Image: Robert Szymanski/Shutterstock.com
By: FEDweek StaffSeveral key bills for federal personnel policies that have begun advancing in Congress so far make no mention of the Trump administration’s proposals to require most federal employees to pay more toward their retirement benefits, while reducing the value of those benefits.
Federal unions had been watching for a bid to attach such provisions to the annual DoD authorization bill—which is considered a “must-pass”—but no such effort was made as the House amended and ultimately passed the bill. An attempt could yet be made on the Senate side but the House was considered potentially more receptive to such a move. In any case, sponsors of the DoD bill typically oppose what they consider extraneous provisions to a bill that they design to attract strong bipartisan support.
Also starting to advance is the annual general government spending bill, but benefits changes typically aren’t enacted through the appropriations process without having been cleared by policy-making committees first. None of those committees has held hearings directly on those proposals, although they did arise at a recent House hearing—where only Democrats raised them, only to denounce them.
The natural starting point for such proposals to advance would be in a budget outline called a resolution, which typically orders policy-making committees to find savings in areas under their control and makes suggestions. That occurred last year when a House budget plan recommended many provisions similar to what the Trump administration has proposed, although the process ultimately stalled there.
This year, the House Budget Committee has indicated an intent produce such an outline but it is already growing late in the budget cycle and the prospects for further advancement are no stronger than last year’s. The Senate is not expected to even take up a counterpart—instead using a two-year budget agreement reached in March as its basis for spending bills—which would leave any House measure stalled.
