[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 19 (Wednesday, January 30, 2019)]
[House]
[Pages H1295-H1306]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




       FEDERAL CIVILIAN WORKFORCE PAY RAISE FAIRNESS ACT OF 2019


                             General Leave

  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on H.R. 790.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Maryland?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 87 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 790.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from the Northern Mariana Islands 
(Mr. Sablan) to preside over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1042


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 790) to provide for a pay increase in 2019 for certain civilian 
employees of the Federal Government, and for other purposes, with Mr. 
Sablan in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) and the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Meadows) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, I am proud to be an original cosponsor of H.R. 790, the 
Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019, along with 
my fellow colleagues of the local delegation. I pay special thanks to 
Chairman Connolly and Majority Leader Hoyer for their leadership on 
this very important piece of legislation.
  H.R. 790, as amended, would authorize a 2.6 percent pay raise for 
Federal civilian workers for 2019, the same raise that our military 
servicemembers are receiving this year.
  Historically, Congress has tried to ensure parity in pay increases 
between Federal civilian employees and military servicemembers. This 
bill would continue this longstanding tradition.
  The bill would provide the pay raise to Federal employees in the 
competitive and excepted services, blue-collar workers, members of the 
career Senior Executive Service, and employees in the scientific and 
senior-level positions.
  The men and women of our civil service deserve this small increase in 
pay because they have endured so much during the last several years. 
They were subjected, Mr. Chair, to repeated and unrelenting attacks on 
their pay and on their benefits.

                              {time}  1045

  They have suffered through pay freezes, hiring freezes, higher 
pension costs, and furloughs due to sequestration and government 
shutdowns.
  Since 2011, Federal workers have contributed nearly $200 billion to 
help reduce our country's deficit and to fund other government 
programs. These hardworking, dedicated Federal workers include the 
800,000 employees who were furloughed or forced to work without pay for 
35 days during the longest shutdown in our great Nation's history.
  The men and women of our civil service were held hostage to a 
political dispute over funding for a border wall that the President had 
stated over and over again would be paid for by Mexico. There is 
something wrong with this picture.
  They include members of the Coast Guard, TSA screeners, Department of 
Agriculture workers who help farmers and ranchers, FAA air traffic 
controllers and safety inspectors, FDA food inspectors, the FBI, EPA 
pollution inspectors, Border Patrol agents, and Secret Service agents.
  Given all the hardship Federal employees have experienced, they 
deserve a modest pay increase to help make up for the years of freezes 
and negligible increases and to help offset the cost of inflation.
  The pay increase also would help the Federal Government compete 
against the private sector to recruit and retain highly qualified 
candidates to serve the American people.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for his words on the importance of 
making sure that our Federal workforce is properly compensated. Indeed, 
this is an important subject.
  Mr. Chairman, I guess my question here today is, fundamentally, if it 
is so important, then why haven't we had a hearing? Why haven't we had 
a markup? Why the rush to push this bill on the floor?
  Not too long ago, my good friend from Maryland, the chairman of the 
committee, would be on this same floor arguing the same thing: Why are 
we not having a markup? Why are we not going through regular order?
  Mr. Chairman, I remind this body that, less than 30 days ago, there 
was a vote on the House floor that said we are going to return to 
regular order; we

[[Page H1296]]

are going to make sure that every bill goes through the committee, has 
a markup, and actually has fair debate.
  Yet, here we are, less than 30 days into this new Congress, and we 
are putting forth a messaging bill that, quite frankly, has not been 
vetted. The amendment process has not come out of the Committee on 
Oversight and Reform.
  I will also say, and this is no laughing matter, I have been one of 
the few Members on our side of the aisle on this committee who has 
actively engaged in trying to make sure that our Federal workforce is 
not only compensated, but properly recognized.
  Mr. Chairman, here is my problem. According to Federal workers, over 
25 percent of them believe that raises do not happen based on merit, 
that everyone gets a raise. Indeed, this bill does that. It says, 
regardless of how you perform, we are going to give everybody the same 
increase.
  Now, that same Federal workforce went even further. One-third of them 
said that we don't do enough to get rid of poor performers.
  What message are we sending to the Federal workforce here today? We 
are rushing a bill that has not gone through committee. We have not 
provided meaningful amendments that are actually appropriate. We have a 
Federal workforce that says they don't get raises based on the merits 
of their work, on the hard work they put forth. Indeed, they are saying 
that a third of the employees are getting compensated regardless of 
their performances.
  Now, when we look at that, what message does this body send to the 
Federal workforce? It says that it doesn't matter what kind of job you 
do. I think that is a terrible message to send.
  I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, as we look at this bill--and I am sure 
we will debate the merits of this particular piece of legislation--we 
have the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Connolly, here, and the gentleman 
from Maryland, Mr. Cummings, both Members who I respect greatly. Yet, 
this rush to put this messaging bill on the floor does nothing but 
damage the underlying support that many of us on both sides of the 
aisle have for the Federal workforce.
  I strongly object to this particular measure. Let's slow it down. 
Let's go through the appropriate time to make sure that, indeed, we 
have a markup, that we have a bill.
  The chairman knows full well that Federal workers, not only in and 
around Washington, D.C., but across the Nation, deserve our full 
attention, and this deserves a full debate.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me be clear that there are many Federal workers who 
are suffering and who have suffered. The message that we send to them 
is that we care about them, and we know that they give their blood, 
sweat, and tears over and over again. That is one of the messages we 
send.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Connolly), the chairman of our Subcommittee on Government 
Operations.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, the distinguished new 
chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform. I am so proud to 
call him that.
  Mr. Chairman, let me just say, I heard the arguments from my friend 
from North Carolina, and I know he does care about the Federal 
employees, but his arguments ring hollow when you support a 35-day 
shutdown of the Federal Government.
  If you believe in regular order, then you never shu down the Federal 
Government, nor do you advise the President of the United States to 
shut down the Federal Government, nor do you use shutdowns as a tool to 
get some policy goal achieved.

  That is never acceptable. It shouldn't be acceptable to Washington. 
It is not acceptable to the American people. It certainly is not 
acceptable to the 800,000 Federal employees and an equal number of 
Federal contract employees and small business owners who were affected 
negatively by this shutdown.
  So it is hard to listen to a lecture about regular order in the midst 
of that wreckage.
  That is what we are trying to do here. It is not a messaging bill to 
embarrass anybody. It is a bill to try to begin to restore the 
integrity of respect and dignity to the men and women who serve this 
country. They are called Federal employees. They were innocent victims 
of political games, as if they were pawns, Mr. Chairman, for a wall. We 
are just trying to begin the process of making them whole again.
  I thank the majority leader, Mr. Hoyer, for bringing this bill to the 
floor. The bill would end the current freeze for Federal employees, 
recommended by President Trump, and provide hardworking civil servants 
with a 2.6 percent pay increase, matching that for military employees.
  On the heels of this largest government shutdown in U.S. history, and 
the longest, I believe it is appropriate for the House of 
Representatives to take up this legislation to make a statement in the 
people's body that we do respect the work of our civil servants and our 
Federal employees and that we are prepared to provide concrete measures 
to do that.
  During the shutdown, some of these individuals reported to work 
without knowing when, or if, they would receive their next paycheck, 
while others were willing to work, but were told they couldn't.
  Even though the Federal Government has reopened, most Federal 
employees are still waiting to receive that first paycheck. Under 
statute, Federal employees should have received a 2.1 percent pay 
increase for 2019. Instead, the recommendation from the White House was 
zero.
  This bill represents a pay increase for Federal employees above that 
statutory level equal to an additional 0.5 percent over and above the 
statutory level that would have otherwise been provided.
  While the House of Representatives passed appropriations bills that 
included a 1.9 percent pay increase for Federal employees, the 
continuing resolution agreed to by the House and Senate did not reverse 
the President's pay freeze. This bill would.
  Historically, Congress has tried to ensure parity in pay between 
Federal civilian employees and military servicemembers. This bill would 
continue the tradition of pay parity for which I have advocated since I 
came to Congress 10 years ago.
  A Federal employee pay increase of 2.6 percent is, in my view, 
further justified, as the distinguished chairman of the committee 
pointed out, by the hardships just suffered and those suffered over the 
last 10 years: three pay freezes, hiring freezes, compensation cuts, 
and benefit cuts. Federal employees are the only group on the planet 
that actually has contributed nearly $200 billion to deficit reduction.
  In 9 of the last 10 years, Congress has failed to enact an increase 
in basic pay consistent with the statute. Not true on the military 
side. That is why we are trying to have pay parity.
  In 8 of the last 10 years, basic pay increases trailed increases in 
the cost of living itself.
  I will point out that the legislation in front of us has been 
endorsed by the American Federation of Government Employees; the 
National Treasury Employees Union; the American Federation of State, 
County and Municipal Employees; the International Federation of 
Professional and Technical Engineers; the Senior Executives 
Association; the Federal Managers Association; and the Professional 
Managers Association.
  Mr. Chairman, I include in the Record letters of support from these 
groups.

                                            American Federation of


                                Government Employees, AFL-CIO,

                                                 January 29, 2019.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the American Federation 
     of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (AFGE), which represents 
     more than 700,000 federal and District of Columbia government 
     employees within 70 agencies, I write urging you to support 
     H.R. 790, the Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness 
     Act of 2019, introduced by Representative Connolly (D-VA), 
     when it comes to the floor this week. This legislation 
     provides federal workers with a FY 2019 pay adjustment of 2.6 
     percent. This modest adjustment would allow federal employees 
     to make up some of the purchasing power they lost over the 
     last decade and restore the long tradition of parity in the 
     rate of adjustment for civilian and military employees of the 
     United States government.

[[Page H1297]]

       January 25, 2019 marked the end of our nation's longest 
     government shutdown, and federal employees have been without 
     a paycheck since December 21st. As a result of the funding 
     lapse, many federal employees have fallen behind on their 
     monthly bills and are experiencing serious financial 
     hardship. Although some federal employees make more, among 
     AFGE's own membership, the average take home pay is just $500 
     per week after they pay their taxes, health insurance 
     premiums, and mandatory retirement contributions. Many 
     federal employees were struggling to make ends meet before 
     the shutdown, and H.R. 790 would not only help agencies 
     recruit new employees, and retain a workforce battered by the 
     shutdown, compensation cuts enacted in the wake of the 2008 
     financial crisis, it would also demonstrate that the Congress 
     values the federal workforce's dedication and commitment to 
     serving the American public.
       For decades, Congress supported pay adjustment parity 
     between federal and military employees. The civilian 
     workforce not only works alongside the warfighters to keep 
     our nation safe, they are also public servants who have 
     dedicated their lives to providing the American public with 
     invaluable benefits services. Federal employees work across 
     the country securing our borders, keeping travelers safe, 
     providing benefits to the elderly and disabled, caring for 
     our veterans, and keeping our air and water safe and clean. 
     Unfortunately, in recent years pay adjustment parity has not 
     been upheld and federal civilian salaries have continued to 
     lag standards set by private employers. H.R. 790 would help 
     narrow this gap.
       As you work to pass legislation to fund the remaining seven 
     appropriations bills, AFGE urges you to support H.R. 790 when 
     it comes to the floor this week, and we strongly urge you to 
     support inclusion of a 2.6 percent federal employee pay 
     adjustment in the final funding measure for FY 2019.
           Sincerely,
                                                J. David Cox, Sr.,
     National President.
                                  ____

                                             The National Treasury


                                              Employees Union,

                                                 January 29, 2019.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the National Treasury 
     Employees Union, which represents over 150,000 federal 
     employees in 33 agencies, I urge you to support H.R. 790, the 
     Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019, 
     which would provide federal workers a 2.6 percent pay 
     increase for 2019 and ensure pay parity with the military, 
     with whom they frequently work in service to the nation.
       At the end of August, the President sent a letter to 
     Congress reiterating the call in his Fiscal Year (FY) 2019 
     Budget Request for a pay freeze for federal workers. If not 
     for the President's decision to implement a pay freeze, the 
     Federal Employee Pay Comparability Act (5 USC 5303) indicates 
     that federal employees should receive a 2.1 percent pay raise 
     in January 2019, prior to any amount being provided for 
     locality pay rate increases. This formula is designed to 
     ensure that the gap between federal government and private 
     sector wages does not further deteriorate. According to the 
     most recent Federal Pay Agent Report, the current pay 
     disparity is over 30 percent.
       Like all American workers and middle-class taxpayers, 
     federal employees face ever-increasing costs of living, with 
     rising utility, health care and food bills, along with school 
     loan and rent or mortgage obligations. Due to a three-year 
     pay freeze and five subsequent years of below-market pay 
     raises that were lower than the amounts called for under 
     current law, federal employees have seen their wages fall 
     further behind the private sector, which has adversely 
     impacted them and their families.
       Moreover, if the federal government is to have the ability 
     to compete with the private sector in recruiting and 
     retaining a skilled workforce, it is essential that the 
     federal government provide its workers a pay increase. The 
     federal government relies on qualified and professional civil 
     servants that live and work in every state and congressional 
     district across the country to carry out our nation's laws 
     and programs, providing critical services for our nation and 
     the American people.
       Now, after suffering through a 35-day shutdown that caused 
     unimaginable hardship for hundreds of thousands of federal 
     workers, their families, and their communities, it is 
     important to ensure that employees are able to afford the 
     increased fees and penalties that they suffered as a result. 
     All federal employees deserve an adequate pay raise and we 
     urge your support for H.R. 790 in appreciation for their 
     service.
           Sincerely,
                                               Anthony M. Reardon,
     National President.
                                  ____


         American Federation of State, County and Municipal 
           Employees, AFL-CIO,
                                 Washington, DC, January 29, 2019.
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the members of the 
     American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 
     (AFSCME), including thousands of federal government 
     employees, I write to strongly support the ``Federal Civilian 
     Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019,'' H.R. 790, which 
     would increase federal employee salaries for calendar year 
     2019 by 2.6 percent. AFSCME urges you to vote for this bill 
     to demonstrate your support for America's dedicated and 
     hardworking federal workers.
       A salary increase is necessary because expert analysis 
     demonstrates that when contrasted position by position, 
     federal workers' wages lag below employees in the nonfederal 
     sector--both in the private sector and in state and local 
     governments. In fact, federal employees are significantly 
     underpaid in numerous occupations. Furthermore, since 2010, 
     as a direct result of congressional legislation that reduced 
     pay and benefits, federal employees have had their 
     compensation cut by more than $180 billion (over 10 years). 
     Congress should take action to reverse these cuts and close 
     this pay gap.
       To recruit, hire, and retain a qualified capable federal 
     government workforce, America must pay competitive salaries. 
     This is vital to continue attracting the best and brightest 
     to our public service. Unfortunately, during the last two 
     years, the federal government's hiring freeze and shutdowns 
     have lowered morale, forced many federal employees to cover 
     others employees' job responsibilities, and reduced the 
     federal government's effectiveness. H.R. 790 would help 
     address these challenges and move us forward.
       AFSCME endorses this important legislation and urges you to 
     vote for the ``Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness 
     Act of 2019,'' H.R. 790.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Scott Frey,
     Director of Federal Government Affairs.
                                  ____

         International Federation of Professional & Technical 
           Engineers,
                                                 January 29, 2019.
       Dear Representative: On behalf of the 90,000 represented 
     members of the International Federation of Professional and 
     Technical Engineers (IFPTE), we are writing regarding the 
     Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019 
     ((HR 790), legislation sponsored by Virginia Congressman 
     Gerry Connolly that is scheduled for full House consideration 
     this week. After the longest government shutdown in the 
     history of the United States, which impacted some 800,000 
     federal workers and their families, IFPTE is urging you to 
     support pay parity between military and civilian workers by 
     voting in support of this bill.
       After three consecutive years of pay freezes, followed by 
     meager across-the-board adjustments, federal workers have 
     seen their incomes decrease by nearly 15% with respect to 
     inflation over the last eight years. Therefore, IFPTE feels 
     it is both fiscally responsible and reflective of the income 
     sacrificed by federal employees to adopt the long-standing 
     practice of pay parity between civilian workers and the 
     military by supporting HR 790 calling for a 2.6% federal pay 
     increase.
       As Congress works to negotiate an acceptable solution to 
     pass the remaining FY19 appropriations bills, IFPTE urges 
     that whatever action is taken--whether it be a Continuing 
     Resolution (CR) or a full FY19 Minibus that includes all or 
     some of the seven outstanding spending measures, we believe 
     that quickly approving a 2.6% civilian pay raise is more than 
     reasonable. This number is reflective of pay parity with the 
     military pay raise approved last year as a part of the 
     National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and is reflective 
     of the many years of sacrifices made by federal workers, 
     including enduring a senseless 35-day government shutdown.
       IFPTE does recognize the acute difficulties facing Congress 
     in these contentious times, but we simply ask that the men 
     and women who work hard every day in the trenches to deliver 
     excellence for the taxpayer not be harmed any more than they 
     already have by the political turmoil in Washington.
       Thank you for your consideration.
           Sincerely,
     Paul Shearon,
       President.
     Matthew Biggs,
       Secretary-Treasurer/Legislative Director.
                                  ____



                                Senior Executives Association,

                                                 January 29, 2019.
     Hon. Steny Hoyer,
     Majority Leader,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Gerald Connolly,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Majority Leader Hoyer and Representative Connolly: On 
     behalf of the Senior Executives Association (SEA)--which 
     represents the interests of career federal executives in the 
     Senior Executive Service (SES), and those in Senior Level 
     (SL), Scientific and Professional (ST), equivalent executive 
     positions, and other senior career leaders--I write to convey 
     our support for H.R. 790, the Federal Civilian Workforce Pay 
     Raise Fairness Act of 2019.
       For the past decade the federal workforce has been treated 
     as the nation's piggy bank, with nearly $200 billion in pay 
     and benefits being taken for debt reduction and other 
     purposes. Providing all civilian federal employees with a 
     2.6% raise in 2019, especially following the shutdown, is an 
     important step to ensure the government can attract and 
     retain the talent it needs to serve the American public in a 
     competitive labor market. Moreover, reestablishing pay parity 
     with the uniformed services is applauded and welcomed.
       This legislation sends a signal that Congress is serious 
     about ensuring the federal

[[Page H1298]]

     government is an employer of choice. For too long race-to-
     the-bottom policies related to the federal workforce have 
     become the norm. It is our hope that the silver lining of the 
     shutdown is that the American people now better understand 
     what government does for them every day, how dedicated the 
     professionals who work for them in the government are, and 
     that Congress and the administration will find ways to work 
     together to ensure our federal government has the personnel, 
     tools, and resources necessary to fulfil the duties assigned 
     to it.
       SEA is deeply concerned that neglect of federal workforce 
     capabilities in recent years have resulted in an increased 
     risk of government failure, as outlined in a paper we 
     released last week. Strengthening the Senior Executive 
     Service (SES) and civil service and advocating for 
     cultivation of the public service leadership profession are 
     among our top organizational priorities in the 116th 
     Congress. I hope that passage of this legislation is just the 
     beginning of concerted efforts to modernize and strengthen 
     our civil service, to bring data-driven approaches to 
     management and compensation, and much more.
       Thank you for your steadfast support of our federal 
     workforce and your leadership on this issue.
           Sincerely,

                                                  Bill Valdez,

                                                        President,
     Senior Executives Association.
                                  ____



                                 Federal Managers Association,

                                 Alexandria, VA, January 29, 2019.
     Hon. Gerry Connolly,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Connolly: On behalf of the managers and 
     supervisors currently serving our nation in the federal 
     government and whose interests are represented by the Federal 
     Managers Association (FMA), we extend our strongest support 
     for your bill, the Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise 
     Fairness Act of 2019 (H.R. 790). This legislation provides a 
     much-deserved 2.6 percent pay raise for 2019, and addresses 
     the inequity federal employees faced in recent years due to 
     pay freezes and minimal raises.
       The federal workforce ensures the safety of our borders, 
     protects the nation's food supply, cares for our elderly and 
     veterans, and serves alongside our military forces. But the 
     minimal increases in pay received do not reflect the duties 
     of these dedicated workers. It is time for the federal 
     workforce to be recognized for their dedication to serving 
     our country at home and abroad, and your legislation does 
     that.
       In addition to providing fair wages to federal employees, 
     FMA believes H.R. 790 will help to combat the problem of 
     morale, recruitment, and retention in the federal government, 
     particularly in the aftermath of the partial government 
     shutdown. As the federal government continues to struggle 
     with these issues, your bill is a step towards offering 
     competitive salaries, attracting and keeping the brightest 
     and best to the federal workforce. By calling for wages that 
     fairly compensate the abilities and responsibilities of the 
     federal workforce, you recognize the need to ensure a fully 
     engaged federal workforce that remains dedicated to serving 
     the nation.
       Thank you for your continued support of our federal 
     workforce.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Renee Johnson,
     National President.
                                  ____



                            Professional Managers Association,

                                 Washington, DC, January 29, 2019.
     Hon. Steny Hoyer,
     Majority Leader,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Gerald Connolly,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Majority Leader Hoyer and Representative Connolly: On 
     behalf of the Professional Managers Association--the non-
     profit professional association that has, since 1981, 
     represented professional managers, management officials, and 
     non-bargaining unit employees at the Internal Revenue Service 
     (IRS)--I write to endorse H.R. 790 the Federal Civilian 
     Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019.
       Pay parity between federal civilian employees and members 
     of the military has long been the norm, until recent years in 
     which the federal workforce has been faced with constant 
     attacks that have taken billions in earned pay and benefits 
     out of the pockets of hardworking middle class Americans. The 
     result of abandoning pay parity has been an ever-growing 
     imbalance between the compensation of federal workers and the 
     broader labor market.
       In a highly competitive economy in which the types of 
     skills and abilities the government needs are in high demand 
     across the board, this legislation providing a 2.6% pay 
     increase across the board to federal civilian employees can 
     help begin to close the gap. Especially on the heels of the 
     embarrassing 35-day government shutdown, it is important for 
     Congress to ensure the government is a competitive employer 
     with good pay and benefits offerings.
       Thank you for your leadership on this issue, and for your 
     steadfast support of our federal workforce.
           Sincerely,

                                             Thomas R. Burger,

                                               Executive Director,
                                Professional Managers Association.

  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. CONNOLLY. The bottom line, Mr. Chairman, is that our Federal 
civil servants are like any other workforce. More than 900,000 of those 
Federal employees earn less than $60,000 a year. They are not rich. 
They are not living high on the hog. They deserve and need this 
adjustment, especially after the longest, most reckless shutdown of the 
government in American history.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan), my good friend, the ranking member of 
the committee, and a champion for the American people.

                              {time}  1100

  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman from North Carolina for 
his hard work on the committee and in the United States Congress.
  There are just a couple of key things to keep in mind. I am against 
this bill. The average yearly pay for a government worker is $85,000. 
CBO did a study. Those with college degrees who work in the Federal 
Government make 21 percent more than people with college degrees in the 
private sector; those without a college degree, 53 percent more than 
those in the private sector.
  Think about what this bill says. All of those hardworking taxpayers 
in the private sector, hey, you are already making less, but now you 
are going to have more of your tax dollars go to pay people--who are 
already making more money than you--to get a raise. How is that fair?
  Even worse, think about what the Democrats are doing on H.R. 1, their 
signature legislation. H.R. 1, they are saying to those same people who 
are already making more money than folks in the private sector, they 
are saying to those private-sector taxpayers, Hey, guess what? We are 
not only going to give them a raise, even though they are already 
making more than you, we are going to give them 6 paid days to work on 
campaigns, 6 vacation days where they get to work on campaigns. And, 
oh, by the way, they may be helping the very candidate you are against. 
Such a deal for the taxpayers.
  That is why I am a ``no'' on this bill. I am thinking about the 
taxpayers in the 11th District of North Carolina, the Fourth District 
of Ohio, and all across this country. Tell me how that is fair.
  Oh, I forgot. There is one more thing the Democrats want to do. H.R. 
1, they want to make election day a paid holiday for Federal employees. 
This is not where we need to be. This is not the respect taxpayers 
deserve.
  Mr. Chair, I would urge a ``no'' vote, and I appreciate the good work 
Congressman Meadows is doing on this legislation. Frankly, he is right. 
We probably should have had a hearing and talked about this. Maybe the 
Democrats didn't want to talk about the fact that people in the private 
sector are making less with the same kind of education than those who 
work for the Federal Government.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), our distinguished majority leader.
  (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I am, of course, not shocked that those who 
wanted to shut down the government and keep it shut had Federal 
employees making nothing. I am not shocked that they don't want to give 
Federal employees a cost-of-living adjustment.
  Now, I could spend a lot of time responding to my friend from Ohio 
about the qualifications necessary to run NASA and to work at NASA, or 
the FBI, or the CDC, or the other agencies that require high levels of 
skill to work.
  I am sure my friend from Ohio has read the government reports from 
the council that is charged with the responsibility of determining 
whether we are paying comparable wages who say, no, we are not. As a 
matter of fact, we are substantially under, if you compare apples to 
apples, educational requirements, and skills requirements to the 
private sector, similar requirements.
  He doesn't mention that because the averages, they sound just much 
better.

[[Page H1299]]

Now, of course, the average salary on the Washington National's team is 
a little higher than that. Why, because their skill levels are higher 
than almost anybody else in the country.
  Mr. Chair, I want to thank Representative Connolly and Representative 
Wexton for their hard work, and I want to thank my friend, the chairman 
of the committee. Representative Connolly, of course, has been a long-
time advocate of the pay and benefits, and retaining, and being able to 
recruit people who have those kinds of skill levels.
  You better be careful; some 30 to 40 percent of our people are 
getting pretty close or are at retirement age, and they are going to 
say, you keep shutting them down and not keeping their salary level, 
unlike our salary, which has deteriorated now for 10 years in terms of 
its purchasing value. But averages are averages.
  I want to thank my colleagues, Mr. Connolly in particular. He has 
been an outstanding advocate for many Federal civilian employees living 
and working in northern Virginia and across the national capital 
region, and, indeed, around the country.
  Let me disclose, I represent 62,000 Federal employees. You are not 
shocked that I am for Federal employees. But when I was in the State 
Senate, I represented a miniscule amount of State employees, and I was 
for paying them comparable wages so that we could hire competent, 
capable, committed people to serve my constituents.
  This shutdown just showed what kind of pain it has caused. Do you 
think those high-price people were in food lines because they wanted to 
say: I am in a food line? No, sir. They were there because they were 
not making enough in the Washington metropolitan area and in other 
areas around the country, because less than 20 percent of the Federal 
employees live in this Washington metropolitan area.
  The pay freeze President Trump imposed on Federal workers has been 
detrimental to our ability as a nation to recruit and retain the best 
and brightest citizens to serve in government.
  Now, very frankly, Abe Pollin, a very good friend of mine, owned the 
Washington Wizards. He never asked me to play center because I have a 
disability. I am 6-feet tall, not 7-feet tall. That is all. And the 
people he asked, he had to pay a lot of money to them because he 
wouldn't get them if he didn't.
  The people who were running our space program, or running NIH, they 
are just not run-of-the-mill people, frankly, like me. They have got 
extraordinary skills. If we keep shutting them down and we keep not 
paying them, you are going to have a second-rate government. That is 
where you are going
  You are going to have another opportunity to say shutdown is stupid. 
I hope you join us on that because it is stupid. It cost us $11 billion 
according to CBO. After 5 weeks of an unnecessary, costly, and painful 
shutdown, the American people have been reminded how critical the work 
our Federal employees perform is to our national security and economic 
security.
  Americans were horrified to learn that many civilian Federal 
employees live paycheck to paycheck, as they do. Even a single month's 
delay of income sent many of them to food pantries and in search of 
emergency loans.
  That isn't right. We had, for a long time, an agreement. We do parity 
for our military personnel. Now we pay our military, who we put at the 
point of the spear, hazardous duty pay, as we should. But our agreement 
was we are going to make sure that everybody keeps their pay at pretty 
much a stable level of purchasing power. That is the key.
  Very frankly, some people in this House are not for raising the 
minimum wage. The minimum wage has eroded 40 percent in purchasing 
power since 1968. The Federal employee pay will erode in purchasing 
power if we don't pass this legislation.
  Let's not forget that 85 percent of Federal employees live outside 
the Washington area in some of your districts; even in North Carolina.
  Those who work hard to keep our country and its people safe deserve 
to be paid competitively. This does not bring them to competitive pay 
with the private sector, I tell my friends.
  I am proud to represent, as I said, 62,000 of them. I have met many 
of them over the years. They are wonderful people dedicated to serving 
the Nation and the people of our country. They deserve better than to 
be treated like pawns in political games with shutdowns and pay 
freezes.
  Now, the Senate included 1.9 percent. We included zero over here, of 
course, not surprising. When you don't respect people, you don't 
necessarily have to treat them as you would treat an employee in your 
own firm.
  Federal civilian employees, unlike their counterparts in the 
military, have been asked to contribute $182 billion over the last 10 
years in reduced benefits and pay. $182 billion they have contributed 
to try to bring down our debt, which is sort of a drop in the bucket 
when you give yourself $1.5 trillion for some of the wealthiest people 
in America.
  You give yourself headroom to create $1.5 trillion to $2.5 trillion 
of additional debt to give some of the wealthiest people in America a 
huge tax cut, but not 2.6 percent for Federal employees. My no.
  That scientist at NASA or the FBI agent who has maybe a college 
degree, maybe a law degree, who has to figure out what some of the most 
dangerous people in America and around the world are doing, no, not 2.6 
percent for them.
  Mr. Chair, we need to make sure pay is keeping pace with the rising 
cost of living for those who serve this country in civilian roles, as 
well as those in military roles. They are no less deserving of our 
gratitude and fair compensation. This bill would ensure that civilian 
Federal employees receive the same 2.6 percent that all of you voted 
for on that side of the aisle for our military personnel.
  I honor our military personnel. We should give them that. We should 
make sure their purchasing power doesn't erode. And by the way, you can 
talk to military families who also from time to time are in food lines. 
Is that the right way to treat our people who work for our country and 
our constituents?
  I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join us in 
supporting this bill. In doing so, we can show the hardworking men and 
women--unlike we showed them for 35 days--that we do have respect for 
them; that we do care about their morale; and that we do care about 
their ability to support themselves and their families. We can show 
them that we value their contributions and thank them for their 
important service.
  Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues, at a time of extraordinary trauma 
among our Federal employees, to show them the gratitude and respect 
that they have earned and that they deserve.
  The CHAIR. Members are reminded to address their remarks to the 
Chair.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I am glad the Chairman made this admonishment because some of the 
comments that were just offered actually seemed to be directed at me 
from a standpoint of respect. I would remind the gentleman from 
Maryland, both gentlemen from Maryland, that this is one of the 
individuals who has actually worked in a bipartisan fashion on TPS and 
a number of things. The majority leader knows that well.
  I would also say if we are going to make broad-sweeping statements 
that impugn the motives of individuals, it needs to start with the 
previous President of the United States, Barack Obama, because he froze 
the Federal workforce at zero three different times.
  I didn't hear the outrage on this floor, Mr. Chairman, that I am 
hearing today. It is somehow always one side of the aisle's fault, 
unless it happens to be their party's President that invokes the 
freeze.
  So I would say, Mr. Chairman, we need to make sure that those broad-
brush characterizations are not conveyed here on the House floor.
  Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield on the point he just made?
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chair, I respectfully yield to the gentleman from 
Maryland.
  Mr. HOYER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman very much because he 
makes a good point. When President Obama became President, of course, 
we were in a deep trough as the gentleman remembers.

[[Page H1300]]

  


                              {time}  1115

  It was January of 2009, and we sat around the Cabinet table. I was 
the majority leader then as well, and I said:

       Federal employees ought to get no cost-of-living 
     adjustment, Mr. President. The country is in a deep trough. 
     Many people are hurting in this country, and we should not 
     have a COLA adjustment this year.

  I supported the second year of not having a COLA adjustment because 
we were still in a problem. Mr. Chairman, you will not find any record 
of my standing on this floor saying that we ought to give Federal 
employees a COLA while so many people in the country were struggling 
without a job and losing their homes. So I just wanted to tell the 
gentleman that when a Democrat was President of the United States, I 
told the Federal unions--all of whom supported me--Look, the country is 
in trouble.
  But we are not in trouble now. The President talks about what a great 
economy we have and what low unemployment we have. So now is the time 
to give them that raise.
  Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. MEADOWS. I appreciate the gentleman, but I want to make sure, Mr. 
Chairman, we correct the record because the gentleman is correct in 
2009 and 2010. But we gave them raises in 2010. The Federal pay freezes 
were 2011, `12, and `13 when the same President was saying that 
everything was going fine. So I want to remind the gentleman that if we 
are going to look at history, then I think--to use the gentleman's 
words--let's not use revisionist history.
  Mr. HOYER. I didn't support him, however, when he did those zeros in 
those years when we were doing well.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I am going to direct it to you. The same 
gentleman who is making the argument here today was not on the House 
floor talking about how evil the President was and how he should not be 
doing that. So I just want to make sure we correct the record here 
today.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I have the utmost respect for the majority 
leader. In his comments he said that the shutdown is painful and 
stupid.
  No one wants a shutdown, Mr. Chairman, but I will tell you what is 
stupid. What is stupid is a southern border that is not secure. I feel 
for the Federal employees who missed a paycheck. We don't want any 
family to have to go through that, and I understand that.
  But I also understand the pain that some families across this country 
have suffered, particularly when they lose a loved one because an 
illegal immigrant is here and took the life of someone they cared 
deeply about.
  This shutdown would have never happened if the Democrats would have 
voted for what they were for before, what they had already supported. 
But no, no, no, they are so focused on stopping the President that they 
can't get focused on helping the country.
  Everybody knows we need a border security wall. All you have to do, 
Mr. Chairman, is watch the caravan phenomena over the last several 
months. There is another one forming. Until we understand this and are 
willing to deal with the problem, we can keep having these debates, but 
I just wish Democrats would support what they did previously, support 
money for the border security wall that everybody knows needs to 
happen. That is the real problem here.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Let me make it clear, Mr. Chairman: this is not about a border wall. 
This is about building people and allowing them to sustain themselves.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Jeffries), who is the very distinguished leader of our caucus.
  Mr. JEFFRIES. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished chairman for 
yielding and for his tremendous leadership on behalf of the hardworking 
Federal employees who serve this Nation in such a tremendous fashion.
  I rise today in strong support of this legislation which will provide 
a modest and well-deserved cost-of-living increase for the Federal 
workforce.
  For 35 days, this administration recklessly shut down the government 
so it could try to fund a campaign applause line. For 35 days, this 
administration shut down the government and held hardworking employees 
hostage using them like bargaining chips from a bankrupt casino. For 35 
days, hundreds of thousands of Federal employees were furloughed, 
putting their well-being in jeopardy.
  For 35 days, members of the Coast Guard, air traffic controllers, TSA 
agents, FBI agents, Border Patrol agents, Secret Service agents, and so 
many others were forced to work without pay in the wealthiest country 
in the history of the world. For 35 days, these hardworking Federal 
employees across the country from north to south to east to west 
stepped up for us. Now it is time for this Congress to step up for 
them.
  Over the last 2 years, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle 
have spent their time working on behalf of the wealthy, the well-off, 
and the well-connected. That is the only way, Mr. Chairman, that you 
can explain jamming a reckless tax scam down the throats of the 
American people where 83 percent of the benefits went to the wealthiest 
1 percent.
  House Democrats will spend our time fighting for working families, 
middle class folks, senior citizens, the poor, the sick, the afflicted, 
and veterans from all across this country, many of whom, by the way, 
are part of the Federal workforce. We are going to continue to stand up 
for them.
  We promised the American people that we would increase pay for 
everyday Americans. Keeping that promise begins today. Day after day, 
week after week, and month after month we will continue to do 
everything possible as we fight hard for the people.
  Mr. Chairman, I strongly support this legislation, and I urge my 
colleagues to do the same. I thank the distinguished chair and this 
wonderful committee for their great work.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. I reserve the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time I have 
remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Cardenas). The gentleman from North Carolina 
has 18\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Maryland has 15\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, before I make some statements, I would 
notify the gentleman from Maryland, my good friend, Mr. Cummings, that 
I have no additional speakers on this particular topic, so I am 
prepared to close at any time he would like to do so.
  Mr. Chairman, I will continue to reserve the balance of my time based 
on the speakers the gentleman might have.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Let me say this, Mr. Chairman. Yesterday we had our organizational 
meeting, and I made it clear that the distinguished gentleman from 
North Carolina has been truly a person who has worked very hard in a 
bipartisan way trying to come up with commonsense resolutions. So in no 
way do I want the gentleman to feel as if that is not being recognized, 
and we appreciate it.
  It is just that we have a lot of employees who aren't making those 
very high salaries. They are the ones who are living from paycheck to 
paycheck.
  Mr. Chairman, one of the saddest parts is when they go from paycheck 
to paycheck it is almost like no check because when they look at their 
bills, the bills are so much higher than their net pay. All we are 
trying to do is make sure that they keep up with the cost of living.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Lynch), who is the distinguished chairman of our Subcommittee on 
National Security.
  Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding.
  I do agree that the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Meadows) has 
tried mightily to work with us on various issues. He is not a bad man, 
he is just wrong on this one issue, in my opinion.
  First of all, I rise in support of this very, very modest cost-of-
living increase for Federal workers.
  My wife has a habit of reminding me from time to time. She says: When 
we

[[Page H1301]]

first met, you were an ironworker. Then you went to law school and 
became a lawyer. Then you ran for office and became a politician. You 
know, it has been one disappointment after another.
  But I want to say, as an ironworker I was in a much better position 
than our Federal workers. When I was an ironworker--and I eventually 
became president of the union--if my job was unsafe or if the employer 
refused to pay my workers, as a union president, I would pull my men 
and women off the job. Under Taft-Hartley 1947, we changed that law for 
Federal workers, everybody in the Federal Government. We said, 
ironically, that these jobs are so important that we can't have the 
government shut down. We can't have the government shut down.
  So even though we have a President now in the White House who not 
only shut the job down, forced the workers to work without pay, and 
then--that was on the 22nd of December--on the 28th of December he 
signs an executive order that says no pay increase for all of 2019 for 
our Federal workers.
  I want to point out that the TSA workers--whom we walk by at least 
twice a week as we come and go from Washington--their base starting 
salary is $28,000 a year--$28,000 a year. I made more money than that 
when I was an apprentice boy for the ironworkers back in 1972--$28,000 
a year. This would represent a $27-a-week cost-of-living adjustment for 
those workers.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman from Massachusetts 
an additional 1 minute.
  Mr. LYNCH. In Taft-Hartley we said that as a government we were 
taking away the right of workers to strike. As an ironworker, I put my 
tools down if I thought it was unsafe or if somebody cut my pay. We 
don't allow Federal workers to do that.
  I am saying that this President has broken that covenant of treating 
our workers with respect. I think it is only fair that we consider 
giving back the right to strike to our Federal workers. Let them stand 
up for themselves and protest like we give every other human being in 
our society. Give them the right to protest. Give them the right to 
strike if we are not going to treat them right.
  I think that, unfortunately, we have come to this point. I certainly 
want to urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this very modest cost-
of-living adjustment on behalf of our Federal workers.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend, the new chairman of 
our committee, for yielding to me.
  Mr. Chairman, this tiny--I will call it modest--2.6 percent pay raise 
authorized by H.R. 790 does not begin to make up for the long overdue 
pay raise our Federal workers are due. It does not begin to make up for 
the puny raises--sometimes as low as 1 percent, sometimes no raise at 
all--that our Federal workers have had to bear, and it certainly does 
not make up for 35 days of no pay for the longest shutdown in American 
history.
  It is particularly unconscionable to follow the Trump shutdown with a 
Trump pay freeze. Every Member in this House represents Federal 
workers. Every Member should be on the floor speaking for them.
  For years, Congress recognized pay increase equity between civilian 
and military personnel. But perhaps with the disparagement of Federal 
workers by Republicans and Republican Presidents, and perhaps to save 
money, we no longer even try to bring together these two parts of our 
workforce. It is hard to justify bifurcation of the civilian from the 
military workforce today.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentlewoman from the District 
of Columbia an additional 1 minute.
  Ms. NORTON. For example, what about the many who work side by side 
such as the civil servants who guard our borders who are hardly 
different from the soldiers who do the same thing around the country?
  The 2.6 percent pay raise proposed here does not begin to make up for 
the 32 percent average difference between Federal and private-sector 
employees who do the same work according to the council that measures 
this work every year. But for now, after 35 days of no pay, now is the 
time to try to insinuate some fairness into pay for Federal workers 
with this modest 2 percent pay raise.

                              {time}  1130

  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  We hear a lot of discussion today on what is reasonable and small 
amounts. In fact, the pay raise that they are talking about is about 
$5.5 billion a year or $55 billion over 10. Actually, CBO would 
probably score it higher than that, closer to $60 billion over 10 
years. Yet this whole shutdown that we are talking about could have 
been solved with a compromise between zero and $5.7 billion for a wall.
  So it was an extreme amount of money when we are talking about 
securing families, securing our borders, and protecting our 
communities. It was a price too high to pay. But now, all of a sudden, 
it is not too high of a price to pay because it is a small amount of 
money? I fail to see the logic, Mr. Chairman.
  When we are looking at this, if we are really talking about 
compromises, where was the compromise over the last 35 days? There was 
zero money for a wall on day one. There was zero money for a wall on 
day 35. Yet, here today, we are talking about $5 billion or $6 billion 
as if it were pocket change.
  I find that interesting, Mr. Chairman, because, as we look at this 
particular issue, my friends on the opposite side of the aisle would 
have the American people think that it is only the Republicans who are 
totally responsible for everything. Yet we know that history shows 
that, when there was a Democrat in the White House, indeed, there was a 
pay freeze 3 different years.
  We also know that there were two votes during the economic and 
financial meltdown in 2008 and 2009 where they gave Federal workers a 3 
percent increase while everybody else was out looking for a job. Now, 
where is the parity in that?
  The last question I would have for you, Mr. Chairman, is this: Where 
is the parity, when we look at our military men and women's faces, when 
we start talking about 2.6, that they are getting the same amount? They 
are not getting the same amount. Talk to a chief master sergeant who 
has been on the job for 15 years. He is getting far less pay than the 
Federal worker who is getting this same increase when you have over 25 
percent of the Federal workforce making over $100,000 a year.
  We hear all these statistics that are low statistics, but let's at 
least be honest in our debate. When we look at what we have, if this is 
a small amount of money, I guess I would challenge my colleagues on the 
opposite side: Let's find a compromise on border security measures.
  What amount of money is proper to save families from losing loved 
ones? I have looked in the faces of angel moms and angel dads, where 
they have lost their kids. Are we going to just turn our back on them 
as well?
  Perhaps there is a spirit of compromise here where we can work 
together and find a compromise where there are no more shutdowns. Let's 
look at passing a bill that freezes congressional pay if there is a 
shutdown. I am all in. Are all the Democrats in? Let's look at it, Mr. 
Chairman.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Today we are zeroing in on Federal workers whose average pay is 
$60,000. We are zeroing in on folks who are, in many instances, barely 
making it.
  I don't want us to get it twisted. We have a situation where a lot of 
times we discuss a whole lot of other things but don't necessarily 
concentrate on the subject matter at hand.
  Yesterday, Mr. Chairman, in our committee, we had a lady who came in 
and told us that her daughter died. She died because she couldn't get 
$333 worth of insulin a month. That happened in America.
  What is my point? These dollars mean a lot to these Federal 
employees.

[[Page H1302]]

I am not going to pit our military against our civilian employees. They 
are all very important. I want them all to be well paid. But right now, 
we need to concentrate on, again, building people and making a 
difference in their lives.
  Speaking of building people, Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
distinguished gentlewoman from Virginia (Ms. Wexton), a cosponsor of 
this bill.
  Ms. WEXTON. Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague, Gerry Connolly, for his 
strong leadership on this issue.
  I rise in strong support of H. Res. 790 and in strong support of a 
long-overdue cost-of-living increase for Federal civil servants.
  Many will remember the President's callous executive order of 
December 30, right in the middle of the shutdown, freezing Federal 
workers' salaries while hundreds of thousands of them were furloughed 
or, worse, working without pay.
  Federal employees are not the swamp, as some would have you believe. 
Federal employees are the people who make sure that Social Security 
checks are mailed on time each month. They are the scientists 
researching cures for cancer. They are tour guides in our national 
parks. They are FBI agents investigating criminal activity. They are 
the air traffic controllers and TSA agents keeping us safe when we fly.
  We saw during the shutdown how important every dollar of every 
paycheck is for Federal employees to pay their bills, to pay their 
rent, to pay their mortgage, to afford childcare, to pay off their 
student loans, and, yes, even to feed their families.
  It is time to give Federal employees the pay raise and the respect 
they deserve, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  The Acting CHAIR. Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in 
personalities toward the President.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Let me close by saying a sincere word of compliment to the gentleman 
from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) and the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. 
Connolly).
  We have great differences on this piece of legislation, and, indeed, 
we represent very different districts. It has been said many times that 
you can disagree without being disagreeable, and I want t compliment 
the two gentlemen for their vigorous debate today yet where they didn't 
make personal attacks. I hope that, Mr. Chairman, they have seen the 
same from me, and I have high respect for both of them.

  I also believe that, at times, where perhaps we deescalate the 
emotions--and I know this is a highly charged, emotional debate, as it 
should be--we can find common ground.
  Mr. Chairman, I commit to the two gentlemen with whom I have had the 
privilege of working for the last 6 years that I will continue to work 
hard and with great resolve to find ways that we can not only recognize 
and compensate our Federal workers, but we can do so in a manner that 
is fair and equitable and certainly makes sure that the servants they 
are is recognized.
  Mr. Chairman, I would also say that this particular piece of 
legislation, hopefully, will provide the fodder for us going back to 
the committee and going through a markup process to look at how we 
actually address this, where we actually have hearings and bring in 
experts, because, Mr. Chairman, we have had the majority leader of the 
Congress on this House floor citing one particular survey and we have 
had me here citing the CBO, and those two statistics are at odds. So I 
think it is important that we hear from real experts and figure out how 
we do this.
  The time is now for us to find a way to work in a bipartisan manner 
to truly move this country forward. The Federal workforce is an 
important part of that.
  I believe this particular piece of legislation sends a bad message to 
those Federal workers who believe that pay raises are not based on 
merit, that they don't identify the poor performers. We have to address 
that as well, Mr. Chairman.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge rejection of this bill, and I yield back the 
balance of my time.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chair, may I inquire how much time I have 
remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Maryland has 5 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chair, I insert in the Record an article from The Washington Post 
that reports the Federal Salary Council, the official monitor of 
Federal pay, found that Federal workers make an average of 30 percent 
less than their private-sector counterparts.

               [From the Washington Post, Nov. 14, 2018]

   Federal Employee Salaries Lag by Average of 31 Percent, Pay Group 
                                Reports

                            (By Eric Yoder)

       Federal employee salaries on average lag behind those of 
     the private sector by almost 31 percent, an advisory council 
     said Tuesday, while splitting between union and non-union 
     members on whether to recommend potential changes in the way 
     it arrives at that figure.
       The average salary difference of 30.91 percent reported by 
     the Federal Salary Council is somewhat smaller than the 31.86 
     percent it reported at a special meeting it held April. The 
     figures of prior years were in the 34 to 35 percent range.
       Those figures, based on two Labor Department surveys 
     covering some 250 occupations, stand in contrast to 
     assessments of some conservative and libertarian 
     organizations that have concluded that the advantage is about 
     the same or even greater in favor of federal employees.
       The Congressional Budget Office last year essentially split 
     the difference. It found an average advantage for federal 
     workers of 3 percent, although within that average it said 
     there is a wide range by educational level: from a 34 percent 
     advantage for federal workers with a high school education or 
     less to a 24 percent shortfall for those with a professional 
     degree or doctorate.
       Under a federal pay law, the ``pay gap'' as measured by the 
     Salary Council is to be used in setting annual raises varying 
     by locality for federal employees under the General Schedule, 
     the pay system covering most white-collar employees below the 
     executive levels. However, that law never has been followed 
     due to the potential cost of paying such large raises and 
     disagreements over how the figure is calculated.
       In an August message to Congress, President Trump said that 
     following the law's formula would result in locality-based 
     raises in January 2019 averaging 25.7 percent plus an across-
     the-board raise of 2.1 percent, at a cost of $25 billion. 
     ``Federal agency budgets cannot sustain such increases,'' 
     Trump's said in backing a pay freeze that he originally 
     proposed in a budget plan early this year.
       A House-Senate conference underway on a spending bill will 
     decide between a freeze and a Senate provision to pay an 
     average 1.9 percent raise. Unless Congress passes, and Trump 
     signs, a bill specifying a raise, salaries will be frozen by 
     default. If the raise is enacted, it would vary slightly 
     among 44 city areas and what is called the ``rest of the 
     U.S.'' locality everywhere else; employees working in the 
     Washington-Baltimore area would stand to receive one of the 
     larger raises, probably around 2.3 percent.
       The long-running controversy over comparing salaries flared 
     at Tuesday's meeting of the Salary Council, a group of 
     federal employee unions and compensation experts whose 
     decisions typically are unanimous.
       A ``working group'' document produced since the April 
     meeting laid out a series of potential changes for 
     consideration by a higher-level body called the President's 
     Pay Agent. Those options included adding more detailed data 
     on salaries by occupation and level of work, taking into 
     account other data such as attrition rates, switching to a 
     ``total compensation'' approach taking benefits into account, 
     and conducting a very detailed review only once every four or 
     five years--the latter two of which would require a change in 
     law.
       Council chairman Ron Sanders, a longtime career federal 
     personnel official who is now a clinical professor at the 
     University of South Florida School of Public Affairs, argued 
     in favor of exploring those options. ``I think it's obvious 
     to all of us that the current methodology is problematic,'' 
     he said.
       ``That methodology does not tell the whole story,'' Sanders 
     said. ``It's nice to say there's a 30 percent gap. If OMB 
     [the Office of Management and Budget] doesn't believe it, the 
     White House doesn't believe it, the Congress doesn't believe 
     it, what good does it do?''
       He pointed to the testimony of officials of federal 
     agencies from several urban and rural areas not now receiving 
     higher city-based locality pay, who told of their 
     difficulties in recruiting and retaining employees despite 
     using special hiring authorities and incentive payments. 
     However, the current process doesn't support specific salary 
     rates for them, he said.
       Two other members supported exploring the options: Katja 
     Bullock, associate director of presidential personnel, and 
     Jill Nelson, who leads an advisory committee on pay for blue-
     collar federal employees.
       However, members from federal unions argued against 
     changing the calculations and questioned whether the group 
     even has the authority to raise new options for 
     consideration. ``I don't think the methodology is broken,'' 
     said J. David Cox Sr., president of the American Federation 
     of Government Employees.
       ``The elephant in the room is the Congress and the 
     president over time not funding the

[[Page H1303]]

     pay system'' as the law intended, said Randy L. Erwin, 
     president of the National Federation of Federal Employees. 
     Anthony M. Reardon, president of the National Treasury 
     Employees Union, expressed concern that including the value 
     of federal benefits ``will be used as a justification to 
     reduce those benefits.''
       The council adjourned without voting on whether to 
     recommend that the Pay Agent consider different approaches. 
     Afterward, Sanders said that in the annual report to that 
     higher-level body to be made by year's end, individual 
     members of the Salary Council could express their own 
     opinions.

  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chair, it is so important that we do everything in 
our power to support our Federal employees, and I want to thank Mr. 
Connolly and Mr. Hoyer. They have given their blood and their sweat and 
their tears for Federal employees: constantly standing up for them, 
trying to make sure that they are treated fairly and given their due.
  Just today, I spoke to two people who were telling me about how 
Federal employees at NIH basically saved their lives--saved their 
lives. One told me that the person who saved their life was making 
about $65,000. This is a doctor. Come on now. And the other said it was 
about, maybe, $70,000 at best.
  These are people who could have been doing other things, could have 
been making a lot of money, but they decided to give their efforts to a 
greater cause.
  Their names will probably never appear on the front page--or any 
page--of The Washington Post. They won't be on ABC News. They will not 
have the mansion that they could have gotten, but they have done 
something that will have fed their souls. They have come to the job 
with passion, compassion, and the desire to make things better, and 
they are the ones who have determined that they want to put their 
fingerprints on the future of generations yet unborn.
  Then there are the others, like the TSA workers--you know the ones--
earning $28,000 a year and coming to work, by the way, during the 
shutdown when they couldn't even afford the gas to get there. What 
about them?
  So we can make example after example after example, but one thing is 
for sure, and that is that they are working hard and they deserve our 
utmost support.
  Now, if any message is going to be sent today, I pray, Mr. Chair, 
that that message goes to our Federal employees that we care about them 
and that they are not unseen, unnoticed, unappreciated, and 
unapplauded. No.
  I hope the message goes out that we are upholding them and we realize 
that it is just not about them. We realize, when they don't get their 
raise, their family doesn't get their raise. When they don't get their 
raise, maybe that little girl they wanted to send to ballet lessons 
can't get them. We get that.
  Or maybe that little vacation that they wanted to take, they can't 
get that. They are not trying to get to Disney World. They are just 
trying to get to the nearest amusement park with some tuna fish and 
crackers.

                              {time}  1145

  Come on now. And that is what this is all about. We can talk about 
fences all we want.
  Right now, we are talking about the building of people and making 
their lives the best that they can be. We only have one life to live. 
This is no dress rehearsal, and this is that life.
  I applaud the gentleman from North Carolina. I know his heart is 
right, but right now, I want to concentrate on those folks, the ones 
like people who live on my block, who get up at 5 in the morning, catch 
the early bus to get to Social Security and places, and trying to serve 
the public. I am talking about them.
  Mr. Chair, I pray and I ask the Members to vote in favor of this 
great legislation.
  I thank Mr. Connolly, Mr. Hoyer, Ms. Wexton, and all of our 
cosponsors, and I thank the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. 
Meadows).
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time
  Mrs. LAWRENCE. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 790, the 
Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019.
  Our federal civilian workforce, who continued to work without pay 
through a record-long 35-day shutdown, deserves to be fairly 
compensated for their dedication to our country.
  Often unnoticed, this group includes TSA agents who ensure our 
airports and air travel is safe, the FBI, which actively combats 
terrorism, and CBP agents, who diligently protect our borders. These 
heroic employees deserve to see their salary reflect the important and 
selfless work they do on behalf of the United States.
  The civilian federal workforce also includes FDA personnel who ensure 
the food we eat is safe, National Park rangers who patrol and maintain 
our beautiful national parks, and IRS employees who work tirelessly to 
process and distribute tax refunds to Americans all over this country.
  Mr. Chair, these federal workers dedicate their lives to serving the 
American people and this great nation--it is about time we return the 
favor by ensuring they are fairly compensated for their hard work.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 790, the 
Federal Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019.
  On December 28, 2018, one week into the longest government shutdown 
in history, President Trump added insult to injury by announcing that 
all federal civilian workers would not receive a pay raise in 2019.
  This action continues the years of menial pay raises that federal 
employees have received.
  Federal employees have endured pay freezes, hiring freezes, higher 
pension contributions, and furloughs as a result of sequestration and 
government shutdowns, including the longest shutdown in our nation's 
history.
  Texas has over 270,000 federal employees.
  Almost 4,000 of those federal employees call my district, Texas 18, 
home.
  It is time that Congress act and shows its appreciation for these and 
the almost 2 million other men and women who are federal employees and 
the services they provide to our great nation.
  Denying these federal workers a hard-earned raise is not the way to 
balance the budget.
  Providing these workers with a raise is not an unrealistic burden on 
the federal budget.
  The cost of a pay raise would be approximately $25 billion.
  Trump's tax reform bill cost over 10 times this amount.
  It is inappropriate for the President to use these civil servants as 
a bargaining chip, and it is inappropriate to not recognize their hard 
work and dedication through a much earned pay raise.
  For too long, federal employees have been the victims of attacks 
being told that ``good people don't go into government,'' that the 
federal government is full of ``waste, fraud, and abuse.''
  This is categorically false.
  Federal employees have contributed nearly $200 billion to deficit 
reduction and other government programs over the past several years.
  These attacks on federal employees are in addition to the Republican 
attacks on federal worker pay and benefits that have been happening for 
years.
  We need to help the morale of the federal workforce.
  We need to make the federal government competitive with the private 
sector so that highly qualified candidates are able to serve the 
American people.
  We need to retain the talent that we have.
  It is time for Congress to show their support for the men and women 
who work selflessly and tirelessly for our government with this modest 
pay raise.
  H.R. 790 would authorize a 2.6 percent pay raise for federal civilian 
workers and established pay parity between them and military service 
members for 2019, a longstanding Congressional tradition.
  Federal workers who would receive this pay raise are employees in the 
competitive and excepted services; prevailing wage or blue collar 
workers; members of the career Senior Executive Service; and employees 
in the scientific and senior level positions.
  This modest pay increase, between $488.41-$4,041.54 a year, would 
help offset the cost of inflation and to make up for years of freezes 
and negligible increases.
  I am a strong supporter of the men and women who make up the federal 
civilian workforce, and I ask my colleagues to show their support to 
these integral federal employees by joining me in supporting H.R. 790.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of the Federal 
Civilian Workforce Pay Raise Fairness Act.
  Our federal public servants dedicate their lives to serving their 
fellow Americans.
  Today, let's thank them for their dedicated service to our country by 
providing them and their families an overdue pay raise that they have 
earned.
  The Trump shutdown exposed the all-too-real economic reality for many 
Americans. Millions live paycheck-to-paycheck, including many of our 
public servants. They did not choose a life of public service to make 
it rich, but rather to serve and improve the lives of their fellow 
citizens.

[[Page H1304]]

  The shutdown also crystalized the daily impact federal workers have 
on all our lives. 85 percent of all federal workers live outside of 
Washington, and their paychecks drive the economies of communities 
across the U.S.
  This increase of 2.6 percent will help federal workers, 1 in 8 of 
whom make less than $40,000 a year, make ends meet while stimulating 
local small businesses across the nation when federal employees spend 
their earnings.
  Mr. Chair, it is unacceptable that their pay has not reflected the 
increased demands of cost of living for years. It's time we give our 
hardworking federal employees the pay raise they deserve and earn every 
day.
  The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule. The amendment printed in part A of House 
Report 116-5 shall be considered as adopted, and the bill, as amended, 
shall be considered as read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                                H.R. 790

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Civilian Workforce 
     Pay Raise Fairness Act of 2019''.

     SEC. 2. PAY INCREASE FOR CERTAIN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES 
                   IN 2019.

       (a) Statutory Pay Systems.--For calendar year 2019, the 
     percentage adjustment under section 5303 of title 5, United 
     States Code, in the rates of basic pay under the statutory 
     pay systems (as defined in section 5302 of such title) shall 
     be 2.6 percent.
       (b) Prevailing Rate Employees.--Notwithstanding the wage 
     survey requirements under section 5343(b) of title 5, United 
     States Code, for fiscal year 2019, the rates of basic pay (as 
     in effect on the last day of fiscal year 2018 under section 
     5343(a) of such title) for prevailing rate employees in each 
     wage area and the rates of basic pay under sections 5348 and 
     5349 of such title shall be increased by 2.6 percent.
       (c) Senior Executive Service Career Appointees.--For 
     calendar year 2019, the rate of basic pay for any career 
     position within the Senior Executive Service or the FBI-DEA 
     Senior Executive Service (as that term is defined in section 
     3151(a) of title 5, United States Code) shall be the rate of 
     pay for any such position on December 31, 2018, increased by 
     2.6 percent.
       (d) Senior-Level and Scientific and Professional 
     Positions.--For calendar year 2019, the rates of basic pay 
     for any senior-level and scientific and professional position 
     under section 5376 of title 5, United States Code, shall be 
     the rate of pay for any such position on December 31, 2018, 
     increased by 2.6 percent.
       (e) Excepted Service.--For calendar year 2019, the rate of 
     basic pay for any position in the excepted service (as that 
     term is defined by section 2103 of title 5, United States 
     Code) shall be the rate of pay for any such position on 
     December 31, 2018, increased by 2.6 percent.
       (f) Application.--
       (1) In general.--The adjustments in pay made under this Act 
     shall apply beginning on the date of enactment of this Act.
       (2) Other adjustments permitted; limits.--Nothing in this 
     Act shall be construed to--
       (A) limit any other increase, including allowances, 
     performance awards, or bonuses, otherwise permitted under law 
     to any a rate of pay adjusted under this Act; or
       (B) waive any provision of law, rule, or regulation, 
     including section 5307 of title 5, United States Code, 
     limiting total aggregate pay.

  The Acting CHAIR. No further amendment to the bill, as amended, is in 
order except those printed in part B of House Report 116-5. Each such 
further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the 
report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered read, 
shall be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 
of the question.


                  Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Trone

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 
printed in part B of House Report 116-5.
  Mr. TRONE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Insert after section 2(e) the following (and redesignate 
     subsequent subsections accordingly):
       (f) Secret Service Employees.--For calendar year 2019, the 
     rate of basic pay of any employee of the United States Secret 
     Service provided under chapter 102 of title 5, United States 
     Code, who did not receive a pay increase by operation of 
     subsections (a) through (e) shall be increased by 2.6 
     percent.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 87, the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Trone) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. TRONE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to speak on behalf of this amendment, 
which would guarantee the United States Secret Service receive a 2.6 
percent pay increase with the rest of the civilian workforce.
  The underlying bill will nullify the President's executive order that 
froze pay for Federal workers. It is important we include all employees 
of the Secret Service in that correction.
  The Secret Service's most well-known mission is to spend every day 
protecting the President of the United States. That is why it is 
unfortunate. First, he froze their pay, and then he didn't pay them for 
35 days in the longest government shutdown in history.
  I represent a district right outside of Washington, D.C., and a lot 
of my friends and fellow constituents are Federal workers. I was 
disheartened to learn in December they would not be receiving a pay 
increase. They go to work every day to serve our country. They are 
American workers; they are patriots; they are friends; and they deserve 
better.
  This amendment will ensure that no Secret Service employees are 
inadvertently left out of a much-needed pay raise. They work every day 
to protect the President and the Vice President from harm and protect 
against crimes of our Nation's financial and banking infrastructure, 
and they deserve recognition, and they deserve a raise.
  I urge a ``yes'' vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment suffers some of the same defects as the 
underlying bill.
  Mr. Chairman, while there are numerous dedicated civil servants in 
all parts of the Federal Government, offering an additional across-the-
board pay raise is simply not good policy. It rewards the bad along 
with the good.
  The United States Secret Service is made up of many brave men and 
women, very honorable men and women. However, in 2015, the bipartisan 
report issued jointly by then-Chairman Chaffetz and the new chairman of 
Oversight and Reform, then-Ranking Member Cummings of the Oversight and 
Government Reform Committee, detailed significant personnel problems. 
The report describes ``an extraordinarily inefficient hiring process 
which overburdens the USSS with low-quality applications.''
  So the men and women of the uniformed division render critical 
services to our government. Many of them are friends. And, truly, as we 
see their dedication, they have to sacrifice so much. Whether it is at 
the Vice President's residence or whether it is on the complex just a 
few blocks from here, there is no margin for failure with respect to 
their protective mission, and I acknowledge that.
  However, an across-the-board pay increase does exactly that. It 
rewards the good along with the bad. That is why we have to have, 
indeed, a merit-based system that truly recognizes the great 
performers--the vast majority of whom are great performance--but does 
not recognize and reward those who are not doing it. We need to do 
that. And for that reason, I would reject this particular amendment and 
ask my colleagues to oppose it.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. TRONE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that this is just 
a clarifying amendment.
  The Secret Service has pay authority for certain positions. We want 
to be sure that none of those positions are inadvertently left out of 
this underlying bill. In short, the amendment guarantees all Secret 
Service employees are treated the same--fair and simple.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page H1305]]

  

  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, to rehash all the reasons, both good and 
bad, I am willing to work in a bipartisan way with the chairman of both 
the committee and the subcommittee to try to find ways to address this 
issue. This amendment does not do that.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge a ``no'' vote, and I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. TRONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friend from Maryland for 
his leadership on this amendment, which I support.
  The Secret Service do put themselves on the line, and the studies my 
friend from North Carolina cited had to do with bad management and bad 
working conditions that really affect morale and productivity at the 
Secret Service. The gentleman's amendment is designed to try to help 
that situation.
  The idea that an across-the-board cost of living increase doesn't 
distinguish between productivity and nonproductivity, performance or 
nonperformance, would also apply to the military.
  My friend has no objection to an across-the-board increase for the 
military, but apparently on the civilian side, that is different. We 
are making the opposite argument. We are making the argument that pay 
parity is the right thing to do, especially after this reckless 
shutdown.
  Mr. Chairman, I congratulate my friend from Maryland on his 
amendment, and I support it.
  Mr. TRONE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the Rules Committee for making this 
amendment in order. I urge adoption of this amendment, and I yield back 
the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Trone).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mrs. Fletcher

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in part B of House Report 116-5.
  Mrs. FLETCHER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk and ask 
for its consideration.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Insert after section 2(e) the following (and redesignate 
     subsequent subsections accordingly):
       (f) NASA Employees.--For calendar year 2019, the rate of 
     basic pay of any employee of the National Aeronautics and 
     Space Administration provided under chapter 98 of title 5, 
     United States Code, who did not receive a pay increase by 
     operation of subsections (a) through (e) shall be increased 
     by 2.6 percent.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 87, the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Mrs. Fletcher) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Mrs. FLETCHER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to ensure that the 
pay raises are equally distributed to all Federal employees at the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
  In the Houston area that I represent, there are more than 3,000 
Federal civil servants who do important work at the Johnson Space 
Center. While most of these employees work under the traditional GS pay 
scale and would be covered by the base pay scale adjustment, there are 
certain employees who would not.
  NASA, like many technical agencies, can authorize certain pay 
flexibilities under different chapters of the code to recruit talented 
individuals. My amendment merely clarifies that these employees are 
equally deserving of this pay raise.
  After the shutdown, it is now more important than ever to work to 
retain talented civil service employees around our country, especially 
at NASA.
  I would like to thank my colleagues for working with me on this 
amendment and urge their support to ensure that the hardworking civil 
servants get the pay raise that they deserve.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I am going to keep my remarks brief as we 
have got a number of different amendments going through.
  I acknowledge the gentlewoman's tenacity and her willingness to offer 
this. I would point out, Mr. Chairman, though, this particular across-
the-board pay raise, it really shouldn't apply to the very individuals 
that she is talking about because they have flexibility already. We 
know that. I mean, they get different pay raises.
  That is not to undermine the wonderful work that they do. I have been 
privileged to be able to talk to NASA folks from here in Washington, 
DC, to her home district in the great State of Texas and across this 
country. Remarkably, they are one of the best run agencies--and I say 
that under the previous NASA Administrator and under the current NASA 
Administrator.
  So it is not to not acknowledge their good work, but the whole 
premise of being able to give them a bump, there is already great 
pushback among some Federal workers about the flexibility of those 
individuals and the way that they get their pay raises. There are 
claims of unfairness. So I think that this sends a wrong message.
  Mr. Chair, I urge the rejection of this particular amendment, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. FLETCHER. Mr. Chairman, I just want to reiterate that the 
purpose of this amendment isn't to address the underlying issues that 
the gentleman from North Carolina raised, but it is really to just 
ensure that the language of this amendment may be applied equally and 
that no one at NASA is left behind because of differences in the way 
that their compensation structure is currently scheduled. This is a 
clarifying amendment, and it is just dedicated to the purpose of making 
sure that these employees may be included and not excluded from this 
act.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Mrs. Fletcher).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mrs. Trahan

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 
printed in part B of House Report 116-5.
  Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk, and I ask 
for its consideration.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:
       Insert after section 2(e) the following (and redesignate 
     subsequent subsections accordingly):
       (f) IRS Employees.--For calendar year 2019, the rate of 
     basic pay of any employee of the Internal Revenue Service 
     provided under chapter 95 of title 5, United States Code, who 
     did not receive a pay increase by operation of subsections 
     (a) through (e) shall be increased by 2.6 percent.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 87, the gentlewoman 
from Massachusetts (Mrs. Trahan) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Massachusetts.

                              {time}  1200

  Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I want to commend the sponsors of this important bill that rewards 
the talent and commitment of our civilian workforce by granting them a 
2.6 percent pay adjustment for 2019.
  Mr. Chairman, the shutdown was a stark reminder of how crucial these 
workers are to protect our air and water, secure our shores, guide air 
traffic, and ensure that our tax returns are processed on time.
  I heard desperate stories from many of these public servants, 
including workers at the IRS processing center in Andover. One of my 
constituents who works there wrote the following to me during the 
shutdown: ``Apart from selling everything I own to pay for food, bills, 
and the mortgage, I honestly don't know what to do and am truly scared 
that this may do me in.''
  Mr. Chairman, this was an entirely avoidable tragedy that wreaked 
havoc on thousands of lives; yet he and thousands of others like him 
dutifully reported to work without any certainty of when or whether 
they would be paid next. The underlying bill is the least we can do for 
them and the dedicated

[[Page H1306]]

public servants like them. My amendment is a simple clarification that 
all IRS employees would be eligible for this pay adjustment.
  We learned yesterday from legislative counsel that the bill could 
inadvertently exclude some of these employees hired under special 
provisions of chapter 95, title 5.
  For example, title 5, section 9503 grants IRS special authority to 
hire employees for critical administrative, technical, and professional 
positions necessary to carry out the functions of the IRS. However, it 
is unclear whether such individuals would benefit from H.R. 790's pay 
adjustment. This amendment simply removes any doubt.
  I hope that the amendment can be adopted.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I would highlight one thing.
  We are going through all these amendments that are clarifying and 
technical amendments and all of that. That could have all been avoided 
if we had just had a hearing and had a markup and we had gone through 
it, and yet here we are today on the House floor trying to make 
amendments to a bill that, candidly, is missing the mark.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, this is one of the most ridiculous 
amendments I have ever seen.
  Just a few years ago, the IRS targeted people for their political 
beliefs, systematically, for a sustained period of time, went after 
conservatives because they didn't like their political beliefs and what 
they were doing.
  Now we are saying to those same people across this country--we had 
constituents. Congressman Meadows had constituents. The gentlewoman 
from Massachusetts may have constituents. We are now saying to them: 
Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer, you may have been targeted by the IRS, but now 
we are going to take some of your hard-earned tax money and pay them, 
give them a pay raise?
  Giving people a pay raise who went after people's most fundamental 
right, your right to speak out against--your First Amendment liberties, 
that is what this amendment would do.
  Also, the chairman knows this. We did an investigation in the 
Oversight Committee. The IRS had fired people who they then rehired--
now think about this--and some of the people they rehired, who had been 
fired, some of the very people they rehired were people who didn't pay 
their taxes, and we are now going to give them a pay raise. You have 
got to be kidding me.
  The very agency that systematically went after people, went after our 
most fundamental right, our right, under the First Amendment, to speak 
out against our government, went after people for doing that because 
they didn't like their political beliefs, set up this elaborate system, 
this ``Be on the Lookout'' list, Lois Lerner, and the whole 9 yards, 
did that, also the same agency that fired people for not paying their 
taxes and then rehired them, and now the taxpayers have to give them a 
pay raise. That is what the Democrats want in this amendment.
  This is ridiculous. We should reject this, and we should reject, as 
we talked about before, the whole darn bill.
  Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
  Mr. CONNOLLY. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Massachusetts, and 
I congratulate her on this amendment.
  I can't believe that the distinguished ranking member of our 
committee would continue to engage in conspiracy theories that have 
been, in fact, disproved and, worse, would actually paint the entire 
41,000 or more workforce of the IRS with one brush. They are all, 
apparently, out to get us.
  You would never know these are hardworking public servants who serve 
their country nobly and often under very difficult circumstances, 
because they are hardly the most popular agency in town.
  Of course they deserve a pay raise. They were affected by the 
shutdown. Many of them were called back by the Trump administration to 
come back without pay because certain industries needed paper being 
processed. They did it because they are noble public servants and they 
are patriots, as the distinguished chairman of our committee indicated.
  So instead of slandering public servants, we want to honor them.
  You are right. We are proud of this amendment, and it is anything but 
the most ridiculous to come to the floor. It is a very important 
amendment. I support it.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).
  Mr. JORDAN. Mr. Chairman, I am not painting with a broad brush. Look, 
I know there are lots of good employees there. All I am saying is an 
agency that did what the IRS did, that rehired people who had been 
fired, some of them had been fired for not paying their taxes, an 
agency that went after people for their political beliefs, I just--call 
me crazy, but you can go ask your average taxpayer: Do you think that 
agency that did those things, do you think those people need a pay 
raise?
  My guess is most of the constituents I get the privilege of 
representing in the Fourth District of Ohio would say: Nope, I am not 
for that.
  That is all I am saying, not painting with a broad brush.
  All I know is what this agency did. And it is not a conspiracy 
theory, and the gentleman from Virginia knows it.
  The inspector general did a report and said targeting occurred at the 
Internal Revenue Service. They went after conservative Tea Party 
conservative groups, and it happened just as sure I am standing here 
speaking on the House floor, and the gentleman from Virginia knows that 
to be the case.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I can tell you that when we look at 
sending a message, this sends entirely the wrong message. We need to 
make sure that we reward Federal workers, but we also hold them 
accountable. I urge rejection of this particular amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. TRAHAN. Mr. Chairman, the employees I talked to at the IRS are 
noble. They are hardworking. They are working with the utmost 
integrity. They have endured cuts to their agency, at times doing jobs 
that used to require two, sometimes three people to do.
  Again, my amendment merely makes a clarifying change to be certain 
that all of these employees, all IRS workers, receive the benefit of 
this well-deserved pay adjustment. I urge my colleagues to adopt the 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Mrs. Trahan).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. MEADOWS. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from 
Massachusetts will be postponed.
  Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mrs. 
Fletcher) having assumed the chair, Mr. Cardenas, Acting Chair of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 790) to 
provide for a pay increase in 2019 for certain civilian employees of 
the Federal Government, and for other purposes, had come to no 
resolution thereon.

                          ____________________