Congress routinely exempts itself from federal regulations, but I didn’t realize until reading Stephen Lurie’s latest piece for The Atlantic that only 35 of the 100 U.S. senators pay their interns. Neither Senator Tom Harkin nor Senator Chuck Grassley offers any financial compensation or stipend to interns.  

Unpaid internships have been in the news since a federal court ruled against the practice in June. Lurie summarizes “the two major complaints about unpaid internships: First, that equal work deserves equal pay; and second, that unpaid internships exclude those of lower economic status.”

Unpaid internships, besides the intrinsic problem of failing to pay for work that is necessary to the Senate, are some of the stronger remnants of socio-economic stagnation. For those who can afford to pay out of pocket for a summer in Washington, or are lucky to win a rare grant or scholarship, a Hill internship is a crucial first toehold in the political establishment. Full-time work for no pay clashes with liberal values, but it does perpetuate the cycle of socioeconomic privilege.

Senator Harkin’s official web page on internships mentions that he began his political career as an intern for U.S. Representative Neal Smith, and the experience “provided an invaluable education into what makes government tick.” The page describes Harkin’s intern program as designed for college undergraduates and solicits applications, but does not make clear that the internship will be unpaid.

Given Harkin’s strong lifetime record of standing up for fair labor practices, as well as his chairmanship of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, I’m disappointed to learn that he requires unpaid labor from his interns. But he has lots of company in the Democratic caucus, as Lurie notes.

First, nearly 70 senators ask their interns to perform a public service for free every summer. Over the same three-month period (August recess included), those senators earn $43,500 apiece. Needless to say, there is a distinct contrast between the leaders — many of whom are proud of their own previous internships — who perform “public service” for pay, and the youth they ask to do the same for free.

Second, and embarrassingly for [Senate Majority Leader Harry] Reid and the blue team, the vast majority of senators who do pay are Republicans. Of those 35 senators, only 11 are Democrats — meaning almost 80 percent of Dems require volunteer participation (not counting Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats). This is peculiar and troubling for a party that elsewhere signals its commitment to fair pay, equal representation, economic inequality, and workplace welfare. When it comes to interns in the Senate, it seems that traditional beliefs about labor and economic opportunity are suddenly switched. Despite frequently proposing and voting in favor of legislation that opens the workplace door to all Americans, Democrats ignore the same values when it comes to their interns.

Grassley also offers no compensation to his interns, but that didn’t shock me. I was surprised to learn from Lurie that Rand Paul of all people managed to pay both of his interns last year. A table in his piece shows details on which senators provide compensation or a stipend to interns.

Committing to pay future interns for their work would be an appropriate way for Harkin and Grassley to mark the upcoming Labor Day holiday. It’s not as if they have no options. Lurie points out,

Senators, unlike House members, are also able to use excess campaign funds for “officially related expenses,” a prime pool of unallocated money that could go towards interns. The simplest solution is to apportion intern pay from “the Senator’s Account” meant for office salary and expenses.

Any relevant comments are welcome in this thread.