Politicians And Laws: Above Or Equal?

There is a long-standing debate about whether politicians can be exempt from the laws they pass. Critics of congressional exemptions point to laws such as the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) as examples of legislation that should apply to Congress. On the other hand, supporters of these exemptions argue that certain laws could interfere with the constitutional duties and functions of elected officials. Additionally, the U.S. Constitution grants lawmakers a degree of immunity to preserve the separation of executive and legislative powers. While there have been claims that members of Congress are exempt from many of the laws they pass, this assertion is outdated, with Congress passing the Congressional Accountability Act in 1994, which applies various civil rights, labor, and workplace safety regulations to the legislative branch.

US Congress members have been accused of exempting themselves from laws

Despite this, critics of congressional exemptions point to other laws that they believe should apply to Congress, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Additionally, there have been claims that members of Congress can retire after one term with full pay and that they don't pay into Social Security. While these claims are false, lawmakers can qualify for generous pensions, and until 1984, they were exempt from paying Social Security taxes.

Furthermore, members of Congress are exempt from certain laws regarding financial interests. For example, government officials are barred from participating in matters in which they have a personal financial interest, but this statute does not apply to elected federal officials, including members of Congress. This exemption is based on concerns that the law would interfere with their constitutional duties and functions, potentially disenfranchising their constituents.

There have also been specific instances of alleged misconduct by US Congress members. For example, Rep. Malinowski was accused of failing to disclose stock transactions as required by law, while Rep. Mooney was accused of using campaign funds for personal purposes and improper reporting of reimbursements. Other accusations against members of Congress include assault, carrying a concealed firearm, spending campaign funds on personal trips, and falsifying campaign finance reports.

To address concerns about congressional exemptions, a proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."

The US Constitution grants lawmakers immunity from arrest, except for treason

In the United States, the Constitution grants lawmakers immunity from arrest during their attendance at legislative sessions and when travelling to and from these sessions. This immunity also covers any speeches or debates that take place within either House of Congress. However, this immunity does not extend to cases of treason, felony, or breach of the peace. This privilege was established in Article I, Section 6 of the US Constitution, which states:

> "They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."

The interpretation of "treason, felony, and breach of the peace" has been a subject of debate, with the Supreme Court in Williamson v. United States concluding that the phrase encompasses all criminal offences, and not just those involving violence and public disturbance. This interpretation is based on the historical meaning of the provision and the contention that these phrases were commonly used in England prior to the American Revolution to exclude all arrests and prosecutions for criminal offences from parliamentary privilege.

While lawmakers enjoy immunity from arrest in certain cases, they are not exempt from all laws they pass. For example, following the "Republican Revolution" of 1994, Congress passed the Congressional Accountability Act (PL 104-1), which applies a number of civil rights, labour, and workplace safety regulations to the legislative branch. Additionally, the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) are two laws that critics argue should also apply to Congress.

Members of Congress are exempt from financial interest laws

In the United States, Members of Congress are exempt from certain financial interest laws. While there have been claims that Congress is exempt from "many" of the laws it passes, this claim is outdated. Following the "Republican Revolution" of 1994, Congress passed the Congressional Accountability Act (PL 104-1), which applies a number of civil rights, labor, and workplace safety regulations to the legislative branch.

However, there are still some laws from which Members of Congress are exempt. For example, Code 208 prohibits officers and employees of the executive branch from taking official government action on any matter in which they have a personal financial interest. This statute does not apply to elected officials of the Federal Government, including Members of Congress, the President, the Vice President, and Federal judges. The law has been seen as possibly interfering with their constitutional duties and functions, such as voting or working on legislation.

Additionally, Members of Congress are not subject to the same restrictions on gifts as officers and employees of the Federal Government. While gifts from prohibited sources are generally prohibited, the Office of Government Ethics permits gifts of up to $20, and up to $50 from the same source in a year, for employees in the executive branch. In contrast, the House and Senate have adopted rules that broadly limit gifts from all sources except relatives, regardless of whether the donor has an interest in official matters.

Furthermore, Members of Congress are not required to file Candidate Reports if they are incumbent. They are, however, required to file Financial Disclosure Reports, which are made available to the public online. These reports include information on secured mortgages on personal residences, as well as any mortgages or home equity loans held by the Member. The STOCK Act, passed in 2012, also prohibits individuals from directly negotiating or having any agreement of future employment or compensation without filing a signed disclosure statement within three business days.

While there are some exemptions for Members of Congress, it is important to note that there have been proposals to ensure that Congress is subject to the same laws as citizens. The proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States."

Congress is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has, since 1967, allowed the public to request access to records from any federal agency. Federal agencies are required to disclose any information requested under the FOIA unless it falls under one of the nine exemptions that protect interests such as personal privacy, national security, and law enforcement.

The first exclusion protects the existence of an ongoing criminal law enforcement investigation when the subject of the investigation is unaware that it is pending, and disclosure could reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. The second exclusion is limited to criminal law enforcement agencies and protects the existence of informant records when the informant's status has not been officially confirmed. The third exclusion is limited to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and protects the existence of foreign intelligence or counterintelligence or international terrorism records when the existence of such records is classified.

On the one hand, it could be argued that Congress should be subject to the same information disclosure requirements as the executive branch, as this would serve the purpose of the Act of ensuring an informed citizenry, vital to the functioning of a democratic society. On the other hand, applying FOIA to Congress might impinge on Congress' privilege with regard to its papers, pose administrative burdens on congressional offices, and involve Congress in lawsuits filed by persons appealing the denial of their FOIA requests.

Furthermore, not all congressional records would necessarily be subject to disclosure under the FOIA because they may come within one or more of the Act's nine exemptions. Similar constitutional and practical difficulties may be encountered in an effort to extend the Privacy Act to Congress.

The Congressional Accountability Act subjects Congress to civil rights and labour laws

In the United States, the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (CAA) subjects Congress to civil rights and labour laws. The CAA applies 12 specific laws to the US Congress and its associated agencies, providing rights to the 30,000 employees in the legislative branch.

The CAA was passed by a vote of 98-1 in the Senate and 390-0 in the House, and was the first piece of legislation passed by the 104th US Congress. The Act applies civil rights, labour, and workplace safety and health laws to the US Congress and its associated agencies, requiring them to follow the same employment and workplace safety laws applied to businesses and the federal government. Previously, agencies in the legislative branch had been exempt from these laws.

The CAA applies the following laws:

• Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
• The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
• The Rehabilitation Act of 1973
• Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
• The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
• The Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute
• The Fair Employment Practices Resolution
• The Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1998
• The Employee Polygraph Protection Act
• The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Act
• The Employment and Reemployment of Veterans Act
• The Intimidation Act

Despite the CAA, there are still laws that members of Congress are exempt from. For example, government officials are barred from participating in matters in which they have a personal financial interest, but this law does not apply to elected officials of the federal government, including members of Congress. This is to prevent interference with their constitutional duties and functions.

There have been criticisms of congressional exemptions, with some arguing that Congress should be subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). However, there are concerns that applying FOIA to Congress could impinge on its privilege regarding its papers, pose administrative burdens, and involve Congress in lawsuits filed by persons appealing the denial of their FOIA requests.

Frequently asked questions