Republicans on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee advanced their portion of the GOP’s massive budget reconciliation package Wednesday, but not without dissent from one of their own.
After a six-hour markup, the panel voted 22-21, with GOP Rep. Michael R. Turner of Ohio joining all Democrats in opposition.
The legislation would cut federal employees’ take-home pay, trim their pensions and shrink their job protections to reduce national deficits by more than $50 billion over 10 years.
In his opening remarks, Turner outlined his objections. “I don’t believe it represents Republican values or American values,” he said. “I believe making changes to pension benefits in the middle of employment is wrong. Employee benefits are not a gift. They are earned.”
The largest proposal would increase revenues by $30.7 billion by requiring long-serving federal workers to increase their contributions into the Federal Employees Retirement System, or FERS, to 4.4 percent. Currently, those hired before 2014 pay lower rates.
The reconciliation text would also change how pension benefits would be calculated for federal retirees, using an average of an employee’s five highest-earning years instead of three. That could reduce payouts by $4.75 billion over 10 years, according to a summary provided by committee Republicans. The measure would also eliminate an annuity payment that federal retirees may collect before they reach eligibility for Social Security if they retire before turning 62. That cut could save around $10.1 billion.
Employee unions mobilized against the proposals, lambasting them as yet another attack on an unfairly beleaguered workforce. “This makes the federal government a less-and-less competitive employer,” said Daniel Horowitz of the American Federation of Government Employees. “I don’t know how we will get young people to ever work for us again after this and all the probationary firings.”
The FERS change could reduce take-home pay for certain workers considerably. For someone at the bottom end of the federal pay schedule making just under $28,000 a year, the increased contributions could cost roughly $1,000. For a top-ranking government worker making $162,000, it could mean taking home around $5,800 a year less.
Both employees and employing agencies contribute into FERS. In theory, increasing employee contributions would allow the agencies to reduce their spending levels. But some have doubts about that assumption. “I’m skeptical with how they count the savings if they are not guaranteeing the agencies spend a commensurate amount less,” said John Hatton, staff vice president for policy and programs at the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association.
In a press release Tuesday, the U.S. Capitol Police Labor Committee decried the proposal, warning it could worsen an ongoing staffing shortage. “If these cuts go ahead, many of our officers will resign or retire at a time when we are already understaffed. There is no doubt that will undermine our force readiness and will increase the risk to our remaining officers and to all those they protect in Congress and in the Capitol complex,” said union Chairman Gus Papathanasiou.
Republicans on the Oversight panel described the cuts as necessary to right the nation’s listing fiscal ship. “Congressional procedure, precedent and tradition too often contribute to an ever-expanding federal government, while too little is done to shrink the administrative state or make the federal bureaucracy more efficient,” said Oversight Chairman James R. Comer of Kentucky as he kicked off the markup Wednesday. “The budget reconciliation process, while imposing requirements and some limitations on cost-saving measures this committee is considering, provides a rare opportunity to reverse that trajectory.”
Democrats on the committee, led by Rep. Stephen F. Lynch of Massachusetts, argued that the overall reconciliation package puts “the richest Americans” over everyone else and that the cost of Republicans’ desired tax cuts would dwarf the size of the potential spending reductions. Lynch sat in as ranking member for Rep. Gerald E. Connolly of Virginia, who earlier in the week announced he would be stepping down from the position after his cancer returned.
Another provision in the legislation would require new federal employees to contribute an additional 5 percent of their paychecks into FERS, effectively raising their contribution rate to 9.4 percent, unless they agreed to waive their civil service protections and work as at-will employees.
“From an operation-of-government perspective, encouraging employees to drop merit-based civil service protections makes no sense. They exist to protect against cronyism and corruption, not to protect the civil service employees themselves,” Hatton said.
“This is called extortion,” said Rep. Melanie Stansbury, D-N.M., during the markup. “This is all about cutting federal workers, punishing federal workers, making life harder for Americans and destroying the federal workforce.”
The legislation also would impose a $350 fee for Merit Systems Protection Board filings, which would be refunded to workers who win their appeals, which could raise $2 million in revenues, according to the GOP summary.
Lynch warned the fee “would create a financial barrier for employees seeking justice, particularly for low-income or recently separated workers.”
The only provision in the text that was not met with broad condemnation from federal workers and Democrats would direct the Office of Personnel Management to audit the Federal Employees Health Benefits program for ineligible dependents. The committee estimated it would lead to $1.5 billion in savings.
Federal worker unions say they are organizing their members to lobby lawmakers against the reconciliation package and expect to continue the fight as the proposals advance to the House floor and are taken up in the Senate.
“No tears will be shed here if the entire bill unravels,” said Horowitz.
The post Oversight panel endorses cuts to federal retirement system appeared first on Roll Call.
