Cash for Integrity: Would Paying Politicians More Fix Corruption or Fuel It?

What Happened

Elon Musk, the new head of DOGE, has suggested raising congressional salaries to curb government corruption in Washington.

Musk's reasoning is simple. When policymakers are paid more, they will be less tempted by backroom deals, stock trades, and any lobbyist payouts.

While the idea is intriguing, it is a bit ironic. Musk is the head of the Department of Government Efficiency, whose whole purpose is to cut back on excessive and wasteful government spending.

The idea that throwing even more money at policymakers to solve one of the government’s great flaws is sure to be met with intense criticism, likely from both sides of the political aisle.

Why it Matters

Although the idea is intriguing, it is hardly a new concept. Some nations, like Singapore, have successfully reduced corruption by offering officials higher salaries, assuming well-compensated statesman will be less likely to sell themselves out.

However, recent events have called the effectiveness of this approach into question. In October 2024, former Singaporean Transport Minister S. Iswaran was sentenced to 12 months in prison for accepting over $300,000 in gifts and obstructing justice. This case has sparked debate about the effectiveness of high salaries in preventing corruption among public officials.

A similar logic applies in the corporate world — offering executives high pay and stock options is meant to align their interests with those of shareholders. However, the question is whether Washington can effectively operate on anything resembling a meritocratic system, or if raising policies would simply give career politicians an even bigger financial advantage without improving governance.

Congressional pay currently sits at $174,000 per year, far above the national median household income. However, this hasn't stopped lawmakers from engaging in corrupt behavior that would elicit an SEC investigation in the private sector. If a high six-figure salary isn't enough to deter insider trading, sweetheart deals, or revolving-door lobbying gigs, it’s questionable whether making politicians richer would suddenly inspire ethical practices.

A common criticism is that if corruption were merely a product of financial desperation, the wealthiest members of Congress — many of whom have mysteriously multiplied their fortunes many times over while in office — would be paragons of virtue. This is hardly the case.

The real debate isn't just about salaries. It's about whether financial incentives can actually have a meaningful impact on political integrity. While some argue that higher pay could reduce corruption, many others have pointed out that Congress already operates under far different financial rules than regular citizens.

Policymakers have access to privileged information, lucrative job opportunities after they've served their terms, and political donations that often have a far bigger influence on their policy decisions than a higher salary ever could.

How it Affects You

If raising pay is meant to discourage corruption, it would need to be paired with stronger accountability measures. Critics argue that without restrictions on stock trading, lobbying, and financial conflicts of interest, salary increases alone won’t change much.

For voters, the real question is whether they trust Washington to reform itself. If corruption is truly more costly than higher salaries, as Musk suggests, then any policy change should come with safeguards to ensure it benefits the public, not just those in power.