logo
The ‘big, beautiful bill' would secretly dismantle the civil service

The ‘big, beautiful bill' would secretly dismantle the civil service

The Hill2 days ago

The House-passed budget reconciliation bill contains a troubling provision so dangerous and corrosive to the integrity of the federal government that it demands immediate scrutiny and swift rejection by the Senate.
Buried in more than 1,000 pages of legislative text is Section 90002, a provision that strikes at the heart of the professional, nonpartisan civil service. It proposes a 9.4 percent salary surcharge on newly hired federal employees who wish to retain their civil service protections, ostensibly to pay for their retirement benefits.
Those who cannot afford this effective tax on the rights that federal employees currently enjoy would be forced into permanent at-will employment. Although they would then qualify for a lower retirement deduction of 4.4 percent, as purely at-will employees they could be fired at any time, for any reason — or for no reason at all — with no legal recourse.
This is not just bad policy — it is a direct attack on more than 140 years of bipartisan civil service tradition.
Our professional civil service was born out of the rampant corruption of the 19th-century 'spoils system,' in which federal jobs were handed out as political favors by victorious candidates. That system came to a halt with the Pendleton Act of 1883, passed after President James Garfield was assassinated by a disgruntled office-seeker who believed he had been improperly denied a patronage job. The Pendleton Act established a competitive, merit-based hiring system and laid the foundation for the modern professional civil service that serves the nation — not the party in power.
This commitment was reaffirmed and modernized by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, signed by President Jimmy Carter. That law improved efficiency and accountability and codified labor rights while protecting employees from arbitrary or politically motivated firings. It also created federal bodies — the Office of Personnel Management, the Federal Labor Relations Authority and the Merit Systems Protection Board — to safeguard merit principles and the integrity of public service.
Now, with a single provision rolled out with little debate and no hearing record, the House reconciliation bill threatens to undo all this hard-won progress. If enacted, it would create a two-tier federal workforce: one class protected by civil service laws, and another completely vulnerable to the whims of political appointees. Worse still, the measure is designed to coerce new hires into giving up their rights for the rest of their careers.
Faced with a 9.4 percent pay cut, most new federal employees — already earning salaries that are an estimated 25 percent lower than their private-sector counterparts — will feel they have no real choice. Many early-career workers live paycheck to paycheck; this surcharge would be an impossible burden. According to the Congressional Budget Office, three-quarters of new hires would likely be driven into at-will status. Among the 800,000 federal workers I represent as president of the American Federation of Government Employees, few if any could afford to pay the surcharge.
That inability to pay is one reason why the provision raises so little money — less than $500 million annually according to the CBO — or just 0.1 percent of the cost of the bill's accompanying tax cuts.
Clearly, revenue is not the point. The point is to erode labor rights and weaken the civil service.
This provision is also a political time bomb. If passed, it sets a precedent that could be exploited by any future administration. Imagine a newly inaugurated Democratic president firing every at-will federal employee hired during the previous Republican administration — no hearings, no cause, no appeal. If Republicans are willing to set this precedent, they must be prepared to live under it.
But the real danger is institutional. How can federal scientists, doctors, safety inspectors or law enforcement officers operate with independence and integrity if they can be dismissed on a whim? These protections are what enable civil servants to speak truth to power — even when that truth is inconvenient.
This proposal is also a direct attack on organized labor. Without civil service protections, unions are hamstrung in their ability to represent their members. Workers afraid of being summarily fired are unlikely to file grievances, assert their rights or even speak candidly in meetings. Only those who can afford the surcharge would retain access to effective representation. Section 90002 isn't just misguided — it's union-busting by design.
Imagine the outcry if a Democratic Congress imposed a 5 percent income tax on corporations to preserve their rights to challenge unions under the National Labor Relations Act. Republicans would rightly decry this as the weaponization of tax policy. Yet that's precisely what this bill does to federal workers — using financial coercion to undermine their legal protections.
The civil service exists to provide stability, expertise and continuity regardless of the party holding office. It is one of the bedrock institutions that has sustained American democracy through wars, crises and peaceful transitions of power. The Trump administration may not like the idea of a government that can resist political manipulation — but that is exactly what democracy requires.
Section 90002 is not reform. It is sabotage. Congress must reject it and reaffirm its commitment to the principles that have guided our civil service since 1883. Our institutions — and the American people they serve — deserve no less.
Dr. Everett B. Kelley is national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Medicaid spending in Mass. has nearly quadrupled in the past 20 years. It needs reform.
Medicaid spending in Mass. has nearly quadrupled in the past 20 years. It needs reform.

Boston Globe

timean hour ago

  • Boston Globe

Medicaid spending in Mass. has nearly quadrupled in the past 20 years. It needs reform.

Advertisement Medicaid was The cost of this is staggering. The budget for the state's Medicaid program, called MassHealth, has to over Advertisement But this explosion in the cost of Medicaid begs the question: Has all this spending led to better health outcomes? Surprisingly, Despite these findings, even modest Medicaid reform in Republican proposals before Congress — like encouraging community engagement through volunteering or work, preventing duplicate payments to insurers, and closing state-level However, it should be noted that the current proposals in Washington — which the House passed last week and are now in the Republican-controlled Senate — will result in more Medicaid spending over 10 years, not less. The bill merely slows the rate of growth. Only in Washington, D.C., is more spending decried as a cut. The fundamental issue remains: Are we prioritizing the right goals? Advertisement The evidence on the power of connection is . Past state-level experiments with work engagement in programs like food stamps and welfare cash assistance offer a promising road map. A Medicaid reform could similarly refocus state efforts on connecting enrollees with community engagement rather than solely maximizing federal funding. Encouragingly, these past reforms also saw a halving of the time individuals needed to stay on public assistance. Shouldn't we celebrate if someone like J.D. could earn enough to transition to employer-based or ACA coverage? Sadly, too often, critics characterize any transition off Medicaid as Advertisement While Medicaid reform often faces bipartisan heartburn, paradoxically there's longtime bipartisan agreement that major entitlement programs are growing unsustainably. If we can't at least slow the rate of growth, in part by delivering better outcomes, then our fiscal house of cards may fall, which hurts the most vulnerable. Our leaders must shift the debate from simply protecting the flow of federal dollars to ensuring that every Medicaid dollar genuinely improves patient health. Current inertia seems more about preserving the status quo than addressing the health impact on individuals like J.D. Meanwhile, our communities suffer as we miss out on J.D.'s contributions to society. The federal proposals provide a crucial moment to discuss opening doors of opportunity rather than defending a system that requires poverty for coverage. It's time to move beyond simply paying insurance companies for a card in J.D.'s pocket and focus on reforms that foster human thriving.

Are Tensions Between Trump and Musk Cooling Down?
Are Tensions Between Trump and Musk Cooling Down?

Bloomberg

time2 hours ago

  • Bloomberg

Are Tensions Between Trump and Musk Cooling Down?

00:00 Now, as you say, it's an extraordinary public blowup between them and some very personal things said against each other. But just as quickly, it seems perhaps there are moves already to to patch things up. We can see from Elon Musk's posts in the wee hours, Yes, he's open to doing so, agreeing with people posting on social media. Bill Ackman among them saying, guys, you need to cool this down. You know, Donald Trump saying to Politico, you know, it's going very well in his relationship with musk and politico reporting. In fact, the two men are due to talk on friday. At some point, the White House is arranging that conversation. So that kind of explosive display of anger at each other on social media, trading barbs, perhaps very quickly, followed by an effort to cool things down. And this is kind of a sign of the relationship that they have. We've seen frustrations bubble up before, but there's always been a very careful effort to keep that under wraps behind the scenes. They've disagreed on other things before. Aside from this big tax bill that Donald Trump is trying to get through the Senate in the U.S. It's just that that was a moment where everything burst into the open. The question is, even if they cool things down, you know, is the relationship repaired or is this just a temporary fix? And to that point, Ros, I mean, there was some almost kind of taking bets at the start of this relationship between Trump and Musk as to how long it would last. Some suggesting maybe it's going to be six months, some eight months. So to some extent it's not a surprise that the relationship is breaking down, given that given the nature of both individuals. And yet to see it in that public spotlight was, as you say, remarkable. What does it mean? What are the implications in terms of Trump standing? What does it mean in terms of the Republican Party? What does it mean in terms of in terms of the bill that Trump is so clearly keen to get to get across the line? Well, as you say, some people said it was a matter of time. You've got two very big egos involved here, but it comes at a very delicate time for both of them, arguably, particularly Donald Trump. He's trying everything to get this bill through. He's personally spending hours on the phone lobbying Republicans, saying we've got to get this done. And it faces a very tricky path in the Senate. And if this bill gets amended in any way whatsoever, it has to go back to the House for further review. Said he's wanting to get this done very quickly. He's up against a lot. And for Republicans, there are key questions here of loyalties to Trump or to Musk, because obviously Donald Trump is saying to them, you need to listen to me. But Elon Musk is the one with the money when it comes to, you know, the midterm elections, which are really not that far away. And a lot of his campaign money could help them individually. So how they patch this up or whether they patch this up has a real impact potentially on the bill itself, but also for individual Republicans with one eye very closely, no doubt already on those midterms.

Rep. Jasmine Crockett Announces Run To Chair House Oversight Committee
Rep. Jasmine Crockett Announces Run To Chair House Oversight Committee

Black America Web

time2 hours ago

  • Black America Web

Rep. Jasmine Crockett Announces Run To Chair House Oversight Committee

Source: Jemal Countess / Getty Rep. Jasmine Crockett — one of the few Democratic leaders who has truly been dedicated to keeping her foot on the neck of the Trump administration, and calling it the band of 'idiots' that it is — bid to become the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, a position that was vacated when the late Rep. Gerry Connoll died last month. 'Our country is in an existential crisis driven by an out-of-control Executive with a flagrant disregard for our Constitution, our way of governance, and our very way of life as citizens of a democratic republic,' Crockett said in a letter to Democratic colleagues obtained by POLITICO. 'We must pull back the curtain on the unmitigated chaos under Trump 2.0 and translate our findings to the American people in a way they can digest.' Crockett is now the fourth contestant in line to chair the Oversight Committee, which is expected to take on the Trump administration's autharatorian agenda, especially if Democrats win a House majority after the midterm elections, which might just happen if the MAGA-fied GOP's approval numbers continue to decline due largely to the White House's abysmal leadership. 'From the pulpit of the Oversight Committee, the Ranking Member must lay out our case against Trump 2.0 and his accomplices, the Republicans in the House, and discharge this message across the nation,' the 44-year-old wrote. 'Our work cannot be solely reactive.' The other Democrats who are campaigning for Connoll's spot are Reps. Robert Garcia of California, Stephen Lynch of Massachusetts and Kweisi Mfume of Maryland. Again, Crockett, who is currently serving in her second term representing Texas in the U.S. House, has been lauded by progressives and Democratic voters as one of the up-and-comers who can truly give the Democratic Party the image refresher that it sorely needs. The question is: Will the party embrace change, and is it ready to let leaders like Crockett take up the reins? SEE ALSO Rep. Jasmine Crockett Announces Run To Chair House Oversight Committee was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store