Government Executive - Authors - Andy Leonatti

Wisconsin Senate limits collective-bargaining rights of public unions

Lindsey Boerma and Andy Leonatti — Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:00:00 -0500

In a surprise move, Wisconsin Senate Republicans passed a long-stalled bill stripping public-employee union members of most collective-bargaining rights without Democratic senators present on Wednesday.

According to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the Senate sent GOP Gov. Scott Walker's budget-repair bill to a conference committee that stripped all of the spending measures out of the bill and sent it back to the Senate, which lawmakers said allowed them to pass it with a simple majority present. Senate rules require a quorum of 20 senators to vote on spending bills, and all 14 Senate Democrats fled the state on February 17 to prevent that.

The vote was 18-1, with GOP state Sen. Dale Schultz the only member to vote against it. There was no debate on the bill.

Protesters were chanting "shame" and "this is not democracy," according to the Journal Sentinel.

"The Senate Democrats have had three weeks to debate this bill and were offered repeated opportunities to come home, which they refused," Walker said in a statement. "I applaud the Legislature's action today to stand up to the status quo." The governor also penned an op-ed for Thursday's Wall Street Journal defending his stance against compromise, acknowledging it as a "bold political move."

Appearing on Fox and Friends on Thursday morning, Republican Sen. Randy Hopper -- one of the 18 senators to vote "yes" -- said that defining the revamped legislation as devoid of fiscal components is inaccurate.

"Everything is fiscal," Hopper said. "What we did is we can't allocate those funds; we can't appropriate the funds that we save. So even though those things are very fiscal, we can't spend the money until one of the Democrats decides to come back and do their job. What we can start doing is capturing the savings."

According to the Journal Sentinel, Democratic Sen. Chris Larson attempted to drive back to the capitol in Madison from Illinois, but he was too late, and would not have been able to stop the bill's passage.

"This is on the Republicans' heads right now. If they decide to kill the middle class, it's on them," Larson said. "This is a travesty, is what it is. I can't sit by and let them kill the middle class."

The adjusted bill goes to the Republican-controlled State Assembly this morning for a vote, but political analysts across Wisconsin call its passage a done deal.

]]>

Business groups blast proposed immigration reforms

Chris Strohm and Andy Leonatti — Wed, 11 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0400

Two major industry groups Wednesday blasted proposals to reform U.S. immigration policy, including pending legislation in Congress that would raise work-visa fees for foreign companies operating in the United States.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Council on International Personnel issued a report calling for a market-based system of granting H-1B visas to attract skilled foreign workers and allow employers to sponsor workers for green cards, citing excessive wait times to gain access to the United States.

"The best policy for the United States is one that sides with freedom and innovation, not restriction," the report stated. "It is a policy where the H-1B cap is either eliminated or set high enough that we can let the market decide on the number of new skilled foreign nationals who work in America each year."

During a conference call, officials from the groups slammed pending legislation that would increase the work-visa fees foreign companies must pay if they have more than 50 employees in their U.S. operations and hire more than half their workforce using H-1B or L-1 visas.

The bill would pump $600 million into security efforts along the border with Mexico,and it was approved by the House Tuesday. The Senate is expected to approve it when it returns for a special session Thursday, clearing the way for President Obama to sign it into law.

The U.S. Chamber opposes increasing visa fees, said Randel Johnson, the group's senior vice president for labor, immigration and employee benefits. He said the fee mechanism was "an easy political shot" that lawmakers are pushing through without debate.

"This opens the door to using immigration fees to fund a whole variety of things," said Lynn Shotwell, executive director of the American Council on International Personnel.

The bill has also ignited a firestorm of opposition from other business groups, specifically India-based companies that would be primarily affected.

"It is totally outrageous in this day and age, when the world is so interconnected by the Internet, that draconian measures would be floated by the U.S. Congress that tar-brushes Indian companies as 'chop shops,' " said Ron Somers, president of the U.S.-India Business Council, in a statement.

"We urge the Congress and the Obama administration to amend this new funding method for border security and any policies that would harm America's economic interest and undermine the burgeoning economic, trade and strategic relationship with India," Somers added.

The report issued Wednesday also criticized a proposal backed by the AFL-CIO to create an independent commission to determine work-visa levels, saying it would not be responsive to business needs.

"A government commission to set the annual level of temporary visas and green cards would become a new set of obstacles employers would need to overcome to hire foreign nationals and could effectively end employment-based immigration to the United States," the report stated.

The report said the best policy would be to make it easier for employers to sponsor high-skilled individuals for green cards and allow well-educated college graduates to quickly obtain green cards.

]]>

Senate panel OKs 6,000 troops for border

Andy Leonatti — Fri, 28 May 2010 00:00:00 -0400

The Senate Armed Services Committee approved an amendment to its fiscal 2011 defense authorization bill requiring 6,000 troops be sent to the border with Mexico, Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., announced Friday.

Levin, who opposed the amendment from Armed Services Committee ranking member John McCain of Arizona, said it was approved by a 15-13 vote in the committee's closed markup of the bill setting Pentagon spending and policy priorities.

Levin said he was unsure whether Congress could "constitutionally mandate" to the president where to send troops, adding he thought the language "went too far," and he thinks it will be addressed on the Senate floor or in conference. Levin also said White House National Security Adviser James Jones sent a letter to the committee strongly opposing the language.

President Obama announced on Tuesday that he would send 1,200 National Guard troops to the Mexican border.

Addressing other hot-button issues considered during the markup, Levin said the committee voted to strip $245 million for funding the conversion of a prison in Thomson, Ill., to house detainees now held at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, prison. Levin said he opposed the amendment but a "clear majority" emerged, hinting that prospects of restoring the funding were murky.

The committee approved an amendment to restrict the transfer of detainees to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Somalia, where al-Qaida has an active presence.

The committee's authorization also includes a 1.4 percent across the board pay raise for the military, equal to President Obama's request. The House version being voted on Friday includes a 1.9 percent raise.

Levin said Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., will offer an amendment on the Senate floor that will further increase pay to targeted sectors of the military. Levin said Webb's "creative" proposal would more specifically target people "on the lower end" of the pay scale.

Levin said he remains optimistic that there will be little momentum for Senate Republicans to filibuster the bill for including a repeal of the "don't ask, don't tell" law banning gays from serving openly in the military, or a potential veto threat from the White House over different spending priorities.

"I think it's hard to filibuster a defense bill," he said, adding the compromise language followed the course recommended by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen for a comprehensive study on how to implement the repeal.

"It still requires action by the military to act on their own regulations and their own prohibitions," Levin added.

Gates said he would recommend a veto if the bill includes funding for an alternate engine program for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The House rejected an amendment Thursday evening to strip $485 million from the bill for the second engine. Levin would not speculate on how to try and add the funding to the Senate bill, but said he was "very encouraged" by the House vote.

"[It is] difficult for me to believe the president will do anything but look at the entire bill," Levin said about a potential veto over one provision.

In other provisions included in the Senate bill, it fully funds the Afghan Security Forces fund at $11.6 billion to train Afghan police. It also cuts $1 billion from the Iraqi Security Forces fund. The bill also approves $75 million for equipment and training of counterterrorism forces in Yemen.

It also includes $9.1 billion to build 42 Joint Strike Fighters, which Levin said will fully fund the Pentagon's request. An additional $205 million is included to buy a JSF to replace one lost in battle. The House version allows the Pentagon to only obligate enough money to buy 30 of the 42 JSF fighters until certain performance milestones are met.

On missile defense, the bill fully funds the Missile Defense Agency at $8.4 billion, and included an additional $205 million for the Israeli Iron Dome missile defense program.

]]>

Alaska senator urges restraint on spill reaction

Andy Leonatti and Darren Goode — Fri, 21 May 2010 00:00:00 -0400

Senate Energy and Natural Committee Resources ranking member Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, on Friday urged Congress not to overreact legislatively to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.

Speaking at a conference sponsored by the University of Virginia's Center for Oceans Law and Policy, Murkowski said investigations into the cause of the spill should "guide us in our decision-making" when it comes time to make new regulations, but too much was still unknown.

Murkowski and other Republicans have blocked Senate Democratic attempts to raise to $10 billion the $75 million cap on how much a company is liable for economic damages resulting from a spill.

She hoped that exploratory drilling would still begin this summer off the coast of her home state of Alaska. "[Alaska needs] to be given the chance to prove that we can explore safely," she said, noting that the spill did not change U.S. demand for oil.

Meanwhile, 78 House Democrats -- led by Reps. Jay Inslee of Washington and Lois Capps of California -- wrote to President Obama on Thursday to ask for a delay in the exploratory Arctic Ocean drilling until the Gulf spill has been investigated and until the administration "has subsequently put into place improved and rigorous prevention technology requirements," according to their letter.

Obama halted drilling permits from being issued until Interior Secretary Ken Salazar gives him a set of safety recommendations, which are expected this month.

Administration officials have not been immune to criticism regarding their actions before and after the spill, including not moving away from an initial joint BP-government estimate that roughly 5,000 barrels of oil has been leaking from the sunken rig daily.

BP conceded on Thursday that more oil than the company had estimated has been leaking every day. The company is collecting 5,000 barrels of oil a day from a mile-long tube the company inserted over the weekend, but oil continues to leak from the ruptured well.

Some scientists have estimated that the per-day spill volume has exceeded 70,000 barrels.

But in a statement Friday, BP said some third-party estimates of flow are inaccurate.

Obama administration officials, including Salazar and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Administrator Jane Lubchenco, have continued to say the most up-to-date estimate remains 5,000 barrels per day. A government-created technical team is working on a more precise estimate and is required to produce a report by Saturday.

]]>

Citizens United prepared for another fundraising case

Billy House and Andy Leonatti — Fri, 30 Apr 2010 00:00:00 -0400

Reaction to Thursday's unveiling of legislation to increase disclosure in political advertising in the wake of the Supreme Court's Citizens United v. FEC ruling in January was mixed, but the plaintiff in the case is leaving the door open for more court action.

The bill, crafted by Senate Democratic Conference Vice Chairman Charles Schumer of New York and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, would require CEOs of corporations, labor unions and other interest groups to disclose their spending in political advertisements.

Citizens United spokesman Will Holley said the organization was still examining the legislation, but the group would challenge the measure in court if "[we] feel it infringes on our First Amendment rights."

Citizens United President David Bossie said in a statement the bill "would force groups of modest means like Citizens United to spend thousands of dollars of donor money on a battery of attorneys and accountants. This is precisely what the Supreme Court ... sought to avoid."

Jeff Patch, spokesman for the Center for Competitive Politics, said his group "will certainly be among the groups challenging this legislation in court, probably at the amicus level."

Conservative groups have slammed the bill as chilling free speech. The court ruled that corporate spending on independent broadcasts could not be limited.

Schumer said earlier Thursday that the bill would level the playing field by not allowing corporations and unions to influence elections more than average citizens. He singled out the U.S. Chamber of Commerce as a group that corporations anonymously funnel money to for ads.

Chamber President Tom Donohue called the bill "an abuse of the legislative process and unconstitutional."

Left-leaning groups said the bill needs to go even further. Anna Burger, secretary-treasurer of the Service Employees International Union, said the bill needs protections for investors and retirees to have a say in how corporations spend pension and 401(k) funds on politics, and contended the measure does not protect workers from retaliation.

"Can they say 'no,' without fear of reprisal, when their boss tells them to hand out campaign flyers in front of the office?" Burger asked.

Although the House version of the bill attracted GOP Reps. Michael Castle of Delaware and Walter Jones of North Carolina, Republican leaders bashed the bill.

"I find it interesting that Democrats here in Congress have chosen the heads of their two campaign committees to drive this process, to stifle speech in America," said House Minority Leader Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio. Schumer is a former chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

Republican Study Committee Chairman Rep. Tom Price of Georgia accused Democrats of writing the bill "behind closed doors."

House Majority Leader Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., however, noted the bill had bipartisan sponsorship and said he hopes "more Republicans will join Democrats in supporting transparency and accountability in political campaigns when it comes to the House floor for a vote."

]]>

Democrats unveil bill blocking election advertising by contractors

Andy Leonatti — Thu, 29 Apr 2010 00:00:00 -0400

Democrats unveiled legislation on Thursday to blunt the impact of the Supreme Court's January ruling in Citizens United v. FEC by requiring corporations and labor unions to disclose their involvement on political ads.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., one of the lead architects along with Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, said the legislation will for the first time "follow the money" by requiring political ads to disclose major donors and prevent corporations and unions from having more sway in an election than ordinary people.

Joining Schumer are Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden of Oregon, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Evan Bayh of Indiana. House Administration Chairman Robert Brady, D-Pa., along with Republican Reps. Michael Castle of Delaware and Walter Jones of North Carolina, are House co-sponsors.

The Democrats held their news conference in front of the Supreme Court building, where the court in January struck down parts of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform law by upholding the right of corporations to fund independent political ads.

Schumer said he has consulted with Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to make sure the bill reaches the Senate floor and passes by July 4. "The beauty of this building can't even be defaced by the ugliness of this ruling," Schumer said. He added the bill would stop corporations from funneling money to groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to run ads on their behalf.

Under the bill, the CEO of any corporation, interest group or labor union would have to announce at the end of the ad that they "approved this message," just as federal candidates are required to do. Shell groups that take donations from many entities would have to disclose the top five donors in the ad.

The bill would also prohibit spending on campaign expenditures by Troubled Asset Relief Program recipients, government contractors and corporations in which more than 20 percent of voting shares are controlled by foreign nationals. Schumer said that language would prevent a foreign company from spending money through a U.S. subsidiary.

President Obama praised the bill in a statement, saying he has "long believed that sunlight is the best disinfectant, and this legislation will shine an unprecedented light on corporate spending in political campaigns."

Although the Senate bill has no GOP co-sponsors, it will attract significant support when it comes to the floor, Schumer said. Feingold noted it includes the provisions that he and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., "have always fought for together."

Castle, who is running for Senate in Delaware, said more Republicans should sign on because it treats interest groups on both sides fairly.

"I don't see why this issue is a partisan one," he said.

Brady said the Administration Committee will hold a hearing on May 6 and will mark up the bill soon after to get it to the floor.

But Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., blasted the bill in a statement, calling it a plan to protect Democrats in the November elections. "It should be beyond suspicious when the man in charge of electing Democrats in the House teams up with the man who held the same job in the Senate to tell Americans how they can express themselves in an election."

Another opponent of the Democrats' bill, the Center for Competitive Politics, took aim at a provision allowing candidates to receive the lowest possible advertising rate in a media market to respond if an independent group spends more than $50,000 on airtime. The group argued the provision is unfair because many candidates already enjoy a great deal of exposure.

"Citizens United vindicated robust political speech no matter the speaker," said CCP Vice President Stephen Hoersting in a statement.

Schumer and Feingold said the court decision will play a role in the selection of retiring Associate Justice John Paul Stevens' replacement. Feingold said it would not be a litmus test on whether a nominee supports the ruling, but it will be significant if they will swear to uphold current precedent, such as the provisions struck down in the court's ruling.

"The next nominee must be someone who will understand how the court's decisions affect people in the real world," Schumer said.

]]>

Officials say they are cracking down on contractor award fees

Andy Leonatti — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 00:00:00 -0400

Procurement officers for NASA and the departments of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Defense and Energy told a Senate subcommittee Monday they were taking steps to ensure performance bonuses attached to contracts are awarded responsibly.

Alluding to bonuses paid to executives by Wall Street financial firms receiving federal bailout funds, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Federal Financial Management Subcommittee Chairman Thomas Carper, D-Del., said "rewards and incentives that are not properly aligned can lead to failure."

The use of "award-fee" contracts at the departments and NASA have come under fire over the years as awards have been paid out even though performance measures were not met by contractors.

William McNally, NASA's assistant administrator for procurement, said the agency had banned the practice of "rolling over" awards, which gives contractors an opportunity to earn an award from a previous evaluation period that was lost due to poor performance.

McNally said the practice was banned because it removes the incentive to improve performance.

Jeffrey Zients, the Office of Management and Budget's deputy director of management, said there needs to be verifiable evidence of an extraordinary situation for rolling over awards "if it's not an outright ban."

John Hutton, the Government Accountability Office's director of acquisition and sourcing management, agreed, telling the subcommittee it would be "hard-pressed" to find a time when rolling over an award is appropriate.

Zients said OMB has issued findings for responsibly managing award fees so that awards are not paid for unsatisfactory work or failing to meet requirements of a contract. Award payments are linked to timeliness, cost and quality of work, he said.

Zients also praised the Defense Department for taking action to link award payments to project outcomes and scaling back "rollover."

OMB and the Federal Acquisition Regulation Council are working toward new regulations that will provide more specific guideposts for doling out award-fee contracts, he added, noting that the agencies share the subcommittee's skeptical view of rolling over awards.

"These facts are being taken into careful consideration in deliberations over whether the practice should be banned altogether," Zients said.

The new regulations will provide a better foundation to eliminate wasteful practices, such as allowing contractors to receive fees for unsatisfactory performance or routinely tying fees to effort rather than achievement, Zients said. Within the next 30 to 60 days, the FAR Council will publish a new rule to increase the attention agencies give to determining if an award fee is appropriate during the acquisition planning phase and provide evaluation standards to help agencies differentiate between performance levels and the corresponding award fee. Zients said the rule also will prohibit award fees for unsatisfactory performance and provide clear guidance on the use of rollovers.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., wondered why contractors do not share the same risk as the government in contracts being completed on time. He suggested that contractors should have capital at risk so there is a greater incentive to improve performance.

Elizabeth Newell of Government Executive contributed to this report.

]]>

Military construction-VA spending bill sails through Senate panel

Andy Leonatti — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:00:00 -0400

The Senate Appropriations Committee easily approved a $133.9 billion spending bill for military construction projects and the Veterans Affairs Department on Tuesday, a day after it sailed through subcommittee. The vote was 21-0.

Last month, the House Appropriations Committee approved a $133 billion spending bill.

The Senate measure includes $76.7 billion in discretionary spending, an amount that is $439.1 million above President Obama's request. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii said the discretionary portion is 5 percent above fiscal 2009 spending.

The bill appropriates $109 billion total for VA, including $53.2 billion in discretionary funding, $150 million more than Obama requested. Total medical care funding for VA is $44.7 billion.

The bill also includes $48.2 billion in advance appropriations for fiscal 2011 in three VA medical accounts: medical services, medical support and compliance, and medical facilities. Appropriations Committee ranking member Thad Cochran, R-Miss., said the advance appropriations would provide "more predictable" funding levels that will improve the quality of healthcare for veterans.

Military Construction-VA Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Tim Johnson, D-S.D., said the committee will carefully go over funding again before a fiscal 2011 appropriations bill is worked on next year, but that it was "important to maintain stable healthcare funding."

VA funding includes $2.1 billion for health care for veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a $463 million increase over fiscal 2009, and $5.9 billion for long-term care for aging veterans and severely wounded Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. It also includes $1.9 billion for VA hospital and clinic construction.

Johnson said the bill also contains $1.4 billion for overseas contingency operations in Afghanistan, a separate category from the military construction projects.

The bill provides $23.2 billion for military construction projects, $286 million more than Obama's request. The funding includes $12.6 billion for active and reserve military construction, $2 billion for family housing and $373 million for the Homeowners Assistance Program to provide mortgage relief to military families forced to relocate. The Base Closure and Realignment Program is also fully funded at $7.5 billion.

Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., said she was glad the bill included a request for a report on cost savings for residential barracks for the military. Family housing can now be built with 25 percent savings, and Landrieu said the same should be done for barracks, pointing out that 30 percent of the Army's barracks are at least 30 years old.

Additionally, the bill provides $279 million for related agencies, including $80.6 million for the American Battle Monuments Commission, $27.1 million for the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans' Claims, $37.2 million for Arlington National Cemetery and $134 million for the Armed Forces Retirement Home.

]]>

Military construction-VA package passes Senate subcommittee

Andy Leonatti — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:00:00 -0400

The Senate Military Construction-VA Appropriations Subcommittee unanimously approved a nearly $134 billion spending package for fiscal 2010 on Monday.

The subcommittee moved the bill by unanimous consent without any amendments. It provides $133.9 billion, including $76.7 billion in discretionary spending. On June 24, the House Appropriations Committee approved a $133 billion total spending package.

Military Construction-VA Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Tim Johnson, D-S.D., said the discretionary spending was more than $439.1 million over President Obama's request, and $3.8 billion more than fiscal 2009 enacted spending.

The bill approves $109 billion total for the Veterans' Affairs Department, including $53.2 billion in discretionary funding, $150 million above Obama's request. Total medical care funding for VA is $44.7 billion.

Johnson said the subcommittee has "done our best to address both the needs of the military and our veterans in this legislation."

The bill provides $48.2 billion in advance appropriations for the VA for fiscal 2011, Johnson added. The advance appropriations include $37.1 billion for medical services, $5.3 billion for medical support and compliance and $5.7 billion for medical facilities.

The VA funding includes $2.1 billion for health care for veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a $463 million increase over fiscal 2009, and $5.9 billion for long-term care for aging veterans and severely wounded Iraq and Afghanistan veterans. It also includes $1.9 billion for VA hospital and clinic construction.

Subcommittee ranking member Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, praised the bill, and said it was "good that construction needs are met." Hutchison was pleased that $7.5 billion for the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure program was included, and said fully funding the program would ensure it would finish on time in 2011.

The bill also provides $1.4 billion for military construction projects in Afghanistan.

]]>

Panel lays groundwork to buy more fighter jets

Megan Scully and Andy Leonatti — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:00:00 -0400

The House Armed Services Committee early this morning voted unanimously to approve the fiscal 2010 defense authorization bill, sending a measure to the floor that could keep alive the F-22 Raptor fighter jet despite the Pentagon's plans to end the program.

At the tail end of a markup that spanned more than 16 hours, Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, narrowly succeeded in gaining approval of an amendment authorizing $369 million for the advance procurement of 12 F-22s in fiscal 2011.

The offset for the amendment -- which passed, 31-30, with the help of six Democrats -- would come from the defense environmental cleanup fund.

The money essentially would give the Pentagon the option of buying more of the stealthy Lockheed Martin fighter jets. But Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who wants the four F-22s in the pending fiscal 2009 supplemental spending bill to be the last Raptors the Air Force buys, has repeatedly said that the 187 fighters planned are adequate.

The bill authorizes $550.4 billion for the Defense Department, as well as for the Energy Department's nuclear programs. The measure, which passed 61-0, also authorizes $130 billion for ongoing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

During the markup, the panel approved language prohibiting the administration from transferring prisoners held at the military's detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to the United States until President Obama has a plan mitigating any risks they might pose.

The amendment, offered by House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton, D-Mo., also requires the president to consult with governors, the mayor of Washington, and chief executives of U.S. territories and possessions on any efforts to transfer prisoners to their localities.

"Congress will have plenty of time to review his [Obama's] plan before any detainee is moved, and states' rights are preserved by requiring that he consult with state governors before submitting it," Skelton said in a statement.

His amendment is a watered-down alternative to language offered by Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., that would have required state legislatures and governors to approve the transfer of any detainee into their states.

Obama wants to close Guantanamo by early next year, but lawmakers -- including many congressional Democrats - have argued that any efforts to transfer detainees to U.S. soil could pose a national security risk.

The language is the latest in a string of congressional efforts to block or delay the move of any detainees to the United States. On Tuesday, the House passed a war supplemental that allows the administration to move detainees to the United States for trial but not permanent detention.

Meanwhile, Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, withdrew his amendment that would have banned release of detainee abuse photos because the Oversight and Government Reform Committee also has jurisdiction over the issue. He could offer it during floor debate on the bill, which is expected next week.

The language was dropped last week from the conference report for the supplemental after Obama issued a letter assuring Senate Democrats he would appeal to the Supreme Court to prevent the release of the photos.

Many members of the House Progressive Caucus oppose the language, which they believe is too broad and would weaken government transparency law.

]]>

FEMA, HUD get more heat for post-Katrina relocation

Andy Leonatti — Fri, 22 May 2009 00:00:00 -0400

At a House Transportation and Infrastructure Economic Development Subcommittee hearing, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-D.C., asked officials from both agencies about how to best relocate the trailer residents, noting that her subpanel estimated there are 4,052 temporary housing units in use after the Katrina Housing Program was terminated May 1.

Although the federal government could not allow people that refuse permanent housing options to stay in trailers just "because they prefer it that way," Norton said, FEMA, HUD and the Louisiana Housing Authority's case management is not helping many elderly and disabled residents settle.

Frederick Tombar, a senior adviser to HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan, responded that Section 8 housing is available in the Baton Rouge, La., and New Orleans areas and that the agency is prioritizing elderly and disabled residents.

FEMA Acting Deputy Administrator David Garratt said the agency notified residents in April that they would need to vacate their trailers by May 30. After that, Garratt said, FEMA "will follow established legal processes, which may include the Department of Justice seeking orders from federal courts." But he added the agency has worked to connect residents that need more time to state social services.

The assertions by both officials were discounted by Louisiana Episcopal Diocese Bishop Charles Jenkins, who said FEMA's idea of case management was handing residents a list of phone numbers. "You can call those numbers and no one answers," he added.

Jenkins, who has run a private rebuilding organization, suggested Congress should provide strict short-term progress deadlines and hold more frequent accountability hearings.

]]>

Recession spurs Postal Service bid to cut mail deliveries

Andy Leonatti — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 00:00:00 -0500

Citing the U.S. Postal Service's declining financial situation, Postmaster General John Potter urged Congress Wednesday to drop an annual appropriations provision requiring mail delivery six days a week.

During a hearing on the impact of the current recession on the Postal Service, Potter told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Federal Financial Management Subcommittee that dropping the appropriations rider could allow USPS to save money during periods of low volume by temporarily rolling service back to five days a week.

"I'm forced to consider every option due to the severity of the challenge at hand," Potter said of his request.

The recession and continual loss of mail volume to private sector competition and Internet e-mail has already caused a $1.3 billion loss for the first quarter of fiscal 2009, with losses of $6 billion or more estimated for the year, Potter said.

He also cited a projected 12 billion to 15 billion drop in pieces of mail for fiscal 2009.

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs ranking member Susan Collins, R-Maine, warned Potter that with her new membership on the Appropriations Committee, he should expect some opposition to his request.

"I'm rather fond of the universal service language," Collins said, referring to the annual rider. She expressed concern that cutting delivery days would lead people and businesses to find other methods of delivering letters, direct mail or packages.

Federal Financial Management Subcommittee Chairman Thomas Carper, D-Del., who called the hearing to see what temporary help Congress could offer the Postal Service during the recession, worried that cutbacks in service might make USPS appear less attractive to customers, but suggested the prospect of a "test drive" to Potter.

Potter said cutbacks would only be used during lighter volume periods, such as July and August this year and in 2010, and would not be in place during the fall and winter holiday seasons.

Potter asked for relief in covering the cost of current and future retiree health benefits. A 2006 law requires USPS to make payments between $5.4 billion and $5.8 billion over the next 10 years to a trust fund for future retiree benefits, while paying for current retiree benefits out of operating revenues.

The postmaster general requested an eight-year period in which USPS would be allowed to pay current retiree health benefits out of the trust fund, a change he said would save $24.6 billion through 2016. The USPS is due to make $2.3 billion in payments for current retiree health benefits in fiscal 2009.

Carper and Collins already have called for a two-year reprieve to allow use of the trust fund, but were wary of allowing any further relief. "Depleting the reserve fund for eight years would further delay the management reforms the [USPS] should be making to promote its future viability," Collins said.

In the House, Reps. John McHugh, R-N.Y., and Danny Davis, D-Ill., have introduced a bill that would allow USPS to pay current retiree health benefits out of the trust fund through 2016.

]]>

Future of bill blocking truck program still up for grabs

Andy Leonatti — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:00:00 -0400

Although a bill blocking the Transportation Department's cross-border trucking program sailed through the House last week, its future is still uncertain.

The bill would prohibit the Transportation Secretary from allowing any future pilot programs that allow Mexican-based commercial semi-trucks to operate in the United States beyond the 20-mile wide "commercial zone" along the Southwest border. It passed the House 395-18.

Transportation Secretary Mary Peters and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrator John Hill have argued the current pilot program can run for up to three years, and a ban on using federal funds for the program, part of the fiscal 2008 omnibus appropriations bill, only applies to future pilot programs.

Peters and Hill have said the program needs more time to encourage more participation, and after the bill was unanimously approved in committee on July 31, Transportation announced four days later -- after Congress had begun its summer recess -- that the program would be carried out for another two years.

Although House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee spokesman Jim Berard said the move was not surprising, it drew the ire of Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar, D-Minn.

"The Secretary of Transportation continues to flout the will of Congress," Oberstar said. Many members oppose the program due to safety concerns, including Mexico's less stringent requirements for driver hours of service, training and licensing.

Including it in a continuing resolution might be the best option, as there is no companion bill in the Senate, and the Senate Commerce Committee has not scheduled any hearings on the issue.

But a spokesman for Senate Transportation-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee Chairwoman Patty Murray, D-Wash., who chaired Senate hearings about the program in 2007, said he was not aware of any plans to include any language in a continuing resolution.

A spokesman for the American Trucking Association said that while the organization is supportive of free trade and the program, it has not taken a position on the bill and is not lobbying against it.

Before the full House vote, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent a letter to House members warning them that a vote for the bill could "greatly undermine the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers, farmers, and service providers in the second largest U.S. export market." The letter also said the United States is obligated under the North American Free Trade Agreement to open its border to Mexican trucks.

]]>

Agencies detail plans to decrease aviation congestion

Andy Leonatti — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0400

While Transportation Department and Federal Aviation Administration officials said Tuesday they were implementing new strategies to reduce air traffic congestion, an industry representative said Transportation was relying on unproven experiments.

At a Senate Commerce Aviation Subcommittee hearing, Air Transport Association Executive Vice President John Meenan said service reductions by major airlines will not result in fewer delays in major airports, especially in the New York region.

Three airports in the New York metropolitan area account for 45 percent of flight delays system-wide, according to the ATA, and Meenan was critical of FAA and Transportation's plans to auction airlines' flight slots and encourage airports to implement congestion pricing against airlines.

"The DOT seems intent on leaving a legacy of failed but costly experiments that "do nothing to reduce congestion and flight delays in New York or anywhere else," Meenan said.

Transportation has favored market-based solutions to reduce congestion, such as slot auctions and congestion pricing, while it views flight caps, which have been implemented in the New York area, as only part of the solution. Government Accountability Office Physical Infrastructures Director Susan Fleming said the department has not demonstrated how slot auctions will help reduce congestion and added that FAA and DOT efforts will have a "limited" effect on delays this summer.

FAA Air Traffic Organization COO Hank Krakowski pointed to other congestion reduction initiatives, such as increased routes over the Atlantic Ocean and new "playbook" routes for avoiding inclement weather, including the use of military airspace. He added that new and extended runways and airfield configurations will help expand flight capacity. All agreed that implementing the digital NextGen air traffic control system and implementing new satellite technology nationwide by 2013 is an important goal.

Subcommittee members also used the hearing to sound off against oil speculation and the effect it is having on the industry. Meenan said the industry was being "decimated" by a $20 billion increase in fuel expenses compared to 2007, and as airlines restructure and slash service, higher fares can be expected.

Senate Commerce Committee ranking member Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, said he supported legislation criminalizing oil speculation. Aviation Subcommittee Chairman John (Jay) Rockefeller, D-W.Va., was concerned that states like his with smaller airports would feel the brunt of the airline's service cuts.

]]>

Lawmaker assails Pentagon for inaction on contractors

Andy Leonatti — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0400

Senate Democratic Policy Committee Chairman Byron Dorgan of North Dakota Wednesday castigated the Defense Department for not addressing contractor malfeasance in Iraq.

"I've seen precious little activity out of the Pentagon," Dorgan said at a meeting of his panel, which focused on Kellogg, Brown and Root.

Charles Smith, the former chief of the Field Support Contracting Division for the Army Field Support Command, said he personally saw KBR submit $1 billion in overcharges to the Army, including excessive meal counts for more soldiers than were stationed at a camp and more trucks than the Army needed, and was fired for protesting.

Smith, who was in charge of the LOGCAP III contract in Iraq overseeing the KBR contract, said the Defense Department documented $1.8 billion in unsupported charges from KBR.

"In 31 years of doing this work, I have never seen anything like the way KBR's unsupported charges were handled by the Department of Defense," Smith said.

Smith also criticized the Army's decision to waive the standard 15 percent withholding of payments until KBR reconciled its charges to the government, even though the Defense Contract Audit Agency endorsed withholding payment in May 2004.

Smith said he was verbally "attacked" by then-Brig. Gen. Jerome Johnson, the head of the Army Sustainment Command who later relieved Smith of his duties, at KBR's offices in June 2004 and was instructed to draft a letter to KBR that would not implement the 15 percent withholding.

Smith recommended the Defense Department examine whether providing certain types of support to soldiers in the field could be done through contractors and controls on requirements, because "contractors are happy to provide as much as the Army orders and should not be expected to encourage restraint," he said.

Dorgan said he was afraid the treatment of Smith and other whistleblowers by the Pentagon would send the message that people "can't afford to rock the boat."

]]>

Legislation extends residency rights to military spouses

Andy Leonatti — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0400

The House Veterans' Affairs Economic Opportunity Subcommittee unanimously approved a bill in late June extending residency rights to spouses of service members.

Sponsored by Rep. John Carter, R-Texas, the bill was approved by voice vote. The bill affects spouses of service members who accompany his or her military spouse to temporarily live in another state for military duties.

The bill amends the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act, a law that allows soldiers to keep one state of residency regardless of where military orders send them. It is intended to prevent soldiers from having to re-register to vote, obtain new driver's licenses, maintain property titles and simply state income tax filings. Currently spouses are not covered.

"Over the course of their spouse's career, they face multiple changes of voter registration and drivers licenses, will pay income tax to a state they never intended to live in, and likely not have their name on any property titles," Carter said at a June 19 Economic Opportunity Subcommittee hearing.

Carter said by extending property and title rights to spouses, it will ensure the spouse proper legal protections in the event of a divorce.

Carter added that allowing couples to claim the same state of residency could lead to savings in property and income taxes if military orders take them to a state with higher tax rates.

]]>

House subpanel approves bill to help soldiers terminate service contracts

Andy Leonatti — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 00:00:00 -0400

The House Veterans' Affairs Economic Opportunity Subcommittee passed a bill June 26 making it easier for active duty soldiers to terminate service contracts.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Patrick Murphy, D-Pa., amends the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, a bill intended to provide soldiers with financial protection. The bill was approved by unanimous voice vote.

Murphy, an Iraq war veteran, said at an April 16 Economic Opportunity Subcommittee hearing that his bill would help soldiers focus on missions without "worrying about their credit rating or whether bill collectors are harassing their families."

The bill would allow soldiers to terminate contracts for cellular phone, cable or satellite television, internet, automobile insurance and utilities if a soldier is deployed for a period of more than 90 days or a soldier is transferred from one base to another.

The bill also entitles soldiers to refunds for fees paid in advance on terminated contracts.

The bill called for violations of the bill, such as seizing funds or property, to be punishable by up to one year in prison or fines. A substitute amendment from Rep. John Hall, D-N.Y., approved by voice vote, changed the punishment to $5,000 for an individual and $10,000 for an organization.

In a letter to the subcommittee, Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association Vice President Jot Carpenter said its organization requires its members to allow penalty-free contract termination. Carpenter said, however, that the punishment for violations in the original bill were excessive.

The bill also added a penalty for creditors that knowingly fail to reduce interest rates on soldiers that receive deployment orders. The penalty was up to one year in prison and fines, but Hall's substitute altered that provision.

]]>

Contempt vote delayed after executive privilege invoked

Andy Leonatti — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0400

House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., blasted President Bush Friday for invoking executive privilege on documents relating to the White House's involvement in EPA ozone regulations.

"I don't think we've had a situation like this since Richard Nixon was president -- where the [president] may have been involved in acting contrary to law," Waxman said.

The committee was scheduled to vote on holding EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson and Susan Dudley, head of OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, in contempt for not issuing subpoenaed documents relating to a committee probe.

The panel is investigating the White House's decision to override Johnson's decisions involving stricter ozone standards.

The vote was postponed because the executive privilege claim would prevent the committee from obtaining the remaining documents it seeks. Waxman said he wanted to consult with committee members before deciding how to proceed.

In a letter to Waxman Friday, OMB Director James Nussle accused Waxman of a double standard, charging he was lenient during an investigation of possible White House political involvement in ozone standards during the Clinton administration. Nussle mentioned an April 18 letter sent from Waxman to Oversight and Government Reform ranking member Tom Davis, R-Va., that said the OIRA under Clinton withheld two documents, but had been "extraordinarily responsive" in that case because it had already turned over 3,800 pages of other material.

"It is curious that you are now unsatisfied to have received 'thousands of pages' of documents from OIRA in advance of your May 20 hearing," Nussle wrote. Nussle also criticized Waxman for not asking Dudley more pointed questions at a May 20 hearing.

In a letter to Bush, Attorney General Michael Mukasey cited case law to argue that the committee did not present a strong enough case that the subpoenaed documents are "demonstrably critical to the responsible fulfillment of the committee's functions." EPA Associate Administrator Christopher Bliley announced EPA would release 71 additional documents to the committee, including redacted copies related to White House communications.

]]>

House bill creates VA ombudsman's office

Andy Leonatti — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 00:00:00 -0400

WASHINGTON - Citing the confusion veterans face when trying to arrange benefits, the House Veterans' Affairs Health Subcommittee passed a bill Thursday creating an ombudsman office within the Veterans Affairs Department (VA).

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Paul Hodes, D-N.H., was adopted by unanimous voice vote, along with the adoption by voice vote of a substitute amendment from Veterans' Affairs Health Subcommittee Chairman Michael Michaud, D-Maine.

The bill instructs the VA secretary to create an office of the ombudsman, and designate the head of the office.

The office would act as a one-stop shop for information on benefits administered by the VA, including medical, housing and education. When testifying in support of his bill before the Health Subcommittee on June 14, 2007, Hodes said the VA has separate hotlines for different benefits, and the process can be confusing to veterans returning from overseas.

Michaud's substitute amendment expanded the duties of the new office. Under the amendment, the VA secretary will designate an ombudsman director in each of the department's three administrations, health, benefits and cemeteries. The ombudsman director in each administration will report to the head ombudsman.

The amendment also defines the official duties of the office of the ombudsman as providing patient advocacy and problem resolution, provide assistance in understanding benefits, provide information on claims submissions and field complaints from veterans.

The VA secretary will also designate six regional ombudsmen throughout the United States for both the health and benefits administrations.

However, the VA does not support the bill. VA Undersecretary for Health Michael Kussman testified at the Health Subcommittee hearing on the bill that it would create an unnecessary level of bureaucracy within the VA. Kussman added the VA already has officers such as patient advocates and benefit counselors, and many state level veterans departments also have counselors.

]]>

Virginia senator: McCain 'missing the boat' on veterans' benefits bill

Humberto Sanchez and Andy Leonatti — Tue, 27 May 2008 00:00:00 -0400

Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., said Tuesday that opponents of his revamped GI Bill, including presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona, were "missing the boat" by ignoring the fact that a large majority of soldiers leave after their first enlistment.

"Seventy-five percent of the Army and 70 percent of the Marine Corps leave before or at the end of their first enlistment, and these people need to be taken care of," Webb said in a radio interview on The Diane Rehm Show.

"They're getting out no matter what." Webb added that if he could sit down with McCain for "15 minutes and explain to him how this works," McCain would come on board.

Webb added he has tried to keep politics out of the bill and attracted Republican co-sponsors, and said McCain "needs to calm down a little bit and join us on it."

Under Webb's amendment, which the Senate approved last week as part of the war supplemental budget, recent war veterans would get a four-year scholarship to any public university after a three-year deployment. It would provide enough to cover the cost of a four-year degree at the most expensive public university in any state -- about $1,700 a month, according to some news reports -- and is estimated to cost $52 billion over a decade.

Speaking at a Memorial Day event in Albuquerque, N.M., McCain said Monday that the measure would hurt the military's ability to retain troops and decimate the ranks of noncommissioned officers. "At a time when the United States military is fighting in two wars, and as we finally are beginning the long overdue and very urgent necessity of increasing the size of the Army and Marine Corps, one study estimates that Senator Webb's bill will reduce retention rates by 16 percent," said McCain, referring to a recent CBO analysis. Webb and others have seized on that same report, however, noting that it projects the Webb measure would likely raise recruitment levels by 16 percent.

McCain, along with Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Richard Burr, R-N.C., has offered competing legislation that would provide $1,500 a month for veterans after a three-year stint and up to $2,000 after 12 years. Their bill is estimated to cost $38 billion over 10 years. But that measure failed to get 60 votes needed for passage when it came to the Senate floor.

The House is expected to take up the war funding package next week, but its outlook remains unclear. The Senate passed the underlying bill by a veto-proof majority, but House passage could be complicated by efforts of the Blue Dog Coalition to find an offset for the cost of the veterans' education benefit, which the Senate version lacks. President Bush has threatened to veto the legislation if it contains any domestic spending unrelated to the war effort.

]]>

House Armed Services panel approves $712 billion defense package

Otto Kreisher and Andy Leonatti — Thu, 15 May 2008 00:00:00 -0400

The committee alternated between quick bipartisan approval of major segments and sharp party-line disputes over specific issues such as ballistic missile defense, the Army's massive Future Combat System and a number of personnel issues.

It cleared the committee on a unanimous 61-0 vote.

Republicans were outmaneuvered by the majority Democrats on amendments that would place some Democratic members in uncomfortable positions. One vote was a sense of the Congress resolution from Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., calling on the Congress to pass an emergency appropriations bill for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan unburdened with non-defense spending.

House Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton, D-Mo., instead offered a second degree amendment to Forbes' original amendment inserting the new language "Congress has provided, and will continue to provide, funds to address readiness shortfalls in the Armed Forces of the United States." Skelton's modifications were approved 33-28.

With repeated interruptions for floor votes, the committee struggled to complete the bill that would authorize total spending of $712 billion, including $70 billion in initial supplemental funding for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The next president would have to decide whether to request additional war funding next year.

The bill is expected to be on the House floor next week.

Armed Services Chairman Ike Skelton, D-Mo., said the committee's priority was restoring the combat readiness of the military, particularly the ground forces, which have experienced severe strains on their personnel and degradation of equipment from six years of combat.

To offset those effects, the bill would allow 7,000 additional soldiers and 5,000 more Marines in the active forces and 500 more full-time support personnel in the Army National Guard and 150 in the Army Reserves. It also would add $800 million for equipment for the Guard and reserves, to replace gear destroyed or worn out in combat, and $932 million more for improved maintenance by all the services.

The committee continued the practice of adding half a percentage point to the administration's requested military pay raise, authorizing a 3.9 percent increase. And it rejected for the third year the administration's request for increased fees for Tricare medical and pharmacy services. That forced the House leadership to give the panel an additional $1.2 billion in budget authority to offset the lost revenues.

The committee's usual bipartisanship was reflected in most of the process, including approving requested funding for most of the major weapons programs.

The full panel endorsed without opposition the Seapower Subcommittee's proposal to provide full or partial funding for four ships in addition to the Virginia class attack submarine, Joint High Speed Vessel and two T-AKE supply ships that were requested. It then adopted an amendment offered by ranking member Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., and Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., to add $422 million to the $300 million the subcommittee had provided in advanced funding for another submarine. That would allow the Navy to buy two submarines a year starting in 2010, two years earlier than planned.

It also approved procurement of two more of the troubled Littoral Combat Ships, but reduced the requested funding because of unused money from. But it sought to stop the controversial DDG-1000 program, cutting the requested funding and telling the Navy it could use the money to start construction of another of the $3 billion-plus warships or to buy more of the proven DDG-51s, which the Navy does not want.

The full committee also endorsed the panel's proposal to require the Navy to consider using nuclear power in future amphibious assault ships, in addition to the existing requirement for nuclear power in the next generation guided missile cruisers. The Navy has expressed concern about the additional cost and construction delay that would cause.

The Air-Land Subcommittee also added substantially to the administration's request, including $3.9 billion for 15 more C-17 transports that the Air Force wanted but did not request, $526 million for a second engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which the administration opposes, and $523 million in advanced funding for 20 F-22 fighters that the Pentagon did not seek.

The first major dispute was over the Air-Land Subcommittee's attempt to cut $200 million from the Army's massive Future Combat System and to reallocate another $33 million. Subcommittee Chairman Neil Abercrombie, D-Hawaii, noted that his panel approved $3.3 billion for FCS and fully funded every program that is expected to be fielded by 2011.

But Air-Land ranking member Jim Saxton, R-N.J., protested that this would be the fourth straight year of cuts in the Army's major program for future capabilities. He offered an amendment to restore $233 million to FCS, taking the money from a number of personnel, health care and other Army research programs.

Skelton and Abercrombie both opposed the amendment, arguing that the priority had to be on improving current Army readiness. It was defeated on a party-line 33-23 vote.

The next battle was over the Strategic Forces Subcommittee's proposal to cut half of the funding requested for the ballistic missile defense system President Bush wants to build in Europe. The current year's authorization restricted most funding on the project until Poland and the Czech Republic agreed to host the interceptor missiles and the early warning radar and the systems had been tested.

Strategic Forces Subcommittee Chairwoman Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., said none of those conditions had been met but the administration requested twice as much as provided this year.

Ranking member Terry Everett, R-Ala., protested the proposed cut, arguing that it would send the wrong signal to the allies and to Iran, whose ballistic missile program was the reason for the European defense site. Everett offered an amendment to restore $372 million to the so-called "Third Site" program. That was strongly supported by a long list of Republican members, but opposed by Tauscher and Skelton.

The amendment was defeated on a 34-24 vote with one member from each party switching sides.

An amendment by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., to restore $100 million to the multi-kill vehicle program, which is intended to counter decoys, was rejected on a similar 34-25 score. And an attempt by Everett to require a study on the potential advantages and cost of a space-based missile defense system was defeated 34-26.

The subcommittee also cut $719 million from the total request for national missile defense, while providing $10.2 billion, an increase of $212 million over the current year. It shifted another $185 million to four programs providing missile defense for deployed forces and allies. Those included the Navy's Aegis-based system, the Army's Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) and the U.S.-Israeli Arrow program.

The Personnel Subcommittee's proposal drew an array of amendments and provoked some angry complaint by GOP members when proposed amendments were ruled out of order because the increased expense was not off-set or because the subject was within the jurisdiction of another committee.

Rep. Thelma Drake, R-Va., protested Skelton's ruling that her amendment to end the so-called "widow's tax" that reduces surviving spouses benefits had to be approved by the House Budget Committee. She argued that the budget resolution the House approved authorized the increased spending.

But her amendment was tabled on a party-line 32-26 vote.

The committee honored a number of its retiring senior members, with an amendment to name the bill for ranking member Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., and sense of Congress amendments praising Saxton and Everett. All were approved by unanimous voice votes, although Hunter predicted that his honor would never pass the Senate.

]]>

House bill aimed at increasing diversity among senior executives advances

Andy Leonatti — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:00:00 -0400

Citing a decline in the diversity of senior government executives, the House Oversight and Government Reform Federal Workforce Subcommittee sent a bill to the full committee renewing efforts to increase the hiring of women and minorities.

The bill, sponsored by Oversight and Government Reform Federal Workforce Subcommittee Chairman Danny Davis, D-Ill., was adopted by unanimous voice vote. The bill would create the Senior Executive Service Resource Office within the Office of Personnel Management.

The Senior Executive Service is a pay grade within the federal government, encompassing executives that serve as a link between presidential appointees and the rest of the federal workforce.

Along with improving efficiency and professionalism in the SES, the new office will be charged with creating lists documenting the number of reserved positions at each agency, whether candidates are being pursued to fill vacancies, the race, ethnicity, gender and disabilities of people certified to join the SES, and conducting a recruiting program to attract women, minorities and persons with disabilities.

The bill also requires each agency to establish a SES evaluation panel, each having three members and having at least one woman and one minority.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-D.C., said it was possible for a minority or a female employee to wonder "if they're getting a fair shake" when sitting in front of the "panel that looks like the old work force - the 100 percent at the top, white male workforce," and added that there was "no harm with trying to correct the disparity here."

Davis said that the Government Accountability Office found that from fiscal 2000 to fiscal 2007, the SES experienced a decline in black men. Davis added that 90 percent of the current SES corps will retire within the next 10 years.

A Federal Workforce Subcommittee report issued Nov. 13, 2007, found that fiscal 2007 salaries for minorities in the SES was on average $6,000 less than non-minorities, and women in the SES made on average $10,000 less than SES men.

The report also found that the percentage of minorities in the legislative branch SES decreased by 1 percent from fiscal 2002 to fiscal 2007, and the percentage of women increased by 4 percent over the same five years.

A companion bill (S. 2148) has been introduced in the Senate by Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Oversight of Government Management Subcommittee Chairman Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii.

]]>

Federal paid parental leave bill heads to full House committee

Andy Leonatti — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 00:00:00 -0400

Over Republican objections that an economic slowdown was no time to increase benefits for federal employees, the House Oversight and Government Reform Federal Workforce Subcommittee moved a bill giving federal employees paid parental leave.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., was sent to the full committee on a 7-3 party line vote. House Oversight and Government Reform ranking member Tom Davis, R-Va., is the lone Republican co-sponsor.

The legislation would allow all federal employees eight weeks of paid leave with benefits for the birth or adoption of a child. The bill applies to both maternity and paternity leave.

An amendment from House Oversight and Government Reform Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., changed the amount of paid leave to four weeks and allowed employees to use accrued sick leave for an additional eight paid weeks. The amendment allows the Office of Personnel Management to assess whether the provisions are comparable to what is offered in the private sector. The amendment passed by voice vote with Republicans voting no.

Waxman said parental leave was "one area where the federal government has lagged behind" the private sector. Democrats promoted the bill as a family values measure that would allow parents more time to bond with new children.

Oversight and Government Reform Federal Workforce Subcommittee Chairman Danny Davis, D-Ill., said that 168 countries offer some sort of paid parental leave for mothers, while 66 offer paid leave for fathers.

Currently, the Family and Medical Leave Act allows federal employees unpaid parental leave.

Federal Workforce Subcommittee ranking member Kenny Marchant, R-Texas, called the bill "not essential, given the limited resources of the government," and added that since paid paternity leave is not prevalent in the private sector, the government is going beyond simply trying to keep pace.

"This is the worst time to in fact increase public sector benefits, when in fact the private sector is seeing an increasing recession," said Rep. Darrell Issa as many private sector employees start to have benefits reduced due to the economic downturn.

"We're permitting a statement that we're out of touch with the people who are enjoying a bad economy," Issa said, adding that Waxman's amendment "falls short" of coming in line with Republican concerns.

Waxman tried to ease Republican fears that the bill would create new spending. Waxman said the money for benefits would come from discretionary spending and would not require additional appropriations.

]]>

Panel doesn't expect letup in air traffic congestion

Andy Leonatti — Thu, 10 Apr 2008 00:00:00 -0400

As House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar, D-Minn., warned that "public patience is running short" with airlines, his panel's Aviation Subcommittee members Wednesday voiced pessimism about easing air traffic congestion.

A recent report from the Transportation Department's inspector general, Calvin Scovell, praised Transportation Secretary Mary Peters and President Bush for taking steps to ease congestion, such as capping the number of flights out of New York's Kennedy International Airport and Newark (N.J.) Liberty International Airport, but said the FAA needed to take more steps to ease congestion as the summer travel season ramps up.

The report suggested DOT negotiate a plan with the Defense Department for use of "special use airspace" to open up additional lanes; update capacity benchmarks for major airports, which has not been done since 2004; train large numbers of new controllers and address controller productivity, and improve taxi-way use.

The report singled out several airports for concern during the summer. Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Jerry Costello, D-Ill., wondered how Northwest Airlines expected to get 56 scheduled departures out on time in a 15-minute window from Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Airport.

DOT General Counsel D.J. Gribbin said the department had been penalizing airlines for chronically delayed flights, but Scovell said that the department's approach leaves "much to be desired," and told Costello he knew of no instance of DOT taking legal action against airlines that engage in "deceptive practices," such as scheduling chronically delayed flights, since 2001.

Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., attacked Gribbin for what he saw was the department's "proposing to propose" to take action, and accused officials of waiting to hand the problem off to a new administration. He said the idea of letting the free market play out was not working.

"Why do we fear regulation so much?" he said, suggesting forcing airlines to notify customers of chronically delayed flights at point of purchase and letting customers know of hidden fees, such as meals and additional luggage checking.

Transportation and Infrastructure ranking member John Mica blamed the Senate for not passing an FAA reauthorization bill, and chided the Senate for not voting to confirm Robert Sturgell as FAA administrator.

Mica said that anyone who thinks progress is coming "is smoking the funny weed."

]]>

House, Senate budget panels clear $3 trillion spending plans

Andy Leonatti and Terry Kivlan — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 00:00:00 -0500

Defeating Republican efforts to preserve President Bush's 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and impose a moratorium on earmarks, Democrats pushed a $3 trillion fiscal 2009 spending plan through the House Budget Committee shortly after midnight. On a straight party-line 22-16 vote, Democrats adopted the budget after defeating numerous Republican amendments aimed at stopping what they thought were inevitable tax increases as Bush's tax cuts expire in 2010.

Meanwhile, the Senate Budget Committee Thursday afternoon approved its budget resolution on 12-10 party-line vote, after adopting amendments dealing with transparent budgeting, reserve funds for pediatric dental care and health information technology, and caps on farm commodity payments.

The House budget resolution also contains reconciliation protection for a one-year fix of the alternative minimum tax to prevent it from affecting an increasing number of middle-class households. Republicans unsuccessfully offered amendments to set aside $330 billion to accommodate the proposed healthcare plan of presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y. Republicans joined Democrats in voting against it. Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-La., then offered an amendment allotting $195 billion for the proposed healthcare plan of Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., which also was defeated.

The House bill would boost domestic spending while rejecting President Bush's fiscal 2009 budget proposals to slash spending for Medicare and Medicaid by more than $150 billion and make deep cuts in an array of other programs, including education, alternative energy, the environment, economic development and infrastructure improvement and low-income heating assistance. The biggest spending increase would be a $50 billion expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program. The measure would also boost spending on veterans' health care by $3.6 billion and education by $3.8 billion. The bill authorizes the $573 billion in fiscal 2009 defense funds sought by the president but would not earmark money for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. House Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt, D-S.C., noted that Bush had not requested specific allocations for the conflicts next year.

Reprising their stance in last year's budget debate, Republicans argued that the Democratic measure would trigger "the largest tax increase in American history" by failing to provide for the extension of the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts when they lapse next year. Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif., charged that the increased domestic spending in the bill would be financed with $683 billion a year in savings "assumed" from the expiration of the tax cuts. The committee defeated Republican attempts to target specific taxes that they argued would return to pre-2001 levels if allowed to expire. Democrats also voted down an amendment from Rep. Pat Tiberi, R-Ohio, that would have preserved the elimination of the "marriage tax," an amendment by Rep. Mike Conaway, R-Texas, that would have set aside $180.5 billion for estate tax relief and an effort by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., to prevent the child tax credit from being reduced from $1,000 to $500.

]]>