Washington-area lawmakers pledge to fight for pay parity

Some Washington-area lawmakers shrugged off the latest White House pay proposals Monday, seemingly confident that Congress would enact equal pay raises for military and civilian federal employees in 2006.

In the proposed fiscal 2006 budget released Monday, President Bush put forward a 3.1 percent pay raise for military service members and a 2.3 percent average increase for civilian federal employees. For the past several years the White House has battled with Congress over the issue of disparate pay for federal workers. Recently, lawmakers have managed to successfully secure equal pay raises for military and civilian federal employees.

"The administration's proposal is closer than we have seen in recent years to pay parity, but it still ain't parity," said David Marin, a spokesman for House Government Reform Committee Chairman Tom Davis, R-Va. "And pay parity is what [Davis] has long supported and will continue to support."

The Bush administration proposed a lower raise for the federal civil service because it did not want to hand out across-the-board raises to poor performers, according to White House spokesman Alan Abney. He said hard working civilian employees will have a chance to earn higher raises through within-grade increases.

"It is an effort to attract the most qualified workforce, instead of giving across-the-board raises...so that high performers won't be discouraged, because everyone is just getting the same raise," Abney said.

One congressional staffer said the unequal pay raises were not unexpected, and they do not signal any fissure between the Bush administration and Washington-area Republicans.

"That's just the way it is, that's their budget," said Dan Scandling, a spokesman for Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va. "There is no frustration on our end."

Still, one Washington area lawmaker and a union leader were not as confident that pay parity would happen in 2006.

"Here we go again … every year we have to fight to get pay parity," said Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., who has pushed for equal pay raises from the House Budget Committee. Because of term limits, he is required to leave that committee this year and Moran said he is concerned about who will carry on the fight for equal pay raises in Budget Committee deliberations.

"Every year [it] has become tougher and tougher. I think our chances for getting this through this year are no better than 50-50," he said.

National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley said a tight budget will lead to "a yearlong fight."

"Federal employees should not be under any illusions about the difficulty of achieving pay parity," Kelley said.

The pay parity cause could be strengthened this year by another reorganization in Congress. Last year, Rep. Ernest Istook, R-Okla., led opposition in the House to equal pay raises-saying taxpayers could not afford the added financial burden. Istook, however, might be squeezed out of his role as chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that oversees federal pay raises. A spokeswoman at his office confirmed that Istook might no longer lead the Subcommittee on Transportation and Treasury and Independent Agencies. The congressman was traveling and could not be reached for comment on the pay parity issue.

A congressional staffer who asked not to be named suggested that the smaller-than-usual difference between the two proposed raises could signal a softening and acceptance by the White House.

"Maybe they are hoping to head off the criticism," the staff member said.

That approach did not cushion the blow for federal workers' organizations. NTEU President Kelley said she was "disappointed, but not surprised" by the White House proposal. The Federally Employed Women organization also released a statement saying they are "disappointed" with the difference in proposed pay increases.