Dem senator slams Dem colleague’s measure as unconstitutional

In a remarkable exchange on the Senate floor Tuesday, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) attacked Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) for presenting an amendment that he said directly violated the Constitution.

Boxer’s amendment would strip members of Congress and the president of their pay in the event of a government shutdown. Article 2 of the Constitution, however, as Leahy pointed out, explicitly states that the president’s salary “shall neither be increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have been elected.”

“The Constitution specifically prohibits that,” Leahy told Boxer.

Boxer countered that her staff had looked into the issue of constitutionality and concluded that the president would only be able to challenge the constitutionality of the law in court, a scenario that seems highly unlikely.

Leahy was not satisfied.

“Is the senator saying we are setting the right example by passing a bill which on the face of it violates the Constitution, but it's OK unless someone challenges it?” he asked.

Most of Boxer’s arguments centered on the inherent unfairness of some government employees losing compensation while politicians, who could prevent the shutdown, still received pay.

“We don't think its fair to treat people different from others,” Boxer said.

Leahy said he agreed, but suggested that such unfairness did not warrant a violation of the Constitution.

At times, the exchange became snappy.

“In this case you go against Article 2 by decreasing the president’s salary,” Leahy insisted.

“No, we do not,” Boxer replied.

“Of course you do,” Leahy said. 

At one point, Boxer said she felt Leahy was dominating the conversation.

“Can you let me talk?” she asked. “You had a turn. Now I have a turn. I don’t have the legal degree my friend has.”

Boxer's amendment ended up passing the Senate by unanimous consent after Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) dropped an objection he had voiced earlier in the day.