119-HR-5755 Journalist Public Summary

Headline Summary

A bipartisan House bill would dock members of Congress their pay—without later repayment—on any day after October 1 that Congress hasn’t finished a budget resolution and all annual spending bills.

What It Does

Bill

H.R. 5755 — “No Budget, No Pay Act” (119th Congress)

Trigger each year

October 1 (the start of the new fiscal year).

Conditions to avoid pay stoppage

Both chambers must approve a budget resolution and pass all regular appropriations bills before October 1.

Penalty

Members’ pay is not disbursed for each day after October 1 until both tasks are completed; pay is permanently forfeited (no retroactive pay).

Who decides compliance

Chairs of the Budget and Appropriations Committees in each chamber certify whether Congress met the deadlines and for how long pay is halted.

Who is covered

All Members of Congress; the Vice President is excluded.

Effective date

February 1, 2027.

In plain English: If Congress misses the annual budget-and-spending deadlines, members stop getting paid until they finish both the budget resolution and all the regular spending bills. They don’t get that money back later.

Why It Matters

• Seeks to create personal financial pressure on lawmakers to meet budget deadlines and reduce last-minute shutdown brinkmanship.
• Could change incentives: members’ pay would depend on both chambers finishing all work, so one chamber’s delays would affect the other’s pay too.
• By banning back pay, the penalty is meant to be real, not symbolic.

Who’s For It

• Primary sponsors: Rep. Scott Peters (D‑CA) and Rep. Bill Huizenga (R‑MI).
• Backers of similar ideas generally argue it promotes accountability, timely budgeting, and fewer shutdown threats.
• Some bipartisan, good‑governance advocates may view it as a straightforward consequence for missed deadlines.

Who’s Against It

• Constitutional concern: Critics may argue that permanently changing pay during a current Congress could conflict with the 27th Amendment, which restricts altering congressional compensation until after an intervening election.
• Fairness concern: Pay would stop for all members even if one chamber (or a small group) is responsible for the holdup.
• Access and equity: Opponents may say it disadvantages less‑wealthy members or those without outside income, potentially narrowing who can realistically serve.
• Process risk: Could encourage grandstanding or strategic delay by factions willing to forgo pay to gain leverage.

What’s Next

Status: Introduced in the House on October 14, 2025, and referred to the Committee on House Administration. Next typical steps would be committee consideration, possible House vote, Senate action, and then the President’s signature or veto.