This account is pending registration confirmation. Please click on the link within the confirmation email previously sent you to complete registration. Need a new registration confirmation email? Click here
Rep. McKeon, Sen. Inhofe proposed legislation would fatten defense contractor cronies while slashing federal jobsWASHINGTON,
Feb. 6, 2013 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- There they go again. The usual suspects are scheming to spare their big defense contractor friends from the impact of sequestration by arbitrarily slashing federal employee jobs.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman
Buck McKeon and Senate Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Jim Inhofe, along with other like-minded lawmakers, have announced their intention to re-launch legislation left over from the previous Congress that would offset the initial impact of sequestration on the Department of Defense by arbitrarily cutting the federal workforce.
Last year's Senate bill (S. 2065) would have reduced the federal workforce by 5% and extended a pay freeze for federal employees for an additional year, while the previous House bill (H.R. 3662) would have slashed the federal workforce by 10%.
Federal employees have already contributed
$103 billion toward deficit reduction, including lost and delayed compensation. And this does not even include growing job losses inflicted by severe budgetary austerity. Yet McKeon, Inhofe and their ilk continue to treat federal employees and their families like an ATM. And despite clear evidence that austerity is crippling the economy, they continue to target useful jobs for working and middle class Americans.
No workload analysis was conducted to determine why the number of federal civil servants should be reduced by the amount required under this proposed legislation. Similarly, no tough decisions are made to identify services that agencies should downsize or eliminate after significant numbers of civil servants have been reduced. As history shows, in order to continue to fulfill their statutory mandates to perform services, agencies will simply contract out to get the work done, even when it costs more or the work is too important or sensitive to privatize.