[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 36 (Thursday, March 10, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H1711-H1716]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
A TRIBUTE TO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 5, 2011, the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms.
Norton) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority
leader.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise to lead a Special Order this evening
in tribute to public employees everywhere, and especially our Federal
employees here in the United States, 85 percent of whom do not work in
Washington. I hope that my colleagues and I will be able to offer some
little
[[Page H1712]]
known facts about Federal employees today so that the word ``Federal
employee'' gets a face and you know who it is we're talking about.
Today I introduced a resolution supporting the right of all workers
to bargain collectively, public and private workers. I'm grateful that
Representative Donna Edwards cosponsored this resolution with me and
invite others to cosponsor the resolution. The resolution reminds us of
what our grandfathers and our forefathers would have told us, that for
a long time there was a fight waged after it became clear that
individual workers standing alone have little or no bargaining power
against some employer that they hope will hire them or in whose employ
they find themselves. Thus rose, and finally was legalized as the
National Labor Relations Act, the right of workers to form unions.
In no free society in the world is the right to bargain collectively
barred. That right has been under attack for decades, and the decline
of unions in the United States is directly attributable to the
difficulty in organizing workers today because the National Labor
Relations Act is a figment of another century.
I think we will see in some of the statistics coming out of Wisconsin
and out of the country at large that the decline of unions today does
not mean that unions are not prized institutions in our country, and I
will have some statistics that show that.
What I think most Americans recognize is that they owe to the
American trade union movement much that they take for granted today,
even if you are not a member of a union movement. Unions could have
been content to bargain at the table for health and safety conditions,
for a 40-hour week and the rest of it. Instead, they led the country in
making laws that require a 40-hour workweek, child labor laws, require
health and safety conditions, require overtime pay, and encourage
health insurance and pension insurance. Those matters which began at
the bargaining table now many Americans enjoy, and yet we have seen
targets especially placed on the backs of public employees.
I'd like to open by giving you an idea of who a public employee is by
speaking of a public employee in my own district, the District of
Columbia. I don't know Anthony Hutchinson, but I've heard about him. He
is an example of an exceptional Federal employee, I understand. He is a
husband and a father of two. He lives on Savannah Street in southeast
Washington. He is a transportation security officer, and he has worked
at the Ronald Reagan National Airport for the last 6 years. He is also
a member and shop steward of his union, which in this case happens to
be the National Treasury Employees Union. He has been named the
Transportation Security Officer of the Year. He has received
outstanding ratings from his employer. He was once the chair and once
the vice chair of the Safety Committee. He is on a team that has
designed ways to keep transportation security officers up to date on
techniques for identifying weapons and prohibited items through x-ray
machines. He served on the Emergency Readiness Team--that's a team that
deploys within 24 hours in the event of an emergency or national
disaster. Anthony Hutchinson is a Federal employee.
When you speak of Federal employees, it seems to me we owe them at
least the courtesy of recognizing them for what they do for the
American people. But you would not have understood that if you have
been watching over the last few weeks the episodes in Wisconsin. These
were shocking. And many I think thought, well, maybe it has come to
this. Unions aren't very popular and maybe people are ready to bash
unions in just this way. But look what the polls are showing us.
The polls show, following Wisconsin, when there have been national
polls about the standing of public employees and public employee
unions, that Americans oppose weakening the bargaining rights of public
employee unions by a huge margin, by a margin of 2-1, 60 percent to 33
percent. Only a slim majority, just a slim majority of Republicans
favored taking away bargaining rights. It's as if Americans understand
a right when they see one.
Now, bargaining rights are not like the rights of freedom of religion
or freedom of speech.
{time} 1740
But they're right up there on my list of six or seven rights that
Americans believe, once you get, you are entitled to because you have
gotten them democratically. You had to go worker by worker. You had to
organize. And it looks as though there has been a horrific backlash
from Wisconsin.
Indeed, now Americans, when asked how they would choose to reduce
their own State deficits, having watched Wisconsin, say they prefer tax
increases over benefit cuts for State workers by a margin of 2-to-1.
That is what Wisconsin has given the country. It has laid bare what a
frontal attack on a basic right means. And what it means is Americans
are not for it.
We saw what happened in Wisconsin overnight, that through the tricks
of parliamentary maneuvers they were able to, in fact, weaken the
bargaining rights of Wisconsin workers. There is going to be a price to
pay in Wisconsin, I believe, and I'm going to point to why.
The present Governor of Wisconsin came in with a six-point margin of
victory. His polls show seven points behind now. Forty-five percent
strongly approve of his performance. The man has only been in office a
little more than 3 months. Public employees' unions, including
teachers' unions in Wisconsin, now have favorable, positive ratings, 16
points higher than Walker's ratings.
The turnaround in Wisconsin I think tells us where the country is
headed when they see the overreaching here in Washington and when they
see the overreaching at the State level.
The Wisconsin results are just astounding. They fly in the face of
everything Walker was doing. They are the classic backlash to
overreach. The State's population now believes that Walker should
reverse course and raise taxes on those making $150,000 a year. That's
by a 72 percent to 27 percent margin.
There you have it. A kind of incubator in one State that I think,
writ large, tells us where the country stands when it comes to public
employees.
Now, the national poll found, not unexpectedly, that 71 percent of
Democrats opposed weakening collective bargaining rights. But there was
also almost as strong opposition from Independents--71 percent
Democrats, 62 percent of Independents. And only a bare margin of
Republicans were for weakening collective bargaining rights.
We know that when it came to Walker, there was no doubt what he was
after, because the unions, seeing that the State was indeed in trouble,
had a huge deficit, gave him what he desired in savings. And still he
would not compromise. He held his ground, and in holding his ground,
appears to have lost his State.
This is a turning point moment for the country. This is a moment that
is sorting out those who linger on the extreme from those who have
fought to find their way to the mainstream. And Wisconsin is a
harbinger of what overreach will reap here in the House of
Representatives as polls in Wisconsin show it has already done there.
Look what we have here. The President already announced a freeze, a
5-year spending freeze, on Federal employees in the State of the Union.
They didn't like that. But that seems to have whet the appetite of
Republicans for more and even more.
They come to the floor with bills that would furlough Federal workers
for the 2 weeks, would impose an additional 1-year pay freeze, and cut
200,000 Federal jobs. There's another bill that would limit the ability
of Federal workers to bargain collectively.
The bills just roll out of Republicans--a freeze, a cut in the
Federal workforce by 15 percent. Don't you think somebody would want to
look and see who the workers are before coming up with a number like
that? Cutting agency funding to 2008 levels in 2012, as H.R. 1 does,
and then to 2006 levels for the next 9 years. That would reduce most
agency budgets by 40 percent.
I see that my good friend who has also cosponsored the resolution
paying tribute to America's public and Federal employees has come to
the floor, and I am pleased to grant her such time as she may desire.
[[Page H1713]]
Ms. EDWARDS. I want to thank the gentlewoman from the District of
Columbia.
Mr. Speaker, I'm here today because I'm here on behalf of and with
the 150,000 Federal workers who live in the Fourth Congressional
District in Maryland. But in our region, in our metropolitan region, we
know that there are some 700,000 Federal workers just in the Washington
metropolitan region who do so much to protect this country, to keep our
neighborhoods, our communities safe, to keep our food safe, to make
sure that we know what the weather is; 2.7 to 2.8 million Federal
workers all around the country and around the globe. That means that
they're not all here in Washington. So I'm always troubled when I hear
people who, for the last couple of decades, have just gone on an all-
out attack against the great work of Federal workers.
And I would say to the gentlewoman from the District of Columbia, I
know a little bit of something about Federal workers. I grew up in a
household with two Federal workers. My mother and my father both worked
for the Federal Government. In fact, it was working for the Federal
Government that really helped them become a part of the middle class in
this country. It was the work that they did as Federal workers that
saved taxpayers lots of money. It was the work that my father did in
uniform in this country protecting and honoring all of us by his
service.
And so there's such a wide range of the Federal workforce, and yet
some who want to go after Federal workers--and I say ``go after,'' and
I mean that very directly--do it without actually knowing what it is
that Federal workers do.
Well, I want to tell you about some of the Federal workers in my
congressional district. They are workers who work at the Food and Drug
Administration. They're doing some of the most cutting-edge research
that is out there. They are looking to make sure that our--that the
food and the drugs that are in our marketplace are safe for children
and families and consumers.
I want to talk about the Federal workers at the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
{time} 1750
Today in the Washington region, and up and down the east coast, we
have actually had flood warnings for communities, including communities
around the District of Columbia metropolitan area, that are under flood
warnings and watches today. It's Federal workers who actually helped us
to analyze the data coming from the satellite that was put up into our
atmosphere by Federal workers that help us understand what's happening
in our environment with our climate and our weather.
It's the Federal workers at NASA who took the charge that President
Kennedy gave to them to explore space, to discover that new frontier,
who have been at the cutting edge of all kinds of research that benefit
us in every capacity. I like to say to people it was actually a Federal
worker and the Federal workforce that figured out through technology
and experimentation that they could create materials that would lead to
the creation of air bags and seat belts in our space program. And those
are the same air bags that I know saved my life one time when I was in
a car accident, and have saved many lives all across this country.
Well, that's the product of what happens when you make an investment in
our Federal workforce.
It's a Federal worker who works at Andrews Air Force Base in my
congressional district looking out for the protection of the President
and for diplomats who fly in and out of Andrews, making sure that we
safeguard the protected space in this capital region, making sure that
we have an Air Force and personnel who are deployed to as far away
places as Afghanistan and Iraq looking out for improvised explosive
devices, training some of our great other servicemembers, those German
shepherds and other service dogs that we see. It's the Federal
workforce that's doing those things.
So I am often shocked, Mr. Speaker, when I hear people targeting the
Federal workforce. Let's just be clear, Federal workers have actually
absorbed and been willing to absorb and to take, not liking it, as the
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia points out, a freeze that's
been placed on their wages, but they continue to serve. It's the
Federal worker, Mr. Speaker, who makes sure that that Social Security
check and that disability claim and those veterans services are
provided not just in the Fourth Congressional District in Maryland, but
all across this country.
So when I think about the range of things that Federal workers do
that no one else does, it's really extraordinary. People try to
compare, the gentlewoman knows this, try to compare wages and salaries
to wages and salaries in the private sector; but it's not a direct
match. I mean, imagine, if you would, that we could get away in the
private sector with paying a top-notch engineering researcher $100,000
to work for us. But that's what happens in the Federal Government, even
though those salaries may be significantly higher than that.
Ms. NORTON. The gentlewoman is making a very important and much
misunderstood point with these comparisons between apples and bananas.
Half of the Federal workforce, I learned, work in the nine highest
paying occupation groups: judges, engineers, scientists, nuclear plant
inspectors. That's half of the Federal workers. Less than a third of
private sector workers work in these same nine top-drawer occupations.
So when you hear these comparisons, you are not comparing comparable
workforces. The private sector has categories we don't even have here
like cooks and manufacturing workers.
So these comparisons that you speak of, I say to the gentlelady,
could not be more important to distinguish. We are talking about the
highest level workforce in the United States of America. And I will say
to the gentlelady, I learned as well that there are far fewer of them
than when I was a child. In 1953, there was one Federal worker for
every 78 residents. Today, there is one for every 147. How did you go
from one Federal worker for every 78 residents to one for every 147
residents? Productivity. This is a knowledge workforce. It is a
workforce to die for.
I yield to the gentlelady from Maryland.
Ms. EDWARDS. I want to thank the gentlelady, because I think it's
really important for us to understand really who is the Federal worker.
You know, what is it that they do? And as the gentlelady has pointed
out, our food is safe because of Federal workers. The drugs that we
take, whether they come over the counter or they're prescription drugs,
they're safe because of a Federal worker. When that prediction is
coming through for severe weather that hits the middle of our country
in the most oppressive way, it's a Federal worker who analyzes that
data and works really hard and really quickly to get that information
out to the public.
Federal workers also work in some of the most dangerous fields, in
addition to being some of the most skilled fields in this country. You
mentioned the work, the gentlelady did, the work of our nuclear
scientists that Federal workers do, in our laboratories all across this
country, not just in Washington, D.C., in States like Colorado and
California and New Mexico, some of the highest level of scientific work
that's going on in the country.
So we have a skilled Federal workforce. And, you know, I was really
shocked about this story that we have heard evolving in Wisconsin and
the struggle of Wisconsin workers for collective bargaining rights that
indeed on the committee on which we serve in Transportation, just a
couple of weeks ago we were looking at an authorization for the Federal
Aviation Administration. In that authorization we actually passed
legislation through our committee that would say that if you didn't
show up for a union vote, maybe you were sick, maybe you didn't want to
vote, for whatever reason, your not showing up would be counted as a
``no'' vote.
Can you imagine if any of us actually conducted elections like that?
All those folks who decided to stay home for whatever reason would be
counted as ``no'' votes? I daresay there would be a lot of Members of
this Congress who would not be Members of this Congress under those
kinds of rules. Yet those are the kinds of rules that are being
promoted by the Republican majority
[[Page H1714]]
through our continuing resolution, through our authorization that
really go at the heart of taking the feet out from under the Federal
workforce.
Ms. NORTON. I thank the gentlelady, and I hope she will remain with
us, because the gentlelady is pointing out distinctions that the public
is largely unaware of. Some of these job categories that my friend from
Maryland points to ought to be instructive: rocket scientists, VA
nurse, park ranger, cancer researcher, prison guards.
It's interesting that the cooks in the Bureau of Prisons are probably
paid more than the cooks in the private sector because they have
supervision of prisoners, who also work in the kitchen. How do you
measure that? You don't do it by throwing out a bunch of statistics,
public versus private, and believe that that tells the whole story.
Now we are very pleased to be joined by the gentlewoman from Hawaii,
our new Member from Hawaii, and I am pleased to grant her 5 minutes.
Ms. HIRONO. Thank you. Relatively new Member. I am really glad to
join the two of you in honoring and acknowledging the work of our
Federal workers. Ms. Edwards and I sit on the same Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee; and, yes, it was quite revealing to talk
about the kinds of changes some people were proposing to the FAA bill
that would have totally changed the way you count votes. It is a way to
count votes that doesn't happen in any other arena.
Certainly, if we had to count votes where all the people who were
registered to vote didn't vote would be counted as a ``no'' vote, I
would say that most of us here, including our friends on the other side
of the aisle, would not be here.
That's very telling to me, the kind of perspective that's reflected,
any kind of an effort that goes after government employees. And today
we are here to talk about the thousands and thousands of Federal
employees who are doing the job every single day to keep our government
going.
{time} 1800
Who do we think keeps government going but our workers? We need to
acknowledge that and honor them.
When you go to the Social Security office, for example, as I have,
and when you see the Federal employees processing the paperwork, that
needs to happen so that our seniors can get the benefits that they've
worked hard for and that they deserve. When you go to an unemployment
line, you see State workers. This is what I mean. Government employees
are there, doing the jobs they need to do to enable our working people
and middle class families and everyone else in our country to get the
kinds of services that we pay for.
They're being scapegoated as though they're the ones who are
responsible for this economic crisis. Some people refer to it now as
the ``Great Recession,'' with a capital ``G'' and a capital ``R,'' as
opposed to the Great Depression. So many of the stories that we hear
are about people just struggling to make ends meet, including our
Federal employees. They're like the rest of us. Of course there are
faces to all of these Federal employees. In fact, let me just tell you
about some of the Federal employees who have been acknowledged in my
State for the exemplary work that they're doing.
For example, I want to talk about Sergeant Michael Schellenbach, who
is a combat camera officer in charge of the Kaneohe Marine Corps Base
in Hawaii. He won a Federal Leader of the Year award. He provided
unparalleled customer service to prepare marines for Operations Iraqi
and Enduring Freedom.
Warren Au won the 2010 Federal Employee of the Year award for
professional, administrative and technical professions. Warren works in
the Naval Facilities Engineering Command as an electrical engineer on
the Far East planning team. He developed and implemented an electronic
data-gathering tool to produce an updated facilities plan. The tool is
now required at all Navy and Marine Corps installations, and it has
greatly increased productivity and efficiency, saving taxpayers--that's
all of us--a lot of money.
Bill Pursley was a 2008 Federal Mentor of the Year. He works for the
Transportation Security Administration at Maui County Airports. Under
Bill's guidance and leadership, over dozens of officers have been
promoted to lead, supervisor and master positions. Bill's very calm and
convincing demeanor has earned him the respect of airport employees and
leaders, and he has had a significant impact on keeping us safe.
These are just a few of the 4.6 million Federal workers and retirees
in every State in our country who have not only provided services to us
over the years and who have earned their retirements, but they're
continuing to, as we have referred to in so many of our committees,
step up to do more with less. They have been doing that for years now,
and I am proud of them. I am proud of the Federal workers in Hawaii.
Ms. NORTON. If the gentlewoman would yield, I think it's very
interesting that we have on the floor Members from, perhaps, the most
dense part of the Federal workforce, all the way to Hawaii. Eighty-five
percent of Federal workers does not work in the Washington region. Ms.
Edwards and I feel fortunate to live in the National Capital Region,
but we by no means regard ourselves as representative of Federal
workers. Every Member has Federal workers in her district. So, when
you're bashing Federal employees, you'd better watch yourselves because
you're bashing your own constituents.
Does the gentlelady from Maryland want to speak to that issue?
Ms. EDWARDS. I do.
Too often we hear: Let's cut Washington. We don't care if the Federal
Government shuts down because it's just a bunch of Federal employees.
In fact, only 1 quarter of Federal employees works in the Three-State
Region that comprises the Washington Metropolitan Region. The other 75
percent of Federal employees works someplace else.
I love this idea of exploring what it is that Federal employees do
because I'm often fascinated by the many jobs that they do which
provide so many important resources for us:
Meteorologists. Well, could we do without meteorologists? Ask the
people in California and in these other earthquake zones. In the
gentlelady's home State of Hawaii, we need meteorologists in that
sector. Aerospace engineers, who are exploring these 21st century new
technologies and horizons that are not here on this Earth, who are
looking at things like climate and planetary science, they don't make a
lot of money. They may have Ph.Ds. An aerospace engineer with a Ph.D.,
who works for the Federal Government, probably makes about $70,000.
Imagine if you translated that skill level into the private sector.
So I thank the gentlelady for reminding us of the fact that Federal
workers span the spectrum of job skills, and they're in every single
State and in every congressional district in this country.
Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to how much time I have
remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentlewoman has 25 minutes remaining.
Ms. HIRONO. Will the gentlewoman yield?
Ms. NORTON. I am glad to yield to the gentlewoman from Hawaii.
Ms. HIRONO. Thank you.
When we think about the kinds of resources in our country that
everyone enjoys, think about our national parks. What a tremendous
resource for all of us, and so many families go to all of our national
parks. Guess who is there to make sure that families, individuals--all
of us--have a lovely time? Who is protecting our endangered species,
these national parks? We have a lot of national parks in Hawaii. In
fact, you may have seen the pictures recently of one of them. We have
the continuing eruption of Kilauea on the Island of Hawaii, which is
part of my district.
So there are just so many areas in which we could not do without the
commitment of our Federal employees. Truly, I feel as though they're
getting picked on for basically political reasons, and it's
unjustifiable to do that and to scapegoat our workers in that way.
Ms. NORTON. They deserve just the opposite.
Ms. HIRONO. Yes.
Ms. NORTON. Far from scapegoating, it seems to me we ought to stand
up
[[Page H1715]]
and salute Federal employees for what they're doing for this country
now.
Ms. HIRONO. You mentioned Ms. Edwards and about exploration and about
meteorologists. Well, the astronaut program, that's a Federal program.
We had a wonderful astronaut from Hawaii, Ellison Onizuka, who
tragically lost his life in the Challenger disaster.
This is part of what we need to do to educate all of us and the young
people and our students. In fact, I was visited by a group of students
in my district yesterday. They were here with the Close Up program, and
were here to learn about the Federal Government and what keeps the
Federal Government going. It's not just us. It's all those 4.6 million
people out there who are helping.
Ms. NORTON. Ms. Edwards, you are probably also aware that we hear
about the best and the brightest. The Federal workforce, now with many
baby boomers, is eligible to retire, and there is absolute panic about
whether or not we will ever see a workforce as good as the workforce we
got in the post-Kennedy period. These were people who came fresh with
all of the notions of the Kennedy era that public service was a
wonderful thing, and they made their careers in the Federal service.
Ninety percent of them could retire in the next 10 years. Now the whole
world is open to them. They could go to the high-tech companies. They
could go to Hawaii. They could go to California.
Will we be able to attract the best and the brightest right when we
most need them--in an era when the country needs, on this side as well
as on the military side, the very best talent we can find?
{time} 1810
Ms. EDWARDS. The gentlewoman from the District of Columbia raises yet
another really interesting point and it is that not only could they go
anyplace in the United States, but the world is their oyster. We know
that our best and brightest are not just being recruited from State to
State outside of the Federal workforce, they are being recruited
outside of the United States, because we know that we have the talent
here, and what better place to absorb that talent in public service
than in service in the Federal sector.
I am just so proud. I think about the time that I met a scientist, a
researcher over at the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Let me tell you what they do at NIST.
Any piece of the electronic equipment that you might have, and maybe
it's in your doctor's office, and it's an MRI machine, or maybe it is
something, a piece of your home equipment in your home, or maybe it's
the iron, or it's the toaster, or it's the microwave, the National
Institute of Standards and Technology sets a standard for industry for
those products and tests those to meet standards. It means that no
matter where you go, no matter what store you shop in, that that
equipment is calibrated in the same way. Now, you may not think that
matters for a toaster, but it surely matters for an MRI machine.
Those are the kinds of jobs that our Federal employees do. Those are
jobs that you really can't translate into the private sector but that
are so necessary to safeguard the public.
Ms. NORTON. That's such an important point about translating them.
Unlike what the Federal Government is required to do, the people who
have been throwing around the comparisons don't do what the Bureau of
Labor Statistics does. Now, this is very, very difficult work.
When the Bureau of Labor Statistics compares workers in the public
and private sector, they have to, for example, look beyond the title of
budget analyst. In the Federal Government, they may be dealing with a
budget analyst who has oversight over multimillion-dollar agency
budgets.
In the private sector, that may be somebody who is sitting in an
office pushing papers, is qualified, but nowhere near the same kind of
responsibility. What the Bureau of Labor Statistics does, and only the
government can do this, because only the government has the resources,
is to literally get into the weeds so that when you see the government
statistics, those are the statistics to be trusted.
I have got to ask my good friend to help me as well on one of the
great distortions, and that is on Federal benefits.
I think most Americans don't know that Federal employees pay for 30
percent of the cost of their health care. If you get dental and vision,
you pay 100 percent.
If you have group life insurance, the employee pays 66 percent of the
premium and the full cost of any additional coverage, and if you have,
and many employees now have, Federal long-term care, 100 percent.
The Federal Government, yes, is a decent employer. It is by no means
an overly generous employer. Just compare that to Fortune 1000, Fortune
500 employers and see if these employees who pay 30 percent of their
health care premium are coddled. I don't think so.
Another issue that is often raised is contractors. One of the most
astounding things about the Federal workforce, and some things should
be done by contracting out, but there are more contracted, contracted
Federal employees than there are Federal employees. When you are
attacking Federal employees, you are attacking people who work in the
agencies, who work, as my two colleagues have spoken in detail, work as
a park ranger, who work as a rocket scientist.
But the invisible workforce is the contracting workforce. At the
Department of Homeland Security, for example, we have 188,000 employees
but there are 200,000 contracting employees working for the Agency. So
if the public really wants to know where the money goes, they shouldn't
be targeting the employee who stands up, has USA written across their
chest, is proud to work for the Federal Government. They should look at
the entire workforce, which turns out to be many, many contracted
workers.
It's interesting to know that the President is cutting the number of
contracted workers and expects to save $40 billion annually by, in
fact, bringing that work in-house, so that we know who is performing
it, we can measure them. We can get rid of the work we don't need. You
contract the work out, it's gone, and it gets a life of its own.
Ms. EDWARDS. Well, I think that you raise such an amazing point for
the American people on two points, one about Federal benefits. There is
this wide assumption across the country that Federal workers don't
contribute to their own health and life insurance and their
dental insurance, and it's just not true. So I think it's really born
for us to debunk that right now.
As you say, the Federal Government is a decent employer, but it is by
no means the best employer when it comes to providing benefits, as some
of those Fortune 500, Fortune 1000 companies that you point to.
Nonetheless, it's the Federal worker who contributes to her own
benefit, contributes to her pension, contributes to her health
insurance, contributes for her family members across the board.
The gentlewoman also makes an important distinction for us to know
that, in fact, the Federal workforce, because they sometimes work
alongside contract employees who are paid different rates, who have
different benefits, but are in some cases doing very, very similar kind
of work. I applaud the Obama administration for trying to get a handle
on what is uniquely government work and shouldn't be contracted out
because we need much greater oversight.
I know, I mentioned earlier to the gentlewoman that I come from a
family of Federal workers. I want to tell you about one of those
workers, because I bet if anybody goes back, they would say that my
mother saved the Federal Government a boatload of money.
She was a steward of the taxpayer. She worked in the Department of
Defense doing military housing, overseeing contracts. She would tell
you in a minute if a contractor was violating a contract. She would
tell you in a minute if they were overspending where they didn't need
to overspend, and she would save the taxpayer money because she viewed
herself as a steward of the taxpayer as a public servant.
I know that my mother is not alone. She is joined by millions of
Federal workers all across this country who take pride in the work that
they do for the taxpayer, the work that they do in service to this
Nation, whether it's processing Social Security disability claims, or
it is making sure that our veterans get appropriate medical and
[[Page H1716]]
mental health attention, or whether it's making sure that our airways
are safe and clear, that our planes are landing and taking off safely,
protecting us in our parks.
After all, if someone gets lost, a child gets lost in a park, it's a
Federal worker that goes to find that child and reunite him or her with
their parents. The Federal workforce is varied, it's diverse, it's
efficient. It's becoming more efficient every day. Federal workers are
really contributing to the lifeblood of this country.
So I think for those who want to get about the business of cutting
spending where it's appropriate, let's do that responsibly. But let's
not make the Federal worker the scapegoat for budget-cutting and for
ending deficit spending. Let's continue a strong and vigorous Federal
workforce that really is working to the best benefit of the taxpayer.
Ms. NORTON. This is such an important point. I would say to my friend
from Maryland because, remember in Wisconsin, the public employees
said, look, we will do our share. Yet the Governor insisted upon going
at collective bargaining. Anyone who thinks public employees are not
willing to do their share does not understand how unions operate.
{time} 1820
If you have a workforce that needs to be downsized, if you have a
workforce that needs to give up some of what it has for a period of
time, the best way to deal with that workforce is through an agent that
the workers trust. If the employer has no agent and simply goes in and
does it, that becomes a deflating, morale-sapping exercise. Unions are
very sophisticated. Unions operate within our capitalist system. They
know when there's money on the table and when there's not. Unions are
said to have been the major agent in creating the American middle
class.
What do we mean by that? After all, there were businesses, automobile
companies and managers. What we mean by it is that when that money was
coming, when that revenue was coming to business, it was sitting across
from a union who said, workers help produce this product, the revenue
from this product should be shared with workers. Out of that came the
great American middle class. That is why an automobile worker, for
example, who didn't have a college education, could get a pension and
could support a family.
And unions did this, yes, across the bargaining table; but in doing
it for their own members, they spread it through the society, because
then competitors had to meet the union wage. And so what happened was
you got a great American middle class that you did not have before the
unionization of American workers. And they deserve credit for that.
Unions deserve credit for that. They don't deserve to be bashed.
I have to say to my good friend, I was never so gratified to read
what the polls show us. And I indicated some of those figures when we
began this special hour that 2-1, Americans oppose weakening the
bargaining rights of public employees. After all that has happened in
Wisconsin, instead of their reaping the whirlwind for it, American
people understand what it means to take away a precious right, even a
right some of them don't enjoy. And so they say they would rather have
their taxes raised than to even weaken--weaken the collective
bargaining rights of workers.
If that is not a lesson for the other side of this Chamber, which is
overreaching in 1,000 different ways, nothing is. It is a bellwether of
what is to come.
Ms. EDWARDS. I want to thank the gentlelady and my friend because I
think what you've done is you've brought the connection from the public
sector worker in Wisconsin and throughout our States to the Federal
workforce and to the private sector workforce.
I think what we've seen over these last couple of decades, and I
think it is evidenced in the poll and the support that all workers are
showing for the workers in Wisconsin and for the idea of collective
bargaining rights, is that we all recognize as workers whether you're
in the public sector or the private sector, whether it's State or
municipal government or it's the Federal Government, that, in fact,
it's that organizing and the ability to organize and the ability to
bargain that has helped so many of us to achieve a place in the middle
class. And I think that there is an understandable fear of losing that
given what's transpired over the years.
In fact, you look at wages in the private sector, and private sector
wages have, in fact, remained stagnant for about the last decade. And
so you can understand that a private sector worker is actually feeling
that strain, but they understand the position of the public sector
workers, of the Federal workers. And so we're all united as workers
together to make sure that we can lift all of us into the middle class.
And I think the Federal workforce is particularly important because
the Federal workforce then becomes sort of a bellwether for what can
happen in other sectors in our workforce. Thank you for bringing that
full circle.
Ms. NORTON. I want to thank the gentlelady for coming down. You make
a very important point about the stagnation of the American standard of
living. It correlates with the stagnation of the American labor
movement. The stagnation of the American labor movement has everything
to do with the difficulty under the National Labor Relations Act of
organizing a union today.
When unions were first legalized in the 1930s, they were encouraged.
Today, it is very difficult under the existing statute to organize a
union; and I'm amazed that unions are still alive and kicking. But I
must say what we've seen from Wisconsin is a national reawakening of
the American trade union movement. I think unions are going to be able
to organize in ways they would never have been able to organize without
Wisconsin. Thank you, Governor Walker.
As I close this hour, I want to particularly thank my two friends
from Hawaii and from Maryland for coming down to share this special
hour with us. We think the least we can do is to, every once in a
while, say to Federal employees and to public employees, we appreciate
what you're doing.
President Obama perhaps said it best. I don't think it does any good,
he said, when public employees are denigrated or vilified or their
rights are infringed upon. We need to attract the best and the
brightest to public service. These times demand it.
Again, I thank the gentlelady for coming forward.
____________________