[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 100 (Monday, July 22, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Page S7170]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. DODD (for himself, Mr. Warner, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Schumer, 
        Mr. Biden, Mr. Torricelli, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Dayton, Mr. 
        Durbin, and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 2770. A bill to amend the Federal Law Enforcement Pay Reform Act 
of 1990 to adjust the percentage differentials payable to Federal law 
enforcement officers in certain high-cost areas; to the Committee on 
Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that 
is important to Federal law enforcement officers and the people they 
protect across America. I am joined today by Senator Warner, Senator 
Lieberman, Senator Schumer, Senator Biden, Senator Torricelli, Senator 
Grassley, Senator Dayton, Senator Durbin, and Senator Clinton.
  The legislation that we are offering will amend the Federal Law 
Enforcement Pay Reform Act of 1990 to ensure that the government treats 
Federal law enforcement officers fairly. This bill will partially 
increase the locality pay adjustments paid to Federal agents in certain 
high cost areas. These areas have pay disparities so high they are 
negatively affecting our Federal law enforcement officers, since 
locality pay adjustments have either not been increased since 1990, or 
have been increased negligibly.
  All over America, Federal law enforcement personnel are enduring 
tremendous stress associated with our Nation's effort to protect 
citizens from the threat of terrorism. Unfortunately, that stress has 
been compounded by ongoing pressing concerns among many such personnel 
about their pay. I have heard from officers who have described long 
commutes, high personal debts, and in some cases, almost all-consuming 
concerns about financial insecurity. Many of these problems occur when 
agents or officers are transferred from low-cost parts of the country 
to high-cost areas. I have been told that some federal officers are 
forced to separate from their families and rent rooms in the cities to 
which they have been transferred because they cannot afford to rent or 
buy homes large enough for a family.
  An agent in the San Francisco area recently wrote to me to explain 
how hard it is to live on the wages currently paid to federal officers 
in that area. This agent, a military veteran who continues to serve the 
public, wrote: ``I have been with the federal government for 15 years 
now and never thought that I would be forced to live in a trailer 
park.'' This agent further explained that she and her husband, who is 
still in the military, cannot afford to buy even a small condominium on 
their government salaries. They can only barely afford to pay the 
mortgage on the trailer they purchased for $255,000.
  Unfortunately, the raise in the cost of living in many cities across 
America has outstripped our Federal pay system. I recognize that this 
is a problem for other Federal employees and I am prepared to work with 
my colleagues to address this larger issue. The cost of living has also 
had a very negative impact on non-federal employees as well and I have 
consistently worked to ensure that all working Americans enjoy a truly 
livable wage. The legislation that we are introducing today in no way 
suggests that the needs of other workers should be ignored, but it 
acknowledges that as we continue to ask federal law enforcement 
personnel to put in long hours and remain on heightened alert, we must 
provide them with a salary sufficient to allow them to focus on their 
vital work without nagging worries about how to provide their families 
with the essentials of food, clothing, and shelter.
  The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, representing more 
than 19,000 Federal agents, along with the Fraternal Order of Police, 
National Association of Police Organizations, National Troopers 
Coalition, National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, 
International Brotherhood of Police Organization, and the Police 
Executive Research Forum have endorsed this legislative proposal. The 
proposed legislation will increase the pay of federal law enforcement 
personnel in the following metropolitan areas by the following 
percentages:

                                                             Percentage
San Francisco--Oakland--San Jose..................................14.02
San Diego, CA......................................................9.58
Houston--Galveston--Brazoria......................................12.94
Miami--Ft. Lauderdale..............................................9.34
LA--Riverside--Orange Cty.........................................11.14
Cincinnati--NO KY--IN..............................................8.76
NYC--NO NJ--SO CT.................................................10.44
Seattle--Tacoma--Bremerton.........................................8.90
Chicago--Gary--Kenosha............................................10.76
Philadelphia--Wilmington--SO NJ....................................9.03
Detroit--Ann Arbor--Flint.........................................10.57
Portland--Salem....................................................9.26
Hartford, CT.......................................................9.67
Minneapolis--St. Paul..............................................8.65
Boston (MA-NJ-ME-CT-RI)............................................8.43
Sacramento--Yolo...................................................8.42
Denver--Boulder--Greeley...........................................9.74
Washington--Baltimore..............................................8.53

  In these difficult time we must remain committed to recruiting, 
hiring, and retaining law enforcement officers of the highest caliber. 
However, we must also recognize that the federal government is in 
competition with State and local police departments that often pay more 
and provide better standards of living.
  I urge all of my colleagues to join us in this effort. I hope that we 
can quickly pass this important legislation because it will improve the 
lives of the men and women who are dedicated to protecting and in so 
doing it will improve the nation's domestic security.
                                 ______