Cutting the Federal Work Force

The House endorsed a Senate amendment to cut 252,000 federal jobs over the next six fiscal years as part of a bill providing emergency unemployment benefits (HR 3167). The amendment would enact work force reduction goals set by Vice President Al Gore’s National Performance Review of federal operations.

Sponsor Bill Archer (R-Tex.) said the amendment is “a chance to save the taxpayers of this country $21 billion over five years and more than that over six.”

Opponent James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.) said it would “cut a quarter of a million federal employees without (anyone) having any idea of what impact that is going to have on the very federal programs that we have created.”

The vote was 275 for and 146 against. A yes vote was to begin a six-year, 252,000-slot cutback in the federal work force.

How They Voted Rep. Beilenson (D): No vote Rep. Berman (D): No vote Rep. McKeon (R): Yea Rep. Moorhead (R): Yea Rep. Waxman (D): Nay

Follow-Up Vote to Cut Federal Workers

The House voted 226 for and 202 against to require that a pending bill providing jobless benefits (HR 3167) also begin a 252,000-job cut in the federal payroll over six years. It was the House’s second vote in five days to enact work force reduction goals set by the Administration. After the first vote, above, House conferees on HR 3167 disregarded the non-binding instructions from their colleagues. The second vote was expected to have more staying power.

The Senate also has voted to begin the Civil Service cuts proposed by Vice President Gore’s National Performance Review of federal operations.

A yes vote was to begin cutting 252,000 federal jobs.

How They Voted Rep. Beilenson (D): Nay Rep. Berman (D): Nay Rep. McKeon (R): Yea Rep. Moorhead (R): Yea Rep. Waxman (D): Nay

Merchant Marine Subsidies

The House passed a bill (HR 2151) that would continue federal operating subsidies of merchant marine vessels under the American flag. The bill also establishes a program to subsidize the production of merchant vessels at American shipyards. The Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill’s cost at up to $2.4 billion between 1995 and 2010. The bill leaves the issue of how the money will be raised to later legislation.

Supporter Vic Fazio (D-West Sacramento) called it “essential to our economic stability and national security that our merchant marine fleet is strengthened.”

Opponent Timothy J. Penny (D-Minn.) said: “Congress must insist upon a top-to-bottom audit and analysis of our maritime subsidies.”

The vote was 347 for and 65 against. A yes vote was to pass the bill.

How They Voted Rep. Beilenson (D): No vote Rep. Berman (D): No vote Rep. McKeon (R): No vote Rep. Moorhead (R): Nay Rep. Waxman (D): Yea

Limit on Merchant Ship Subsidies

In a vote related to HR 2151 (above), the House rejected an amendment that sought to put a cap on merchant marine operating subsidies. Under the amendment, U.S.-flag vessels could have charged no more than twice the world market freight rate. The subsidies are part of “cargo preference” policies that assign U. S. farm exports to American-flag ships. Their rationale is that the U. S. merchant fleet must be kept fit for possible use in wartime.

Sponsor Fred Grandy (R-Iowa) said: “This is not about national security. This is about cost-containment for federal programs that have grown too big too fast.”

Opponent Tom Lantos (D-Burlingame) said the amendment would “guarantee the destruction of our merchant marine,” which must compete against low-wage, less-regulated Third World fleets.

The vote was 109 for and 309 against. A yes vote supported the amendment.

How They Voted Rep. Beilenson (D): No vote Rep. Berman (D): No vote Rep. McKeon (R): No vote Rep. Moorhead (R): Nay Rep. Waxman (D): Nay Source: Roll Call Report Syndicate