about institutional incentives to avoid future shutdowns, yet the symbolic pay refusals did not by themselves change the shutdown’s course [6]. For readers assessing impact, the documented congressional refusals are verified and sizable, while governor-level refusals remain unsupported by the contemporaneous journalistic record.