House panel approves layoffs in legislative branch

No one seemed to like it, but appropriators nevertheless passed out of subcommittee Wednesday a bill that would cut legislative branch spending by nearly 4 percent below last year, resulting in layoffs and personnel cuts across the board.

The bill was approved on a 6-3 party-line vote.

Democrats and Republicans alike expressed severe misgivings about the "misbegotten creature," as Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., called the bill, as he complained about the allocation granted to the subcommittee by the full appropriations panel where Obey is the ranking Democrat. Even Defense Subcommittee Chairman Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., said he would have liked to see the subcommittee receive about $300 million more than it was granted.

Instead, the $1.817 billion package is about $95 million below last year's level, with no agency under its jurisdiction-including the Capitol Police Force, the Congressional Budget Office, the General Accounting Office or the Government Printing Office-safe from the budget-cutter's axe.

Democrats released information that said the bill's funding level would result in layoffs of 193 Capitol Police employees, some 700 staffers at the GAO, another 114 at the Congressional Research Service and 156 custodial and janitorial workers that maintain watch over the Capitol grounds.

"We can take pride in how much we reduce [government spending,] but sometimes we reduce so much we lose effectiveness," said the subcommittee's senior Democrat, Ed Pastor, of Arizona.

As far as House employees, Obey complained that many staffers were already substantially underpaid compared to their Senate counterparts-a situation that would only be exacerbated by the funding levels in the bill.

"We do the same work as they do and have far less legislative resources to do it," said Obey, who also grumbled that the House would soon be run by the "kiddy corps," as many senior House staffers would leave to pursue more profitable jobs in the private sector.

Aside from Lewis, Republican Zach Wamp, of Tennessee, also criticized the bill, saying it left a "sick feeling in his stomach" and he hoped the allocation would change as the bill moves forward.

But to do that, the Republican leadership would have to change its mind about the direction of this year's appropriations cycle. Though careful not to criticize their fellow appropriators, Democrats took turns blasting the leadership for their actions so far this year, especially moving forward with a budget resolution that Democrats said cared more about tax breaks than about providing adequate spending for the government's many programs.

"Don't delude yourself. This is the result of the budget," said Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., who noted that the reductions would prevent the enactment of a new security enhancement and fire safety prevention system for the Capitol. Full Committee Chairman Bill Young, R-Fla., tried to put a positive spin on what has become a yearly predicament of appropriators-trying to meet the demands of House conservatives for less spending while enacting legislation that the Democratic-controlled White House deems acceptable.

Young said that out of the 13 spending bills, only two-military construction and defense-would likely be acceptable to both sides of the aisle and the administration. The rest, he said, would face a fate similar to the leg branch bill, with some people happy and others not. "That's the reality of life. No one said this job was going to be easy," Young said.

Obey complained that the bills are unrealistic and merely "placeholders" until the appropriations process breaks down later this year and GOP leaders are forced to compromise with the White House to see bills enacted. "It may make the trains run on time [to push forward with unrealistic bills], but it doesn't matter if there's nothing in them," he said.

In a related matter, while House staffers might be facing a cut, Hoyer told reporters after the markup that he is negotiating with House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, R-Texas, to allow a cost-of-living pay adjustment for members of Congress. Hoyer said DeLay wanted to pursue a COLA even though conservatives have traditionally objected to increasing lawmakers' salaries and members just received a COLA last year.

But Hoyer noted that given the cuts in the legislative branch spending bill, a CoLA for members was not likely to happen unless more money was freed up for House staffers. Under law, a COLA for members of Congress is automatic each year unless legislation is enacted to prevent it. Typically, that has happened as an amendment to the Treasury-postal spending bill.

Specific funding levels in the bill include:

• House staff: $749.2 million, a decrease of 1.2 percent below last year.
• Capitol Police: $76.7 million, a decrease of 11.6 percent.
• Congressional Budget Office: $25.1 million, a decrease of 3.8 percent.
• Architect of the Capitol: $133.1 million, a decrease of 17.7 percent.
• Library of Congress: $390.1 million, a decrease of 1.1 percent.
• Government Printing Office: $77.1 million, a decrease of $25.3 percent.
• General Accounting Office: $351.5 million, a decrease of 7.2 percent.