[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 200 (Tuesday, December 5, 2023)]
[House]
[Pages H6113-H6114]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
POLITICAL VINDICTIVENESS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Maryland (Mr. Hoyer) for 5 minutes.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, many years ago there was a rule adopted
called the Holman rule. It allows the arbitrary and capricious cutting
of a salary if you don't agree with what the person does. It is
somewhat like if the Speaker of the House, who didn't like a vote of
one of the Members, could cut their salary to $1. Now, there are a
number of citizens who would probably like that, but in fact it would
be unfair, capricious, and undermining of our democracy.
Punishing someone for a difference of opinion is the antithesis of
American democracy. For years, however, Republicans have made it their
policy to vilify Federal workers. The Holman rule is their tool of
choice. They use it as an instrument of political vengeance to cut the
salaries of specific Federal officials who don't share their partisan
agenda; not for misfeasance or malfeasance, but because they didn't
agree.
In the past 2 months, Republicans used the Holman rule to advance 64
amendments targeting individual Federal workers. Fifty-five of those
were voted on. Two were withdrawn, and all 53 were defeated. What it is
is essentially pandering to their rightwing, to allow their rightwing
to pretend that they are doing policy. Every one of them has been
defeated by over 250 votes.
They have wasted over 9 hours of floor time on these pointless
amendments, time that we could have and should have spent funding our
government, time that we should have spent funding Ukraine, our ally,
which is under siege from a dictator who has broken international law.
Yet, we vote on reducing salaries to $1. How capricious.
They are about settling political vendettas. It is sheer, petty, and
irrational political posturing.
Among those Federal officials singled out were the FDA officials
tasked with ensuring the safety of America's medicine and food. There
was no finding that they weren't doing that properly. It was just
because they didn't like the policy.
Others were Federal employees who administer crucial food assistance
programs and other services upon which American people rely.
Mr. Speaker, Republicans also took aim at DOD, Homeland Security,
cybersecurity, and infrastructure security agencies. These men and
women are in charge of promoting military readiness, gathering vital
intelligence, and protecting our national security. There were no
arguments that they weren't performing those services. It was that
Republicans didn't like the policies.
Trying to eliminate their pay signals to America and to the world
that their essential work, their services don't matter. It also gives
the answer to what Texas Congressman Chip Roy said, that the
Republicans have not done anything. Chip Roy, a Republican, a
conservative.
Republicans attack Federal employees only to advance extreme policies
that are out of step with the American people, from restricting
reproductive care to undermining diversity and inclusion efforts. Their
vindictive behavior is nothing new.
In 2017, House Republicans tried using the Holman rule to eliminate
one-third of the Congressional Budget Office's staff, a nonpartisan,
impartial agency. Why? It was because they didn't like the scores their
bills were receiving. They didn't say they were wrong, but they said
they didn't like them, and they had a way to go beyond them to fund
projects they wanted to fund or policies they wanted to pursue.
The people responsible for government oversight and transparency
should not have to face reprisals for their thorough and objective
work. That is no way to run a country. No business on Earth would
conduct itself in this way. No employer that threatens to cut its
employees' pay to $1 on a whim can expect to recruit and retain top
talent. They would simply walk out the door, and properly so.
The Holman rule is not only vindictive, as I said, but it endangers
our democracy and our separation of powers. It is part of the politics
of vindictiveness, the so-called revenge tour President Trump promises
to unleash on
[[Page H6114]]
America. It is just another way he and his followers can, in his own
words, and I quote Mr. Trump: ``root out the . . . radical left thugs
that live like vermin within the confines of our country.''
What kind of rhetoric is that? What kind of objective is that for
somebody who might responsibly be the head of the greatest government
on Earth?
Though these amendments have no chance of becoming law, we must not
ignore them.
They force our Government to serve the political interests of their
authors.
Instead, we must allow our Government to serve the people.
Thank you, and I yield back.
____________________