About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


B-207467 L/M 1 (1983-01-18)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadvca0001 and id is 1 raw text is: COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTOND.C. 20648 B-207467 January 18, 1983 The Honorable George J. Mitchell thited States Senate Dear Senator Mitchell: By letter dated June 17, 1982, you requested our views on whether President Reagan's receipt of a pension from the State of California vio- lates article II, section 1, clause 6 of the Lhited States Constitution. Among other things, that clause prohibits the President from receiving any emolument from any state during the period for which he has been elected. The question presented is not one to which there is an unequivocal answer. Persuasive arguments may be made both for and against the prop- osition that the President's retirement allowance is an emolument whose receipt is prohibited by the Constitution. Nonetheless, having examined the issue and considered the views of both the Department of Justice and opposing citizens groups, we are of the opinion that the President's ac- ceptance of a retirement allowance from the State of California does not violate the prohibition contained in article II, section 1, clause 6. BACKGROUID President Reagan's financial disclosure report, filed May 14, 1982, showed that he received in 1981 frm the State of California as a retirement allowance, based upon his two terms as Governor.. According to. the Justice Department, then-Governor Reagan became a member of the California Legislator's Retirement System as an elective constitutional officer under section 9355.4 of the California Government Code. The Leg- islator's Retirement System is a contributory, non-fully funded system whose benefits are based upon length of service. Cal. Govt. Code SS 9355.4, 9357-59 (Deering 1973 and Supp. 1982). Lhder California law, retirees in the system who have fulfilled the necessary prerequisites have a vested right to their allowances. That right may not be withdrawn except under a previously-existing provision of the plan. Betts v. Board of Admin. of Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. 21 Cal. 3d 859i 863, 582 P.2d 614, 617, 148 Cal. Rptr. 158, 160-61 (1978). Several months after the President took office, his Counsel request- ed an opinion from the Justice Department about whether the_ President's receipt of retirement benefits violated article II, section 1, clause 6. That opinion, provided to us with the comments of the Deputy Counsel to the President, concluded that retirement benefits are not emoluments in