```

[House Report 112-334]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

112th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    112-334

======================================================================

 
 REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THROUGH ATTRITION ACT OF 
                                  2011

                                _______
                                

 December 19, 2011.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Issa, from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 3029]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to whom 
was referred the bill (H.R. 3029) to reduce the size of the 
Federal workforce through attrition, and for other purposes, 
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with 
amendments and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Committee Statement And Views....................................     2
Section-by-Section...............................................     4
Explanation of Amendments........................................     5
Committee Consideration..........................................     5
Roll Call Votes..................................................     5
Application of Law to the Legislative Branch.....................     6
Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the 
  Committee......................................................     6
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............     6
Federal Advisory Committee Act...................................     6
Unfunded Mandate Statement.......................................     6
Earmark Identification...........................................     6
Committee Estimate...............................................     6
Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate...     7
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............     9
Minority Views...................................................    10

    The amendments are as follows:

  After subsection (h) of the bill, insert the following:

  (i) Report.--The Office of Management and Budget shall submit 
a report to Congress detailing the effect of the requirements 
under subsection (b) on programs, activities, and services, 
including those provided to the general population. In such a 
report, the Office of Management and Budget shall pay special 
attention to any reductions that will harm national security or 
endanger life, public health, public safety, property, or the 
environment. Each report shall be submitted annually, with the 
first report provided within 30 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act.

  Redesignate subsection (i) (relating to regulations) as 
subsection (j).

  Strike subsection (h) of section 2 and insert the following:

  (h) Reduction in Procurement of Service Contracts.--The 
President, through the Office of Management and Budget and 
subject to subsection (e), shall take appropriate measures to 
ensure that there is a reduction in the amount expended for the 
procurement of service contracts in each fiscal year occurring 
after the date of the enactment of this Act equal to the 
reduction in the amount expended for the Federal workforce in 
each such fiscal year caused by reason of the enactment of this 
Act.

                     COMMITTEE STATEMENT AND VIEWS

                          PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

    Our fiscal situation requires tough choices to restrain 
government spending. Agencies must focus on their core mission, 
reassess priorities, and direct taxpayer dollars to where they 
are most needed. Intelligent workforce management is a key 
component of this effort.
    The purpose of H.R. 3029 is to reduce the size of the 
federal civilian workforce by ten percent through attrition, 
thereby allowing agencies to target limited resources to core 
mission functions. The bill imposes a hiring freeze on the 
executive branch if the ten percent reduction is not achieved 
by fiscal year 2015. Within this framework, H.R. 3029 provides 
agencies flexibility to implement the reform in the manner that 
best meets their unique and evolving needs.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    From January 2008 to April 2011, the Federal Government 
grew by 242,000 civilian, non-postal employees, while the 
private sector lost 6.7 million jobs, according to the Bureau 
of Labor Statistics. Non-postal civilian personnel costs for 
the executive branch were nearly $230 billion in 2010. The 
annual budget request the President issued this past Spring 
requested funding for an additional 15,000 new federal workers 
for FY 2012.
    The Committee recognizes that the ratio of federal 
employees to the overall U.S. population has declined in recent 
decades. This should not, however, be understood to mean that 
the Federal Government is now understaffed. In testimony before 
the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, U.S. Postal Service and 
Labor Policy, Dr. Andrew Biggs stated, ``If productivity in 
federal services tracked productivity in the economy at large, 
each federal employee would produce almost twice as much as in 
1969. That is, if federal productivity tracked the economy at 
large, a workforce around 16 percent smaller than today's could 
provide services comparable to those of federal employees in 
1969.''
    The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform 
(``Simpson-Bowles'') called for immediate reforms to reduce 
federal spending and make the federal government more 
efficient. The Commission recommended a ten-percent reduction 
via attrition in the size of the federal workforce, to include 
defense civilian employees. In recommending this policy, the 
Commission stated, ``Washington needs to learn to do more with 
less, using fewer resources to accomplish existing goals.''\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, The 
Moment of Truth, December 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The FY 2012 budget resolution adopted by the House, H. Con. 
Res. 34, also calls for a ten-percent reduction in the federal 
workforce, to be achieved through attrition at a one-for-three 
replacement rate. This policy is assumed as part of the overall 
reduction in discretionary spending to below 2008 levels, and 
the five-year discretionary spending freeze accomplished by the 
resolution.
    Thus, H.R. 3029 builds on the recommendations of both 
President Obama's fiscal commission and the most recent House-
passed budget resolution in requiring a ten percent reduction 
in the size of the federal civilian workforce through 
attrition. The bill achieves the necessary reduction through 
natural attrition, allowing agencies to hire one federal 
employee for every three who retire or leave their job.
    Over the last ten years, federal civilian employees 
separated from the federal workforce at an average rate of 
92,000 per year. According to the Office of Personnel 
Management, approximately 300,000 federal civilian employees 
are eligible for retirement, and close to 500,000 will be 
eligible to retire by the start of fiscal year 2015. On 
December 12, 2011, the Federal Times reported that more than 
100,000 employees were likely to apply for retirement before 
the end of the calendar year, a 24 percent increase over 
2010.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Losey, Stephen, Federal Times, ``Retirement surge 24% over last 
year,'' December 12, 2011, available at: http://www.federaltimes.com/
article/20111212/PERSONNEL02/112120301/1001 (last accessed December 13, 
2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 3029 further requires that the level of savings 
achieved by the attrition policy be accompanied by an equal 
savings in service contract expenditures. The bill provides the 
President, acting through the Office of Management and Budget 
and in consultation with the Office of Personnel Management, 
broad flexibility to achieve the necessary reductions in 
staffing and service contracts, and to prioritize staffing 
needs across the Federal Government.
    The Committee recognizes that it is essential for agencies 
to maintain sufficient expertise and technical capability. 
Accordingly, the bill gives the executive branch the 
opportunity to make choices to: (1) protect programs that are 
of the highest priority or that achieve the best results; (2) 
guard against skills imbalances; and (3) allow agencies to make 
decisions that best meet their unique needs. The executive 
branch could prioritize, for instance, hiring for federal law 
enforcement functions over other functions and activities. 
Agencies have three years to achieve the required workforce 
size, providing the opportunity to plan a more nimble and 
effective government, rather than simply backfill vacancies as 
they arise.
    Beginning in fiscal year 2015, the bill makes the Federal 
Government subject to a hiring freeze if the size of the 
workforce exceeds ninety percent of its size as of September 
30, 2011. The President may waive the hiring freeze in the 
interest of national security or other extraordinary 
circumstances. The term ``national security concern'' is 
intended to reflect the essential functions performed by, among 
others, federal law enforcement personnel. The President may 
also waive the hiring freeze with respect to a particular 
position or category of positions critical to an individual 
agency.

                          legislative history

    The Federal Workforce Restructuring Act of 1994\3\ 
established a requirement that the administration reduce the 
federal workforce by 272,900 positions by 1999. The Act placed 
annual ceilings on executive branch full-time equivalent 
positions from fiscal years 1994 through 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\Public Law 103-226.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           SECTION-BY-SECTION

Section 1. Short title

    Establishes the short title of the bill as the ``Reducing 
the Size of the Federal Government Through Attrition Act of 
2011.''

Section 2. Reduction in Federal workforce

    The President must reduce the size of the federal civilian 
workforce by ten percent by fiscal year 2015. The Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB), in consultation with the Office of 
Personnel Management, is responsible for achieving the 
reduction on behalf of the President. The reduction will be 
accomplished through attrition, using a one-for-three 
replacement rate. In other words, the Federal Government may 
hire no more than one employee for every three who separate 
from federal service between the date of enactment and the 
beginning of fiscal year 2015.
    OMB notifies Congress each quarter of each fiscal year in 
which the number of federal employees is greater than ninety 
percent of the number of federal employees as of September 30, 
2011.
    Beginning in fiscal year 2015, the Federal Government is 
subject to a hiring freeze for any increase in federal civilian 
employees greater than ninety percent of the number of federal 
employees as of September 30, 2011. The President may waive the 
hiring freeze in the interest of national security or other 
extraordinary circumstances. The President may also waive the 
hiring freeze with respect to a particular position or category 
of positions critical to an individual agency.
    The President, through OMB, must reduce the amount spent on 
service contracts by an amount equal to the savings achieved 
from reductions in the size of the federal civilian workforce. 
The required reduction in service contract spending is subject 
to the same waiver authority as that pertaining to federal 
civilian employees.
    OMB reports to Congress on the impact of the federal 
workforce reductions on federal government programs and 
activities.
    The President or his designee may issue implementing 
regulations.

                       EXPLANATION OF AMENDMENTS

    Rep. Cummings offered an amendment requiring agencies to 
report to Congress on the impact of the required federal 
workforce reductions on Federal Government programs and 
activities, including those provided to the general population. 
Rep. Issa offered a second-degree amendment requiring only the 
Office of Management and Budget to submit a report. The 
Cummings amendment, as modified by the Issa second-degree 
amendment, was agreed to by voice vote.
    Rep. Cooper offered an amendment allowing agencies to hire 
two workers for every three who leave federal service, instead 
of the one for three replacement rate in H.R. 3029. The 
amendment was withdrawn.
    Rep. Lynch offered an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute. The amendment was defeated by voice vote.
    Rep. Lynch offered an amendment requiring a reduction in 
service contract expenditures equal to the savings achieved 
from the reduction in the size of the federal civilian 
workforce. Rep. Issa offered a second-degree amendment making 
the reduction in service contracts subject to the waiver 
authority in H.R. 3029. The Lynch amendment, as modified by the 
Issa second-degree amendment, was agreed to by voice vote.
    Rep. Meehan offered an amendment exempting federal law 
enforcement officers from the definition of federal employees 
used in H.R. 3029. The amendment was withdrawn.
    Rep. Yarmuth offered an amendment exempting agencies that 
provide services to veterans from H.R. 3029. The amendment was 
defeated by a recorded vote of 9 ayes to 12 nays.

                        COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

    On November 3, 2011, the Committee met in open session and 
ordered reported favorably the bill, H.R. 3029 as amended, by 
roll call vote of 23-14, a quorum being present.

                            ROLL CALL VOTES

    1. Mr. Yarmuth offered an amendment which exempted agencies 
that provide services to veterans. The amendment was defeated 
by a recorded vote of 9 Ayes to 12 Nays.
    Voting Aye: Cummings, Towns, Norton, Tierney, Lynch, 
Connolly, Davis, Yarmuth, and Speier.
    Voting Nay: Issa, Platts, Jordan, Chaffetz, Lankford, 
Buerkle, Gosar, Meehan, DesJarlais, Guinta, Farenthold, and 
Kelly.
    2. The bill, H.R. 3029, as amended, was ordered favorably 
reported to the House, a quorum being present, by a recorded 
vote of 23 Ayes to 14 Nays.
    Voting Aye: Issa, Burton, Mica, Platts, McHenry, Jordan, 
Chaffetz, Mack, Walberg, Lankford, Amash, Buerkle, Gosar, 
Labrador, Meehan, DesJarlais, Walsh, Gowdy, Ross, Guinta, 
Farenthold, Kelly and Cooper.
    Voting Nay: Cummings, Towns, Maloney, Norton, Kucinich, 
Tierney, Clay, Lynch, Connolly, Quigley, Davis, Braley, Yarmuth 
and Speier.

              APPLICATION OF LAW TO THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a 
description of the application of this bill to the legislative 
branch where the bill relates to the terms and conditions of 
employment or access to public services and accommodations. 
This bill reduces the size of the federal civilian workforce by 
ten percent through attrition. Legislative branch employees and 
their families, to the extent that they are otherwise eligible 
for the benefits provided by this legislation, have equal 
access to its benefits.

  STATEMENT OF OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause 
(2)(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee's oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the descriptive portions of 
this report.

         STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

    In accordance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee's performance 
goals and objectives are reflected in the descriptive portions 
of this report.

                     FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not establish 
or authorize the establishment of an advisory committee within 
the definition of 5 U.S.C. App., Section 5(b).

                       UNFUNDED MANDATE STATEMENT

    Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act (as amended by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded 
Mandate Reform Act, P.L. 104-4) requires a statement as to 
whether the provisions of the reported include unfunded 
mandates. In compliance with this requirement the Committee has 
received a letter from the Congressional Budget Office included 
herein.

                         EARMARK IDENTIFICATION

    H.R. 3029 does not include any congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in 
clause 9 of rule XXI.

                           COMMITTEE ESTIMATE

    Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the 
Committee of the costs that would be incurred in carrying out 
H.R. 3029. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that rule provides 
that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has 
included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the 
bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act.

     BUDGET AUTHORITY AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

    With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect 
to requirements of clause (3)(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives and section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received 
the following cost estimate for H.R. 3029 from the Director of 
Congressional Budget Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                 Washington, DC, December 15, 2011.
Hon. Darrell Issa 
Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3029, the Reducing 
the Size of the Federal Government Through Attrition Act of 
2011.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Santiago 
Vallinas.
            Sincerely,
                                         Robert A. Sunshine
                              (For Douglas W. Elmendorf, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 3029--Reducing the Size of the Federal Government Through 
        Attrition Act of 2011

    Summary: H.R. 3029 would require the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) to take action to ensure that:
           Federal agencies do not appoint more than 
        one employee for every three employees retiring or 
        separating from government service (unless the 
        President has issued a waiver) through September 30, 
        2014;
           The number of people in the federal 
        workforce, beginning in fiscal year 2015, does not 
        exceed 90 percent of the total number of employees as 
        of September 30, 2011 (although use of the waivers 
        could exempt parts of the workforce); and
           The amount expended for service contractors 
        is reduced by the same amount as the savings generated 
        from federal workforce reductions each fiscal year.
    In addition, H.R. 3029 would require OMB to submit a report 
detailing how federal programs, activities, and services would 
be affected by the reduction in the workforce.
    Assuming appropriations are reduced in accordance with the 
reduction in the workforce and the use of contractors, CBO 
estimates that implementing H.R. 3029 would reduce 
discretionary spending by about $35 billion over the 2012-2016 
period. The bill would have no effect on direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
    H.R. 3029 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of H.R. 3029 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall in most budget functions.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                   -------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      2012      2013      2014      2015       2016    2012-2016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Reduction in the Federal Workforce:
    Estimated Authorization Level.................      -700    -2,400    -4,300    -5,000     -5,100    -17,500
    Estimated Outlays.............................      -700    -2,300    -4,200    -5,000     -5,100    -17,300
Reduction in the Procurement of Service Contracts:
    Estimated Authorization Level.................      -700    -2,400    -4,300    -5,000     -5,100    -17,500
    Estimated Outlays.............................      -700    -2,300    -4,200    -5,000     -5,100    -17,300
Reports:
    Estimated Authorization Level.................         1         1         1         1          1          5
    Estimated Outlays.............................         1         1         1         1          1          5
    Total Changes:
        Estimated Authorization Level.............    -1,399    -4,799    -8,599    -9,999    -10,199    -34,995
        Estimated Outlays.........................    -1,399    -4,599    -8,399    -9,999    -10,199    -34,595
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 
3029 will be enacted early in 2012 and that future 
appropriations would, on net, be reduced as a result of lower 
expenses for wages, salaries, and service contracts.
    CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3029 would reduce 
salaries and expenses for federal employees by $700 million in 
2012 and by about $17 billion over the 2012-2016 period. The 
bill would authorize the President to exempt parts of the 
government workforce from the attrition policy under certain 
conditions--for example, if there is a national security 
concern or an extraordinary emergency, or if the performance of 
a critical agency mission requires it. CBO believes that those 
waivers are broad enough that a significant portion of the 
federal workforce would be exempt from the attrition directive. 
Based on the governmentwide shutdown in 1995--when about 1.2 
million employees out of a workforce of roughly 2 million 
civilian employees were exempt from the furlough--as well as 
information from the Office of Management and Budget, experts 
on the federal workforce, and the General Services 
Administration, CBO estimates that only about one-third of the 
current workforce would be affected by the provisions of this 
bill. CBO calculates that the portion of the federal workforce 
that would be affected would decline from about 710,000 
employees at the end of September 2011 to about 640,000 at the 
end of September 2014 (at which point, the 10 percent reduction 
in the number of affected federal employees would be achieved).
    The amount of savings that would be generated from reducing 
funding for service contracts is very uncertain. The bill 
specifies that the amount expended for service contracts should 
be reduced by the same amount as the savings generated from the 
federal workforce, as shown in the above table. However, if 
payments were shifted from service contracts to another means 
of acquiring such services (such as by bundling them together 
with other types of purchases), the savings would be less.
    Under the bill, OMB would have to submit an annual report 
detailing the effect of the reduction in the workforce on 
federal programs, activities, and services; CBO estimates that 
reporting requirement would cost $5 million between 2012 and 
2016.
    This bill--or any legislation that would reduce the funds 
available for a particular discretionary program or that would 
achieve savings by undertaking a particular activity--would 
only reduce projected total appropriations if the caps on 
discretionary spending were also lowered. Without a reduction 
in the caps, CBO assumes funding for other discretionary 
programs would fill the gap created by the specific reduction 
or savings.
    Pay-As-You-Go Considerations: None.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 3029 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or 
tribal governments.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Santiago Vallinas; 
Impact on state, local, and tribal governments: Elizabeth Cove 
Delisle; Impact on the private sector: Paige Piper/Bach.
    Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

          CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL AS REPORTED

    There were no changes made to existing law in H.R. 3029.

                             MINORITY VIEWS

    Committee Democrats respectfully oppose H.R. 3029, the 
Reducing the Size of the Federal Government Through Attrition 
Act of 2011, as ordered reported by the Committee on November 
3, 2011. The bill would require an arbitrary, government-wide 
10% reduction in the federal workforce by 2015. This measure 
would be implemented by restricting agencies to hiring only one 
new worker to replace every three workers who leave federal 
service.
    Americans depend on the work that our dedicated federal 
employees do each day to provide for our national security, 
ensure the safety of our food and water, care for our veterans, 
and test new medicines for safety and efficacy. Despite the 
invaluable service that these public servants provide, this 
bill unfairly targets the federal workforce. Although federal 
employees were not the cause of the financial crisis or our 
nation's budget deficit, they are being asked to shoulder a 
disproportionate share of the burden of solving our fiscal 
problems. Federal employees are already struggling through a 
two-year pay freeze that will deprive them of $60 billion over 
the next ten years. They are also are facing early retirement, 
buyouts, furloughs, and layoffs as a result of deep budget cuts 
established by the Budget Control Act of 2011.
    Although we agree that we must take significant steps to 
curb Federal spending, we do not agree that across-the-board 
personnel cuts are a meaningful solution to our nation's budget 
deficit. Arbitrary workforce reductions sound quick and easy to 
implement, but they do not account for the unique mission, 
workload, or critical functions of each federal agency or the 
distinctive education, skills, and training of each agency's 
workforce. The Majority's approach will result in severe 
staffing shortages at many of our critical Federal agencies, 
such as the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans' 
Affairs, the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of 
Justice, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department 
of Health and Human Services, and the Department of Homeland 
Security.
    History has shown that broad-based workforce reductions 
actually may result in increased government spending in the 
form of increased backlogs, reduction or termination of agency 
services, or increased contracting costs. Such rigid cuts will 
also lead to a decrease in the quality of services provided to 
taxpayers. Some agencies and Federal occupations are still 
feeling the negative effects today of workforce reductions 
implemented in the 1990s.
    The personnel cuts supported by the Majority can also 
result in skills imbalances and the loss of institutional 
knowledge when employees with skills in high demand or with 
significant experience separate from federal service. According 
to the Office of Personnel Management, 40% of all Federal 
workers will be eligible to retire in ten years. Non-strategic 
personnel reductions would only hamper agencies in their 
workforce and succession planning.
    In contrast to the Majority's proposal, Committee Democrats 
support a more strategic approach that will provide agency 
leaders with flexibility to determine how their specific 
organizations can achieve necessary cuts and how those cuts 
will impact mission and results. The Budget Control Act, which 
reduced spending caps for the federal government for fiscal 
year 2012 through 2021, has already set this process in motion. 
A budget-based management approach gives agencies the 
discretion to determine the best way for them to meet the 
reduced budget caps.
    During the Committee's consideration of H.R. 3029, 
Representative Lynch offered an amendment that would have 
provided agencies with flexibility to implement the goal of 
reducing the total number of Federal employees. Unfortunately, 
this common-sense amendment was rejected.
    Representative Lynch also offered an amendment, which was 
adopted, that would require the amount expended for federal 
government service contractors to be reduced by an amount equal 
to the savings generated from federal workforce reductions. 
Although we strongly oppose the arbitrary limits on the federal 
workforce included in this bill, this amendment will prevent 
work from simply being shifted to contractors if the federal 
workforce is reduced.
    Finally, the Committee also approved an amendment offered 
by Ranking Member Cummings with a minor change offered by 
Chairman Issa. Ranking Member Cummings amendment required 
agencies to report on the programs, activities, and services 
which would be reduced or terminated as a result of personnel 
reductions required by the bill. The amendment required 
agencies to pay particular attention to reductions that would 
harm national security or endanger life, public health, public 
safety, property, or the environment. Chairman Issa's change to 
the amendment required the Office of Management and Budget to 
report to Congress, instead of agencies.
    Giving our agencies the power to reshape their 
organizations while taking into account mission, priorities, 
workload, and staffing is especially important now that 
substantial automatic budget cuts have been triggered by the 
Budget Control Act. Studies and experience have shown 
conclusively that better results are achieved when agencies 
make cuts strategically rather than arbitrarily. The non-
strategic, indiscriminate cuts to the Federal workforce 
proposed in H.R. 3029 will make the country less secure, lead 
to major backlogs in programs and services, decrease agencies' 
productivity, and impair public access to the services the 
American people deserve and expect from their government.

                                   Elijah E. Cummings.
                                   Stephen F. Lynch.

                                  

```