2013: Schweikert Effectively Voted To Prevent Air-Traffic Controller Furloughs Resulting From The 2011 Debt Limit Deal's Automatic Budget Cuts. In April 2013, Schweikert voted to end the air-traffic controller furloughs that occurred as a result of automatic budget cuts. According to Los Angeles Times the bill, "allow[ed] the Federal Aviation Administration to transfer $253 million from other accounts to keep the air-traffic controllers on the job. [. . .] Senate officials said the funding would also prevent the closure of 149 contract control towers, mostly in rural areas, that had been scheduled for later this year." The vote was on a motion to suspend the rules and pass. The House passed the motion by a vote of 361 to 41, and the bill passed the House on a subsequent vote. The Senate passed the House's version of the bill by unanimous consent and it was signed into law by the president. [House Vote 125, 4/26/13; Los Angeles Times, 4/26/13; Public Law 113-9, 5/1/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1765]
Air Traffic Controller Furloughs Delayed More Than 40,000 Flights And Canceled 1,900 Flights During The Last Week Of April, 2013. According to CNN, "A budget-related furlough of air traffic controllers is over -- and with it, the resulting travel delays. Last week's toll? More than 40,000 flights delayed and 1,900 others canceled in the United States, according to FlightStats.com. The flight tracking site does not separate furlough-related delays from delays caused by weather or other factors. More than 7,000 flight delays were linked directly to the furloughs last week, according to Federal Aviation Administration figures. Hard hit were U.S. airports with large numbers of international travelers." [CNN, 5/2/13]
Democrats And Republicans Blamed Each Other For Implementation Of Automatic Budget Cuts That Caused Air Controller Furloughs And Nationwide Flight Delays. According to the Los Angeles Times, "Seeking to end flight delays that jammed airports nationwide, the House approved legislation Friday that will stop the furlough of air-traffic controllers, sending the bill to President Obama. Final passage of the quickly arranged stopgap measure came as lawmakers were boarding their own flights out of Washington for a weeklong recess. The House overwhelmingly approved the bill, [...] but not without a round of political finger-pointing over who is to blame for the across-the-board sequester cuts that furloughed air-traffic controllers and caused hours-long flight delays this week, angering travelers across the country." [Los Angeles Times, 4/26/13]
Automatic Budget Cuts Were Included In 2011 Debt Limit Deal To Ensure That Significant Deficit Reduction Would Still Occur If Bipartisan Committee Failed To Agree On A Deficit Reduction Package, And To Motivate Parties To Reach Agreement. According to a Kevin Drum blog post at Mother Jones, "After months of negotiations over a "grand bargain" finally broke down in July, Republicans proposed a plan that would (a) make some cuts immediately and (b) create a bipartisan committee to propose further cuts down the road. But they wanted some kind of automatic trigger in case the committee couldn't agree on those further cuts, so the White House hauled out sequestration from the dustbin of history as an enforcement mechanism. It would go into effect automatically if no deal was reached. In the end, no immediate cuts were made, but a 'supercommittee' was set up to propose $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction later in the year. To make sure everyone was motivated to make a deal, the sequester was designed to be brutal: a set of immediate, across-the-board cuts to both defense spending and domestic spending, starting on January 1, 2013. The idea was that everyone would hate this so much they'd be sure to agree on a substitute. Needless to say, no such agreement was reached. So now we're stuck with the automatic sequestration cuts." [Drum blog post, Mother Jones, 3/1/13]
Top Senate Republican Aide Said Funds Used To Prevent Furloughs Would Likely Come From Airport Improvement Programs. According to Huffington Post, "Senate Republican aides were quick to note that the resolution would not change the $637 million reduction in the FAA budget mandated by sequestration. Instead, it would allow for the cuts to come from programs other than the operations account, 70 percent of which is devoted to salaries. One top aide said airport improvement program funds would likely be used to stop the furloughs. The bill only says that the money will come from 'grants-in-aid for airports.'" [Huffington Post, 4/25/13]
Bill's Supporters Argued Delays Caused By Furloughs Were A Significant Problem For Air Travelers And Threatened The Economy. According to Reuters, "'I'm delighted that the Senate has just passed a bipartisan bill to resolve a serious problem confronting the American traveling public and our economy,' said Republican Senator Susan Collins of Maine, one of a handful of senators who wrote the legislation. [. . .] Lawmakers are eager to fix the air travel problem before they head out of town for next week's congressional recess. They are concerned about deepening public resentment over the delays caused by the furloughs of controllers." [Reuters, 4/26/13]
Travel Groups Had Warned That Continued Furloughs Could Hurt The Economy. According to The Guardian, "Some travel groups have warned that the disruptions could hurt the economy. 'If these disruptions unfold as predicted, business travelers will stay home, severely impacting not only the travel industry but the economy overall,' the Global Business Travel Association warned the head of the FAA, Michael P Huerta, in a letter Friday." [The Guardian, 4/23/13]
Airlines, Some Members Of Congress Argued Obama Administration Had Purposely Chosen To Furlough Traffic Controllers In Order To Generate Pressure On Congress To Remove Automatic Budget Cuts. According to The Guardian, "The country's airlines and some lawmakers have suggested the White House is causing misery for fliers to put pressure on Republicans in Congress to rescind the cuts. In a letter to the FAA Friday, Delta general counsel Ben Hirst asked the agency to reconsider the furloughs, saying it could make the cuts elsewhere and transfer funds from 'non-safety activities' to support the FAA's "core mission of efficiently managing the nation's airspace.'" [The Guardian, 4/23/13]
Bill's Progressive Opponents Argued That Congress Should Pass A Full Repeal Of Automatic Budget Cuts Rather Than "A Piecemeal Approach" That Relieves Program Cuts Only When They Affect The Wealthy And Large Corporations. According to Congressional Quarterly, "House Democrats say they will stick with a strategy of pressing for a full repeal of the sequester and won't seek for domestic social programs the kind of special law that eased the impact of spending cuts on air traffic controllers. 'Communities and vital programs across the nation are being impacted by sequester,' Barbara Lee of California said in an email. 'We need a comprehensive solution, not a piecemeal approach.' One of 29 Democrats to reject the bill (HR 1765) allowing the Federal Aviation Administration to shift funds, Lee is among Democrats who attribute the swift action to end the furloughs of air traffic controllers to the influence of corporations on Congress. They say that replacing the sequester completely is the best way to protect programs that don't have the lobbying clout wielded by airlines and wealthier Americans." [Congressional Quarterly, 5/1/13]
Bill's Conservative Opponents Argued That Bill Was Simply A Political Ploy To Resolve Presidentially Created Inconvenience, While Ignoring Other Future Problems Caused By The Furloughs. According to a press release, Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) said, "I find it very unfortunate that millions of American families are experiencing flight delays and travel difficulties due to furloughs imposed by the President's sequester. However, this bill does nothing to address the future catastrophic furloughs my constituents are facing at the Savannah River Site. Today's legislation is a simple political ploy to try and divert the negative attention the Administration has faced this week by angry travelers. The Administration has refused multiple times to respond to the reprogramming request I have submitted on behalf of the people I am grateful to represent. As a result, I did not buy into their political games by supporting a measure that reprograms funds for an inconvenience the President has created." [Press Release, Rep. Joe Wilson, 4/26/13]
2019: Schweikert Voted To Retroactively Pay Federal Employees Who Were Not Paid During The Government Shutdown. In January 2019, Schweikert voted for giving backpay to federal employees who lost pay during the government shutdown. According to Congressional Quarterly, "the bill that would require the federal government to provide retroactive pay to employees who are furloughed or working without compensation during the partial government shutdown. The bill would require federal employees to be compensated at the earliest possible date once the shutdown has concluded, regardless of regularly scheduled pay dates." The vote was on a motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill. The House agreed to the motion, thereby passing the bill, by a vote of 411 to 7. The Senate had already passed the bill, thereby the House vote sent the bill to the president, who signed it into law. [House Vote 28, 1/11/19; Congressional Quarterly, 1/11/19; Congressional Actions, S. 24]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Bar The Hiring Or Continued Federal Employment Of Any Individual With Serious Delinquent Tax Debts. In April 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have "bar[red] the hiring or continued federal employment of anyone with seriously delinquent tax debt for which a lien has been filed in public records. It would [have] exempt[ed] debts being paid in a timely manner, those for which a due-process hearing has been requested or a levy issued, or those determined to be an economic hardship to the taxpayer. Employees and applicants would have 180 days to prove their tax debt status." The vote was on a motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, which required a two-thirds majority to approve. The House rejected the motion by a vote of 250 to 159. [House Vote 105, 4/15/13; Congressional Quarterly, 4/15/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 249]
Supporters Said Congress Had A Responsibility To Find Federal Employees Who Had Not Paid Their Taxes. According to a press release from Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), "'Tax delinquency continues to be a major problem. I will continue to pursue a remedy in a bipartisan way. If we are going to protect the overwhelming majority of good and decent federal workers we have a responsibility to root out the bad apples,' said Chaffetz." [Press Release -- Jason Chaffetz, 4/15/13]
Opponents Said Bill Was A Political Stunt And An Attack On Public Employees; And It Did Not Sufficiently Protect Those Wrongly Accused. According to the Congressional Record, Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN) said, "Failure to pay taxes is a serious offense and should be treated as such. Unfortunately, this bill is not a serious attempt to address that very complicated issue. Instead of being a good faith effort, this bill is being used as a political stunt and appears to be an attack on public employees. [. . .] I am also concerned that this bill does not make sufficient allowances for the dispute process to do its work. Americans have the right to appeal IRS collection actions. While exemptions are provided when a hearing has been scheduled under Collection Due Process, appeals to that ruling or under the Collection Appeals Program are not. Punishing anyone while they are still in the process of pursuing the normal IRS dispute process is wrong." [Congressional Record, 4/15/13]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Limit Federal Employee Bonuses To Five Percent During Sequestration. In August 2013, Schweikert voted for a bill that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "cap[ped] federal employee bonuses during budget sequestration to 5 percent of their base pay." The provision was part of a larger bill that allowed those under federal investigation to record conversations with investigators, including phone calls and in-person conversations. The vote was on the House's version of the Stop Government Abuse Act, which the House passed by a vote of 239 to 176. The Senate took no substantive action on the bill. [House Vote 436, 8/1/13; Congressional Quarterly, 8/1/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2879]
2016: Schweikert Voted Against Creating The Office Of Good Jobs Within The Defense Department. In June 2016, Schweikert voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "decrease[d] funding for defense-wide operations and maintenance by $1 million, and increase[d] funding by the same amount, with the aim of creating an Office of Good Jobs for the Defense Department." The underlying legislation was an FY 2017 defense appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 172 to 248. [House Vote 307, 6/16/16; Congressional Quarterly, 6/16/16; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1186; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5293]
2015: Schweikert Voted Against The FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Assumes A 10 Percent Reduction In The Federal Workforce. In March 2015, Schweikert voted against the FY 2016 budget resolution which called for a 10 percent reduction in the federal workforce. According to Congressional Quarterly, "the budget assumes [...] a 10% reduction in the federal workforce at certain agencies through attrition, with the administration being permitted to hire one employee for every three who leave government service (with exceptions for national security positions)." The vote was on the budget resolution. The House passed the resolution 228 to 199. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 142, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2015: Schweikert Voted Against A FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Assumes A 10 Percent Reduction In The Federal Workforce. In March 2015, Schweikert voted against a FY 2016 Budget Resolution which called for a 10 percent reduction in the federal workforce. According to Congressional Quarterly, "the budget assumes [...] a 10% reduction in the federal workforce at certain agencies through attrition, with the administration being permitted to hire one employee for every three who leave government service (with exceptions for national security positions)." The vote was on the adopting the substitute amendment. The House passed the amendment 219 to 208 and later passed the budget resolution. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 141, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 86; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2015: Schweikert Voted For A FY 2016 Budget Resolution Which Assumes A 10 Percent Reduction In The Federal Workforce. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for a FY 2016 Budget Resolution which called for a 10 percent reduction in the federal workforce. According to Congressional Quarterly, "the budget assumes [...] a 10% reduction in the federal workforce at certain agencies through attrition, with the administration being permitted to hire one employee for every three who leave government service (with exceptions for national security positions)." The vote was on the adopting the substitute amendment. The House rejected the amendment 105 to 319. The House later adopted a substitute amendment identical to this except for a change in defense spending and then later passed the budget resolution. The budget resolution died in the Senate, but a similar concurrent resolution did pass both Houses. [House Vote 140, 3/25/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/23/15; Congressional Quarterly, 3/30/15; Congressional Actions, S. Con. Res. 11; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 85; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2013: Schweikert Voted For Eliminating 10 Percent Of The Federal Workforce In Three Years By Attrition As Part Of The FY 2014 Ryan Budget. In March 2013, Schweikert voted for eliminating 10 percent of the federal workforce in three years by attrition, as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to the House Budget Committee, the budget would "reduce the public sector bureaucracy, not through layoffs, but via a gradual, sensible attrition policy. By 2015, this reform would result in a 10 percent reduction in the federal workforce." The resolution passed the House by a vote of 221 to 207, but died in the Senate. [House Vote 88, 3/21/13; House Budget Committee, 3/12/13; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 25]
2019: Schweikert Voted Against A Full Year Omnibus Appropriations Bill With No Funding For Trump's Wall; Legislation Provided Backpay For Federal Workers And Provided A 1.9 Percent Pay Raise For Federal Workers. In January 2019, Schweikert voted against a resolution that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] full-year continuing appropriations covering six of the seven fiscal 2019 appropriations bills that have not been enacted into law, including those that relate to Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-Science, Financial Services, Interior-Environment, State-Foreign Operations, and Transportation-HUD provisions. The bill include[d] provisions for a 1.9 percent pay increase for federal civilian employees and would extend the National Flood Insurance Program through fiscal 2019. It would also [have] provide[d] for retroactive pay for federal workers furloughed during the partial shutdown." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 241 to 190. [House Vote 11, 1/3/19; Congressional Quarterly, 1/3/19; Congressional Actions, H.R. 21]
2015: Schweikert Voted To Reduce The Annual Raise For Federal Employees As Part Of The FY 2016 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for reducing the annual across the board raises for federal workers. According to the Republican Study Committee, "Beginning in FY 2016, the annual across-the-board increase for federal workers should be reduced by half a percentage point below the expected automatic increases." The underlying budget resolution would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for $2.804 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. The substitute would call for reducing spending by $7.1 trillion over 10 years compared to the Congressional Budget Office baseline." The vote was on the substitute amendment to a Budget Resolution. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 132 to 294. [House Vote 138, 3/25/15; Republican Study Committee, FY 2016 Budget; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/15; Congress.gov, H. Amdt. 83; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2013: Schweikert Was Absent During A Vote On Paying Retroactively, Furloughed Federal Workers Due To The 2013 Government Shutdown. In October 2013, Schweikert missed a vote on legislation that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "appropriate[d] such sums as necessary to pay for salaries of federal employees working during the government shutdown until Dec. 15, 2013. It also would require the director of the Office of Management and Budget to report to the House Appropriations Committee, by Dec. 20, 2013, on how the executive branch spent the funding." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 420 to 0. The bill died in the Senate. [House Vote 535, 10/8/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/8/13; Congressional Actions, H.J. Res. 89]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Pay Retroactively, Furloughed Federal Workers Due To The 2013 Government Shutdown. In October 2013, Schweikert voted for legislation that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for retroactive pay for federal workers furloughed during the government shutdown that began on Oct. 1, 2013. Once the shutdown ends, and as soon as practicable, those furloughed workers would be compensated at their standard rate of pay for the period of time that the shutdown was in effect." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 407 to 0. The bill died in the Senate. [House Vote 525, 10/5/13; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 3223]
2017: Schweikert Voted To Reinstate The 'Holman Rule,' Which Allows Congress To Reduce The Pay Of Individual Federal Employees. In January 2017, Schweikert voted for the 2017 House rules which in part reinstating the 'Holman Rule.' According to the Washington Post, "House Republicans this week reinstated an arcane procedural rule that enables lawmakers to reach deep into the budget and slash the pay of an individual federal worker - down to a $1 - a move that threatens to upend the 130-year-old civil service. The Holman rule, named after a Indiana congressman who devised it in 1876, empowers any member of Congress to offer an amendment to an appropriations bill that targets a specific government employee or program. A majority of the House and the Senate would still have to approve any such amendment but opponents and supporters agree it puts agencies and the public on notice that their work is now vulnerable to the whims of elected officials. [...] The Holman provision was approved Tuesday as part of a larger rules package but received little attention amid the chaos of Republicans' failed effort to decimate the House ethics office on the first day of the new Congress." The vote was on the resolution. The House passed the resolution by a vote of 234 to 193. [House Vote 6, 1/3/17; Washington Post, 1/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Res. 5]
2014: Schweikert Voted To Prohibit Transferring Jobs Contracted By The DoD Back To Federal Employees Unless Given Specific Cost Savings. In May 2014, Schweikert voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "prohibit[ed] transferring previously contracted jobs back to Defense Department employees unless it would provide specific cost savings to taxpayers." The underlying bill was an FY 2015 defense authorization. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 179 to 244. [House Vote 235, 5/22/14; Congressional Quarterly, 5/22/14; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 678; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4435]
2024: Schweikert Voted To Require The Secretary Of Defense To Submit A Report On The Use Of Official Time. In June 2024, Schweikert voted for , according to Congressional Quarterly, "amendment no. 56 that would require the Defense Department to report to Congress on the use of taxpayer-funded official time." The vote was on the amendment. The underlying legislation was the FY 2025 National Defense Authorization Act. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 188 to 228. [House Vote 276, 6/14/24; Congressional Quarterly, 6/14/24; Congressional Actions, H.Amdt.987; Congressional Actions, H.R. 8070]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Extend The Pay Freeze For Federal Civilian Employees For An Additional Eight Months, Through End Of December 2013. In February 2013, Schweikert voted for a standalone bill that, according to Congressional Quarterly, would have "extend[ed] the current statutory pay freeze for federal civilian employees --- including members of Congress --- through Dec. 31, 2013. That would effectively extend the current pay freeze for federal workers by another eight months and the pay freeze for lawmakers by another three months. It would not affect an authorized increase in military pay." The House passed the bill by a vote of 261 to 154. Subsequently, the bill was sent to the Senate, which, as of December, 2013, had not taken any substantive action on it. [House Vote 44, 2/15/13; Congressional Quarterly, 2/11/13; Congressional Actions, H.R. 273]
Federal Civilian Employees Scheduled To Receive A 0.5 Percent Pay Increase On March 27, 2013. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The president on Dec. 27 issued an executive order directing that federal civilian employees generally receive a 0.5% pay increase once the current six-month continuing resolution (PL 112-175) funding the government expires on March 27. The president earlier in 2012 made a similar proposal that would have taken effect on Jan. 1, 2013, but he agreed to delay the increase; the current CR blocks any increase for both federal employees and members of Congress through March 27, the duration of that CR." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/11/13]
Federal Civilian Employees' Pay Had Been Frozen Since Beginning Of 2011. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Federal employees have been subject to a statutorily mandated two-year pay freeze that was first enacted in 2010 under the Continuing Appropriations and Surface Transportation Extensions Act (PL 111-322)." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/11/13]
Supporters Of Extending Pay Freeze Argued Pay Raise For Federal Civilian Employees, Which Would Cost $11 Billion, Was Inappropriate Under Current Fiscal Situation And Economic Conditions. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Supporters of the bill argue that it is necessary given the nation's current budgetary situation. They point to recommendations made by the Simpson-Bowles deficit reduction commission, which included a three-year freeze of federal civilian employee pay, as actions that should be taken to decrease federal spending and help reduce the deficit. They contend that it is wrong to give federal workers a pay raise while families across the nation continue to struggle in a weak economy, particularly since studies have shown that federal employees earn significantly more than workers in the private sector. Allowing the pay increase to occur as proposed under the president's executive order would cost taxpayers $11 billion; moreover, they say, it would provide a uniform pay raise to all federal employees, regardless of merit." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/11/13]
Congressional Quarterly: Pay Freeze Extension Opponents Argued It Continued "Assault" On Federal Civilian Employees, Who Had Already Given Up Over $60 Billion In Compensation Over Ten Years, And Would Make It Even Harder For Federal Government To Hire And Retain Highly Skilled Workers. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Opponents say the bill continues to unfairly penalize federal employees. They argue that federal employees, through more than two years of a pay freeze, are one of the few groups that have sacrificed for deficit reduction, losing more than $60 billion in pay when calculated over 10 years and tens of billions of dollars more in pension changes. Extending the pay freeze, they contend, amounts to a continued assault on federal workers --- including CIA personnel, FBI agents and others on the front lines against terrorism. In addition, studies examining federal employee compensation differ markedly, with more detailed studies showing that highly skilled federal workers earn much less than their private sector counterparts; a continued pay freeze, they say, just undermines the government's ability to hire and keep highly skilled workers." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/11/13]
2015: Schweikert Voted To Institute The Chained-CPI, Which Would Reduce Federal Civilian Pension Cost Of Living Adjustments As Part Of The FY 2016 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for instituting the Chained-CPI. According to the Republican Study Committee, "This budget proposes to begin using the more accurate measure for inflation, chained CPI, saving the taxpayers $220 billion in total over the next ten years." The underlying budget resolution would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for $2.804 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. The substitute would call for reducing spending by $7.1 trillion over 10 years compared to the Congressional Budget Office baseline." The vote was on the substitute amendment to a Budget Resolution. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 132 to 294. [House Vote 138, 3/25/15; Republican Study Committee, FY 2016 Budget; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/15; Congress.gov, H. Amdt. 83; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2015: Schweikert Voted To Change From The Highest Three Years Of Earnings To The Highest Five Earning Years To Calculate Pension Benefits For Federal Employees As Part Of The FY 2016 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for increasing by two years to the five highest earning years for federal workers for the purpose of pension benefits. According to the Republican Study Committee, "This budget would make several reforms to the federal employee retirement system. First, instead of basing the amount of a retiree's benefit on the highest three years of earnings, the benefit would be calculated from the highest five-year period. According to CBO, this proposal would save $3.3 billion over ten years." The underlying budget resolution would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for $2.804 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. The substitute would call for reducing spending by $7.1 trillion over 10 years compared to the Congressional Budget Office baseline." The vote was on the substitute amendment to a Budget Resolution. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 132 to 294. [House Vote 138, 3/25/15; Republican Study Committee, FY 2016 Budget; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/15; Congress.gov, H. Amdt. 83; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2015: Schweikert Voted To Require Current Federal Employees To Contribute More To Their Retirement As Part Of The FY 2016 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for requiring current federal employees to contribute more to their retirement. According to the Republican Study Committee, "This budget would make several reforms to the federal employee retirement system. [...] Second, all federal employees would be required to contribute more towards their retirement employees to contribute more towards their retirement. No changes were made for current federal employees. This proposal would equalize the treatment for all federal workers." The underlying budget resolution would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for $2.804 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. The substitute would call for reducing spending by $7.1 trillion over 10 years compared to the Congressional Budget Office baseline." The vote was on the substitute amendment to a Budget Resolution. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 132 to 294. [House Vote 138, 3/25/15; Republican Study Committee, FY 2016 Budget; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/15; Congress.gov, H. Amdt. 83; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2013: Schweikert Voted For Requiring Federal Employees To Increase Their Pension Contributions As Part Of The FY 2014 Ryan Budget. In March 2013, Schweikert voted for requiring federal employees to increase their pension contributions as part of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's (R-WI) proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to the House Budget Committee, the budget "calls for federal employees---including members of Congress and staff---to make greater contributions toward their own retirement." The resolution passed the House by a vote of 221 to 207, but died in the Senate. [House Vote 88, 3/21/13; House Budget Committee, 3/12/13; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 25]
2013: Schweikert Voted To Require Federal Employees To Increase Their Pension Contributions. In March 2013, Schweikert voted to support requiring federal employees to increase their pension contributions as part of the Republican Study Committee's proposed budget resolution covering fiscal years 2014 to 2023. According to the Republican Study Committee, the budget would "The RSC budget would require all federal employees to pay more towards their retirement. This saves $123 billion over ten years." The vote was on an amendment to the House budget resolution replacing the entire budget with the RSC's proposed budget; the amendment failed by a vote of 104 to 132 with 171 Democrats voting present. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Repeating a strategy from last year, 171 Democrats voted "present" to push Republicans to vote against the RSC plan to make sure it did not have enough support to replace the Ryan plan." [House Vote 86, 3/21/13; Republican Study Committee, 3/18/13; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/13; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 35; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 25]
2017: Schweikert Voted For The FY 2018 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution Which In Part Called For Prohibiting Federal Employees From Using Official Time For Union Activity. In October 2017, Schweikert voted for a budget resolution that would in part, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide for $2.9 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018. It would balance the budget by fiscal 2023 by reducing spending by $10.1 trillion over 10 years. It would cap total discretionary spending at $1.06 trillion for fiscal 2018 and would assume no separate Overseas Contingency Operations funding for fiscal 2018 or subsequent years and would incorporate funding related to war or terror into the base defense account. It would assume repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul and would convert Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program into a single block grant program. It would require that off budget programs, such as Social Security, the U.S. Postal Service, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, be included in the budget." The underlying legislation was an FY 2018 House GOP budget resolution. The House rejected the RSC budget by a vote of 139 to 281. [House Vote 555, 10/5/17; Congressional Quarterly, 10/5/17; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 455; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 71]
2015: Schweikert Voted For An Amendment That Would Have Prohibited Paying Federal Employees For Any Official Time They Used For Union Activates. In April 2015, Schweikert voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "prohibit[ed] funds from being used to pay a federal employee for any period of time during which such employee is using official time for union activities." The underlying legislation was H.R. 2029 which was at this time the FY 2016 Military Construction and Veterans appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 190 to 232. [House Vote 190, 4/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/30/15; Congressional Quarterly, 4/27/15; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 149; Congressional Actions, H.R. 2029]
2015: Schweikert Voted To Prohibit Federal Workers From Using Official Time For Union Activity As Part Of The FY 2016 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for prohibiting federal workers from using taxpayer time for union activities. According to the Republican Study Committee, "The budget also prohibits federal employees from using official taxpayer-paid time for union activity. The OPM estimated that in FY 2011 taxpayers paid more than $155 million in official time (salary plus benefits) for employees to conduct union activities." The underlying budget resolution would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for $2.804 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. The substitute would call for reducing spending by $7.1 trillion over 10 years compared to the Congressional Budget Office baseline." The vote was on the substitute amendment to a Budget Resolution. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 132 to 294. [House Vote 138, 3/25/15; Republican Study Committee, FY 2016 Budget; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/15; Congress.gov, H. Amdt. 83; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2014: Schweikert Voted To Bar Federal Employees From Using Official Time For Union Activities. In June 2014, Schweikert voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "bar[red] the use of funds provided by the bill to pay a federal employee during any period when that employee is using 'official time' to represent a union or its bargaining unit employees." The underlying legislation was an FY 2015 Transportation and Housing and Urban Development appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 167 to 254. [House Vote 295, 6/10/14; Congressional Quarterly, 6/10/14; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 839; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4745]
2019: Schweikert Voted Against The FY 2020 Minibus Appropriations Bill, Which Provided A 3.1% Pay Increase For Federal Civilian Employees. In December 2019, Schweikert voted against the FY 2020 minibus appropriations bill. According to Congressional Quarterly, the bill "provides funding for a 3.1% pay increase for federal civilian employees in calendar year 2020." The vote was a motion to concur in the Senate Amendment. The House agreed to the motion by a vote of 280-138. The Senate then passed the bill and the President signed the bill into law. [House Vote 690, 12/17/19; Congressional Quarterly, 12/17/19; Congressional Actions, H.R.1158]
2019: Schweikert Voted Against An Omnibus Spending Proposal Preventing Another Government Shutdown And Providing A 1.9 Percent Pay Raise For Federal Civilian Employees. In February 2019, Schweikert voted against the FY 2019 consolidated appropriations bill. According to Congressional Quarterly, "This Conference Summary describes the agreement on H J Res 31, Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2019, which provides detailed, full-year funding for all seven remaining FY 2019 spending bills ---thereby completing the FY 2019 appropriations process. The centerpiece, Homeland Security, provides $1.375 billion for new and replacement barriers along the U.S. border with Mexico, including 55 miles of new fencing, along with an increase of $1.5 billion in other border security funding --- such as for new technology at ports of entry and additional Customs officers. Outside of the Homeland bill, it includes another $1.6 billion for border security, as well as a 1.9% pay increase for federal civilian employees." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 300 to 128. The bill was later signed into law by the president. [House Vote 87, 2/14/19; Congressional Quarterly, 2/14/19; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 31]
2019: Schweikert Voted Against Increasing Pay For Federal Civilian Employees By 2.6 Percent. In January 2019, Schweikert voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "increase[d] the salaries and wages of all civilian federal employees by 2.6 percent for calendar year 2019. The pay raise would take effect immediately upon enactment, and would be backdated to apply to the first pay period that occurred after Jan. 1." The vote was on passage. The House passed the bill by a vote of 259 to 161 [House Vote 64, 1/30/19; Congressional Quarterly, 1/30/19; Congressional Actions, H.R. 790]
Legislation Created Parity Between Federal Civilian And Military Employees. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The vote to provide 'pay parity' with military service members, who are already receiving a 2.6 percent pay boost this year, was 259-161." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/30/19]
Bill Also Raised Pay For The Vice President, Cabinet Members, And Senior Trump Administration Officials. According to Congressional Quarterly, "As part of the effort to woo support for the measure, House Democrats removed a provision from the bill that would have continued a pay freeze for Vice President Mike Pence and other senior Trump administration officials. The statutory pay freeze for Pence, Cabinet officials and other senior White House political appointees, which has been in place since 2013, came out of the underlying bill once the House adopted the rule (H Res 87) for floor debate. Pence, who makes $230,700 now, and other affected senior officials would get the same 2.6 percent raise as other civilian workers under Connolly's bill, if it becomes law." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/30/19]
Legislation Raised Pay For Secret Service Agents. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Prior to final passage, the House by voice vote adopted clarifying amendments to ensure workers at the Secret Service and NASA would get the raise. There were some concerns that employees hired under special provisions in the law for hiring at those agencies might be excluded." [Congressional Quarterly, 1/30/19]
2019: Schweikert Voted Against Increasing Pay For Certain IRS Employees By 2.6 Percent. In January 2019, Schweikert voted against an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "increase[d] the rate of pay for eligible IRS employees for calendar year 2019 by 2.6 percent." The underlying legislation raised pay for federal civilian employees. The House agreed to the amendment by a vote of 243 to 183. The House later passed the underlying bill. [House Vote 62, 1/30/19; Congressional Quarterly, 1/30/19; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 19; Congressional Actions, H.R. 790]
2015: Schweikert Voted To Prohibit Automatic Collection Of Union Dues From Federal Employees As Part Of The FY 2016 Republican Study Committee Budget Resolution. In March 2015, Schweikert voted for prohibiting federal employees from performing union activities on official time and prohibiting automatic collection of union dues from federal employees. According to the Republican Study Committee, the budget proposes to "Prohibit Federal Employees From Conducting Union Business on Official Time[.] [and to] [...] Prohibit Automatic Collection of Union Dues for Federal Employee Unions[.] [...] This budget recommends prohibiting the automatic deduction of union dues for federal workers." The underlying budget resolution would have, according to Congressional Quarterly, "provide[d] for $2.804 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. The substitute would call for reducing spending by $7.1 trillion over 10 years compared to the Congressional Budget Office baseline." The vote was on the substitute amendment to a Budget Resolution. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 132 to 294. [House Vote 138, 3/25/15; Republican Study Committee, FY 2016 Budget; Congressional Quarterly, 3/25/15; Congress.gov, H. Amdt. 83; Congressional Actions, H. Con. Res. 27]
2016: Schweikert Voted Against Allowing Union Solicitation At Veterans Affairs Facilities. In May 2016, Schweikert voted for an amendment that would have, according to Congressional Quarterly "prohibit[ed] appropriated funds from being used to allow solicitation of labor organization membership in Veterans Affairs Department facilities." The underlying legislation was an FY 2017 Military Construction and VA appropriations bill. The vote was on the amendment. The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 200 to 225. [House Vote 224, 5/19/16; Congressional Quarterly, 5/19/16; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 1075; Congressional Actions, H.R. 4974]
2015: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment Giving The VA The Authority To Suspend Any Employee Without Pay Whose Performance Threatens Public Health And Safety. In July 2015, Schweikert voted against an amendment that would, according to the AFGE, "establish highly effective mechanisms for increasing VA accountability while preserving the due process rights of whistleblowers and other frontline employees so that they can still make lifesaving disclosures about patient harm and other mismanagement without the fear of immediate job loss as at-will employees. The Takano amendment carves out an exception to current civil service protections when an employee presents a clear and direct threat to public health. It also reduces mismanagement by curtailing a widespread revolving door problem in the VA, and halts the abuses of extended paid administrative leave that have wasted taxpayer dollars and prevented VA employees from being put back to work to serve veterans." The amendment was a substitute amendment to the VA Accountability Act which according to the AFGE would "take away Department of Veterans Affairs employees' due process protection." The House rejected the amendment by a vote of 191 to 233. [House Vote 487, 7/29/15; AFGE, 2015 Voting Record; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 693; Congressional Actions, H.R. 1994]