Representative Steve King (R-Iowa) wrote an article that explains why he felt compelled to vote against the House Republicans’ common sense ‘No Budget, No Pay Act’.

The bill simply stated that – until Senate Democrats passed a budget (required by law to be done every year, but not done for the past 3 years) – they wouldn’t get paid.

Rep. King argues the Act contravened the 27th amendment of the Constitution: “No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of representatives shall have intervened”.

He thinks the ‘intervening election’ requirement is the deal-breaker.

With all due respect to Representative King, it might behoove him to note that the amendment doesn’t read “…varying the compensation for the NON-services…”

We’re not legal scholars at BlueCollar, but it’s our opinion that, until congressional members actually perform ‘the Service’ deserving of compensation, logically, those Democrat Senators aren’t protected by the Constitution they’ve trampled…

…unless of course, there’s some hidden amendment we’re not aware of that states trampling the Constitution is what their ‘Service’ now entails…?

Common sense dictates not doing their sworn job (in this case, not passing a lawfully required budget) can be defined as ‘non-service’…wouldn’t that justify non-payment?

But Democrat Senators can relax…our decision isn’t legally binding…

(Besides, what self-respecting American would want to withhold something you Congressional types believe you’re entitled to…?)