Why the Average Congressional Staff Salary Depends on Who Gets Counted
The average House staff salary is $75,872 when interns are included and $85,847 when interns are excluded.
That nearly $10,000 gap is the point.
“How much do congressional staff make?” sounds like a simple question. It is not. The answer depends on who is included in the calculation.
A single average House staff salary can include senior staff, legislative staff, district staff, communications staff, administrative staff, constituent services staff, paid interns, part-time employees, and temporary staff.
Those are not interchangeable positions. They do not represent the same level of responsibility, permanence, experience, or pay.
That is why HillClimbers separates All House Staff from All House Staff, Excluding Interns. Both views are useful, but they answer different questions.
The $75,872 all-staff average shows the full workforce picture. The $85,847 no-intern average gives a clearer view of permanent congressional staff compensation.
A congressional salary average is only useful if readers know who is included.
Average House Staff Salary Is $75,872 With Interns and $85,847 Without Interns
Interns Can Pull Down the Overall House Staff Salary Average
Paid interns are now part of the congressional workforce in a way that older salary discussions often miss.
They are still interns, but they are also paid employees who appear in workforce and compensation data. When they are included in an average salary calculation, they can pull down the overall figure.
That does not mean the all-staff average is wrong. It means the all-staff average answers a broader question: what does the House workforce look like when everyone is counted?
The more precise question is different: what do permanent House staff make?
That distinction is important because HillClimbers’ broader analysis has shown that internships are no longer just a narrow summer phenomenon. Readers can see more of that workforce context in When Interns Become Infrastructure, the congressional intern-to-staff ratio analysis, and the article on paid congressional intern staffing and pay.
The operational effect is straightforward. As interns become a larger and more consistent part of the workforce, they have a larger effect on broad salary averages.
Excluding Interns Raises the Average House Staff Salary From $75,872 to $85,847
HillClimbers calculates both views because each has a legitimate purpose.
For LY 2025 YTD, the average House staff salary is $75,872 when interns are included. When interns are excluded, the average rises to $85,847.
That is a $9,975 difference.
Excluding interns raises the average House staff salary by $9,975.
The difference is large enough to change the public understanding of congressional pay. A headline number that includes interns can make permanent staff compensation look lower than it is. A number that excludes interns gives a clearer view of the compensation environment for ongoing House staff roles.
The staffing denominator changes too. HillClimbers’ 2025 all-staff view shows 16,647 total staff, while the no-intern view shows 11,036 total staff. That difference shows why the average moves so much when interns are removed from the calculation.
Neither number should be used carelessly. The right number depends on the question.
If the question is “What does the entire paid House workforce look like?” then the $75,872 all-staff average is useful.
If the question is “What do permanent congressional staff make?” then the $85,847 no-intern average is more relevant.
Why Team-Level Salary Averages Are More Useful Than One Broad Average
Even the no-intern average is still broad.
House offices are small organizations with very different functions inside them. A Member office typically includes leadership, legislative, district, communications, administrative, and constituent services work. Each team has a different labor market, career ladder, experience profile, and compensation pattern.
That is why team-level salary averages are more useful than one broad average.
A leadership team average answers a different question than a legislative team average. A district team average is not the same as an administrative team average. Constituent services compensation cannot be understood by looking only at the office-wide number.
Readers looking for broad public context can start with HillClimbers’ congressional staffing salary and staffing data and the explainer on how congressional staffing works.
The data points to a broader capacity issue: salary analysis is not just about pay. It is also about how congressional offices allocate limited resources across leadership, policy, district operations, communications, constituent services, administration, and entry-level pipelines.
A single average compresses all of that into one number.
Why Role-Level Salary Data Still Matters
Team averages are better than one broad average, but they still do not replace role-level salary data.
Inside the leadership team, a Chief of Staff is not the same role as a Deputy Chief of Staff.
Inside the legislative team, a Legislative Director, Senior Legislative Assistant, Legislative Assistant, and Legislative Correspondent/Aide represent different career stages and responsibilities.
The same is true across the rest of the office. A Staff Assistant is not the same as a Scheduler, Administrative Staff, or Executive Assistant/Office Manager. A Constituent Services Representative/Caseworker is not the same as a Director of Constituent Services/Casework. A Press Secretary/Communications Director is not the same as Communications Staff. A District Director is not the same as a Field Representative.
That is why HillClimbers treats role-level salary analysis as a separate layer of the data.
The public average helps frame the issue. The team average makes the comparison more useful. Role-level salary benchmarks are what serious job seekers, offices, and workforce researchers need when they are comparing real positions.
The average is the starting point, not the salary benchmark.
What This Means for Job Seekers, Offices, and Researchers
For job seekers, the lesson is direct: do not rely on one broad congressional salary average when evaluating a job. The relevant comparison is the role, team, experience level, office type, and current labor market.
For offices, the implication is different. Compensation strategy is not only about the office-wide average. It is about whether each team can recruit and retain the people needed to run a modern congressional office.
For researchers and journalists, the denominator should be explicit. If interns are included, say so. If they are excluded, say so. If part-time or temporary staff are included, explain that too.
The workforce consequence is easy to miss. A single average can make congressional salaries look more precise than they are. In reality, House offices are small, complex organizations with many role types compressed into one payroll structure.
Readers can explore broader congressional workforce trends through the HillClimbers Index, current congressional jobs, and the main HillClimbers jobs board. For role-specific salary benchmarks, workforce trends, career paths, and office-level insights, readers can review HillClimbers’ pricing options.
The pattern is not just administrative. It is institutional.
Congressional salary averages shape how people understand Capitol Hill work, whether job seekers can evaluate offers, whether offices can compete for talent, and whether researchers describe the congressional workforce accurately.
A better salary conversation starts with a better denominator.
FAQ Section
What is the average House staff salary?
The average House staff salary depends on who is included in the calculation. A broad all-staff average includes permanent staff, paid interns, part-time employees, and temporary staff. A no-intern average removes interns and better reflects permanent staff compensation. HillClimbers separates All House Staff from All House Staff, Excluding Interns because each version answers a different question.
Why does the average House staff salary change when interns are excluded?
The average changes because interns are paid employees, but they are not comparable to permanent congressional staff roles. Intern compensation is generally attached to short-term, entry-level work. When interns are included in the average, they pull down the overall number. When interns are excluded, the average better reflects the compensation of ongoing House staff positions.
How much does excluding interns change the average House staff salary?
Excluding interns raises the average House staff salary by about $10,000. That difference is large enough to change how readers interpret congressional compensation. The all-staff average is useful for understanding the total workforce, but the no-intern average is usually more relevant for people asking what permanent congressional staff make.
Should interns be included in congressional salary averages?
It depends on the purpose of the analysis. Interns should be included when the goal is to describe the full paid House workforce. They should usually be excluded when the goal is to estimate permanent staff compensation. The best practice is to state the denominator clearly, especially in public discussions of congressional salaries.
Are congressional interns paid?
Many congressional interns are paid, and paid internships are now an important part of the House workforce. HillClimbers has written more about the growth of internships in When Interns Become Infrastructure, congressional intern staffing year-round, and paid congressional intern staffing and pay.
Which congressional staff teams have different salary levels?
House offices include leadership, legislative, district, communications, administrative, constituent services, and non-permanent staff. Each team has different responsibilities and career paths, so salary expectations differ. Readers can start with HillClimbers’ public congressional staffing page for broad context and use the member office roles page to explore how different congressional jobs fit together.
Why is role-level salary data more useful than one average?
Role-level salary data is more useful because congressional jobs are not interchangeable. A Chief of Staff, Legislative Assistant, Staff Assistant, District Director, and Constituent Services Representative/Caseworker all sit in different parts of the office structure. A single average cannot show whether a specific role is underpaid, competitive, or unusually high relative to similar positions.
How can congressional job seekers use salary benchmarks?
Job seekers should compare a job offer to the most relevant role, not just to the overall House staff average. A broad average can provide context, but role-specific salary benchmarks are better for evaluating whether an offer is competitive. Job seekers can also review current openings through HillClimbers congressional jobs and the broader HillClimbers jobs board.
Where can readers explore congressional salary data?
Readers can start with HillClimbers’ public congressional staffing data, staffing insights, and role summary pages. For role-specific salary benchmarks, workforce trends, career paths, and office-level analysis, readers can use the HillClimbers Index or review HillClimbers plans.