Government Executive - Authors - Kelly Martin

In Focus: Who Faces Furloughs?

Kellie Lunney, Eric Katz, and Kelly Martin — Tue, 01 Oct 2013 13:21:11 -0400

During a government shutdown, federal agencies decide which employees to furlough and which to keep on the job. Excepted employees include workers “who are performing emergency work involving the safety of human life or the protection of property or performing certain other types of excepted work,” according to furlough guidance from the Office of Personnel Management. In other words, they aren’t furloughed. Employees who are not funded through annual appropriations are exempt from unpaid leave if the government shuts down.

How many employees an agency furloughs during a government shutdown varies, and tends to depend on mission. At some departments, including Veterans Affairs, most of the workforce stays on the job. At the Education Department, however, the opposite is true: Most employees are furloughed.

The National Science Foundation, for example, will furlough 99 percent of its 2,000 employees. The Office of Government Ethics (not shown below) will retain just one worker throughout the shutdown. The Housing and Urban Development Department is worst off among Cabinet-level agencies, sending home 96 percent of its workforce.

Overall, about 43 percent of the federal workforce will face furloughs during the shutdown. Aside from the three largest agencies -- the Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs departments, which excepted or exempted a large number of employees -- a majority of feds will be furloughed. At all other agencies, about 61 percent of employees will be forced to take unpaid leave.

All told, roughly 900,000 civilian employees will go on unpaid leave. Here’s a snapshot of a few agencies. The list of agencies and corresponding data are not comprehensive.

*Total furloughed does not include the State Department. State spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Tuesday that for now the agency is furloughing a "small, minimal" number of its employees.

( Image via 06photo / Shutterstock.com )

]]>

In Focus: How Many Employees Face Furloughs?

Kellie Lunney and Kelly Martin — Fri, 27 Sep 2013 15:43:48 -0400

Federal agencies decide which employees to furlough and which to keep on the job during a government shutdown. Excepted employees include workers “who are performing emergency work involving the safety of human life or the protection of property or performing certain other types of excepted work,” according to furlough guidance from the Office of Personnel Management. In other words, they aren’t furloughed. Employees who are not funded through annual appropriations are “exempt” from unpaid leave if the government shuts down.

How many employees an agency furloughs during a government shutdown varies, and tends to depend on mission. In some departments, like Veterans Affairs, most of the workforce stays on the job. At the Housing and Urban Development Department, however, the opposite is true: most employees are furloughed.

If the government closes on Tuesday because of a lapse in appropriations, roughly 800,000 civilian employees will go on unpaid leave. Here’s a snapshot of a few agencies and their workforce data from 2011, the last time agencies had to prepare contingency plans for a possible shutdown. The list of agencies and corresponding data are not comprehensive.

]]>

Timeline: Federal Employees Under Attack

Chanin Knight and Kelly Martin — Thu, 19 Sep 2013 17:16:42 -0400

Monday’s shooting at the Washington Navy Yard serves as a sad reminder that federal employees -- even civilians in seemingly secure facilities -- are too often targets of unexpected violence.

The latest tragedy, which was the “single worst loss of life in the District since an airliner plunged into the Potomac River in 1982, killing 78,” according to a report in The Washington Post , killed 12 civilian and contractor employees, in addition to gunman Aaron Alexis, himself a subcontractor for Hewlett-Packard working on a project to upgrade the Navy Marine Corps Intranet. As investigators attempt to piece together Alexis’ motive and how the troubled former Navy reservist gained a security clearance and access to the facility, we look back at some of the other attacks that have claimed the lives of government workers over the past two decades.

]]>

Retiring Military Dogs Helped Locate Explosives, Deter Terrorist Attacks

Chanin Knight, Eric Katz, Kelly Martin, and Kedar Pavgi — Fri, 05 Jul 2013 10:11:18 -0400

Four retiring military dogs were recently honored for their distinguished careers overseas.

At a late-June event at Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma City, Okla., the dogs’ handlers ceremoniously “passed the leash” to the canines’ new retirement caretakers, according to Stars and Stripes . The dogs primarily served to track and locate explosives, drugs and terrorists.

“Simply put, these dogs save lives, many lives,” Col. Julie Boit said at the ceremony.

In addition to serving the Air Force, the “four-legged airmen” also supported components of the Army and Marine Corps.

The ceremony’s honorees were:

· Arras: A six-year-old German shepherd that served in the military for four years. The dog located explosives and deterred terrorist attacks against Manas Air Base in Kyrgyzstan and Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar. Arras supported the president and vice president.

· Blacky: A nine-year old German shepherd that served in the military for seven years. Blacky served in Iraq, helping to locate weapon caches and to prevent improvised explosive devices from detonating.

· Cita: A six-year-old Belgian Tervuren that served in the military for five years, including in Afghanistan helping to locate 30,000 pounds of hashish.

· Sheila: A six-year-old Belgian Malinois that served in the military for four years, including in Kyrgyzstan helping to locate explosives and deterring terrorist attacks.

Below, enjoy a slideshow of military dogs on duty in Iraq and Afghanistan:

]]>

In Focus: Funding Defense

Susan Fourney and Kelly Martin — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 16:59:31 -0400

The national defense base budget has outweighed non-defense spending for much of the past three decades, according to data compiled by the Congressional Research Service. In constant dollars, defense base budget authority in 1977 was lower than non-defense -- $340.6 billion versus $421.1 billion. In 2012, national defense spending was higher than non-defense -- $554.3 billion versus $489 billion.

The national defense budget includes military operations and defense-related activities at other federal agencies, including the Energy Department. The base budget does not include supplemental spending for wars and emergency operations.

Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter and Pentagon leaders warned lawmakers in February that sequestration cuts would result in a “drastic shortfall in the funding we need to do training, which inhibits our capacity to fight.” But it appears consensus is building around scaling back military spending. Factoring in war costs, the Pentagon’s budget is 12 times that of the civilian agencies, former Office of Management and Budget defense analyst Gordon Adams said at a March forum hosted by the Center for International Policy.

Here's a look at how defense and non-defense dollars have ebbed and flowed from the Carter administration to President Obama's. Amounts are adjusted for inflation in fiscal 2012 constant dollars and exclude spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

]]>

Budget Winners and Losers

Susan Fourney and Kelly Martin — Wed, 10 Apr 2013 15:50:24 -0400

While federal deficit reduction and sequestration have dominated the national conversation during the past year, not all agencies would see spending cuts under President Obama’s fiscal 2014 budget proposal .

Eight departments and major agencies would see increases in discretionary funding under the president’s plan. The State and Commerce departments would see the biggest hikes over actual spending levels in fiscal 2012. State would receive a 15.6 percent increase, from $41.6 billion to $48.1 billion, while spending at Commerce would rise 11.7 percent, from $7.7 billion to $8.6 billion.

Still, Obama said Wednesday that his plan includes difficult cuts to grow the economy and ensure the nation lives within its means.

“This budget continues my commitment to reforming and streamlining our government for the 21st century,” the president’s budget message states. “It builds on my Campaign to Cut Waste by further targeting and eliminating wasteful spending wherever we find it. It reorganizes and consolidates agencies and programs to make them leaner and more efficient. It increases the use of evidence and evaluation to ensure we are making smart investments with our scarce taxpayer dollars. And it harnesses new technologies to allow us to do more with less.”

For the second consecutive year, the Justice Department is in line for the biggest request reduction by far -- 39.4 percent -- from $26.9 billion to $16.3 billion. Justice officials note, however, that excluding changes in mandatory programs, the department's spending power would increase by 3.1 percent over its fiscal 2012 enacted budget. The next largest cut would be absorbed by the Small Business Administration. After a budget increase last year, SBA spending would be reduced by 11.1 percent, from $900 million to $800 million.

Here's a look at how the major agencies would fare under Obama’s proposal.

Correction: The original version of this article misstated figures for the Small Business Administration and the percent change for the Interior Department. This story also has been updated to include comment from the Justice Department.

]]>

In Focus: Where the Federal Workforce Counts

Susan Fourney and Kelly Martin — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 14:34:41 -0400

As agencies scramble to determine which employees might be subject to furlough and for how long, states are bracing for the economic fallout from sequestration. Government’s budget crunch sometimes is viewed as solely a Washington problem, but its impact also will be felt disproportionately in other parts of the country where the federal workforce is omnipresent.

Among a federal civilian workforce of than 2 million, Washington, D.C., ranks No. 4 with about 165,000 employees, trailing California (242,000), Texas (187,000) and Virginia (171,000), according to data compiled by Janet Kopenhaver, the Washington representative for Federally Employed Women . States with the fewest feds include Delaware (5,300), Vermont (6,500) and New Hampshire (8,000).

Drawing on data from the Office of Personnel Management and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, FEW breaks down the population of federal civilians (where they work) and retirees (where they live) by congressional district and provides the information to lawmakers each year. “These statistics are very important to legislators and their staffs on Capitol Hill so that they will know how many federal workers and retirees are employed and live in their state and district,” Kopenhaver said in a news release. “So the next time lawmakers say that federal workers are overpaid, wasteful and not productive, and that furloughs and/or layoffs should be implemented, let them remember that they are referring to their own constituents and their livelihoods.”

At a 2012 news conference releasing projections that sequestration would cost the nation’s economy 2.14 million jobs , two big city mayors sounded the alarm. Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton said the cuts “would likely put Arizona in a recession.”

Especially in states with a significant military presence, furloughs and spending cuts loom large. In March, Deputy Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter sent letters to the governors of Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia and Washington, warning that spending cuts at military installations could have a ripple effect on local economies.

]]>

Timeline: The March Into Combat

Susan Fourney and Kelly Martin — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:05:29 -0500

As Pentagon leaders figure out how to integrate female service members into direct ground combat units, they have more than 200 years of precedent to fall back on. Women have been on the battlefield since the American Revolution, albeit surreptitiously at times. Before World War II, most of them were nurses or cooks or laundry maids. Others went undercover, disguising themselves as men to serve on the front lines.

Indirect combat and support roles have been open to female service members for decades. In 1974, for example, Barbara Allen Rainey became the U.S. military’s first female pilot. By 2009, 92 percent of specialties were open to service women, according to a Defense Department report for the White House Council on Women and Girls. Women comprise 14 percent of active-duty military members, and more than 280,000 have deployed to Southwest Asia since 2001, according to the Defense figures. About 150 have been killed, and more than 800 have been wounded.

The decision to reverse the 1994 Defense policy excluding female service members from direct ground combat units is not without controversy. Some critics say women lack the physical and psychological strength to fight on the front lines, and others believe integrating the genders could exacerbate the military’s troubling record of sexual harassment and assaults. But challengers of the ban say the real danger is precluding women from receiving the same combat training as their male counterparts.

Already more than 90 percent of military jobs are open to women. The Pentagon plans to open new positions in stages after the services review their current structure to determine how and when to integrate combat units. Here’s a look at how military roles for women have evolved through the years.

Caitlin Fairchild and Jodie Morris contributed to this report.

]]>

Obama v. Romney on federal pay, the size of government and management

Chanin Knight, Kelly Martin, and Kedar Pavgi — Tue, 11 Sep 2012 16:36:00 -0400

Debate over the nature and scope of the federal government has taken on unusual prominence during the 2012 presidential elections. On the campaign trail, President Barack Obama and Republican nominee Mitt Romney have offered remarkably different visions of how they will manage a federal government facing tough budget decisions and other significant policy matters in the coming years.

We’ve put together a graphic that we hope will guide you on how each candidate wants to shape federal spending, personnel, defense, and pay and benefits. The information was gathered from published policy positions, speeches, media statements and -- in Obama’s case -- his first term record. We will update the graphic as more information becomes available.

Editor's note: Please click on the Romney tab to view his positions and the Obama tab to view his stances.

Eric Katz contributed to this report.

]]>