Examine individual changes

'@@ -7,5 +7,4 @@ The rule was used to eliminate 29 customs positions in 1932 and another eight in 1939, to allow a provision reducing the number of naval officers in 1938, and to allow a 1952 amendment disallowing the filling of vacancies in [[Independent agencies of the United States government|independent agencies]] until the agency's workforce had been reduced by 10%.<ref name=":2" /> It appears never to have been used to cut a specific worker's salary with the intent of incentivizing them to quit.<ref name=":1" /> The rule cannot be used if the reductions are contingent on other events, or to give broad authority to agency heads to fire workers.<ref name=":6" /><ref name=":1">{{Cite news |url = https://fcw.com/articles/2017/01/10/is-congress-really-going-to-cut-your-pay.aspx |title = Is Congress Really Going to Cut Your Pay to $1? |last = Mazmanian |first = Adam |date = January 10, 2017 |newspaper = [[Federal Computer Week]] |access-date = January 14, 2017 }}</ref> -==Constitutionality== The constitutionality of bills passed under the Holman Rule has been questioned by legal scholars in light of the [[Supreme Court of the United States|U.S. Supreme Court]]'s ruling in ''[[United States v. Lovett]]'' (1946). That case dealt with an act of Congress, passed during the [[McCarthyism|Red Scare]], that defunded the salaries of 39 employees accused of having Communist sympathies. The Court held that, under these circumstances, the Act was no "mere appropriation measure", but was effectively a [[bill of attainder]] prohibited by [[Article I of the United States Constitution|Article I]], Section 9, of the Constitution.<ref>{{cite news |first = Patricia J. |last = Williams |author-link = Patricia J. Williams |url = https://www.thenation.com/article/the-holman-rule-once-allowed-congress-to-purge-leftists-from-government-agencies-now-its-back/ |title = The Holman Rule Once Allowed Congress to Purge Leftists From Government Agencies—Now It’s Back |work = The Nation |date = January 19, 2017 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |first = Rick |last = Hills |url = http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2017/01/does-the-holman-rule-authorize-unconstitutional-bills-of-attainder.html |title = Does the Holman Rule Authorize Unconstitutional Bills of Attainder? |work = PrawfsBlawg |date = January 7, 2017 }}</ref> @@ -13,5 +12,5 @@ Prior to 1983, the Holman Rule was part of Rule XXI, Clause 2 of the [[Procedures of the United States House of Representatives|Rules of the House of Representatives]], and stated that an amendment to an [[appropriations bill]] is allowed if it, "being germane to the subject matter of the bill, shall retrench expenditures by the reduction of the number and salary of the officers of the United States, by the reduction of the compensation of any person paid out of the Treasury of the United States, or by the reduction of amounts of money covered by the bill". -The 2017 reinstatement of the law was a standing order not incorporated into the main body of the Rules of the House.<ref>{{Cite web |url = http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20170102/115-HRES5-SxSv2.pdf |title = H.Res. 5, Adopting the Rules of the 115th Congress: Section-by-Section Analysis |last = |first = |date = 2017 |publisher = U.S. House Committee on Rules |page = 5 |access-date = January 23, 2017 }}</ref> It allows during the first session of the 115th Congress, "any provision or amendment ... that retrenches expenditures by—(1) the reduction of amounts of money in the bill; (2) the reduction of the number and salary of the officers of the United States; or (3) the reduction of the compensation of any person paid out of the Treasury of the United States."<ref>{{Cite web |url = https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hres5/BILLS-115hres5eh.xml |title = Text of H. Res. 5—Adopting rules for the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress |last = |first = |date = January 3, 2017 |publisher = U.S. House Committee on Rules |access-date = January 23, 2017 }}</ref> +The 2017 reinstatement of the law was a standing order not incorporated into the main body of the Rules of the House.<ref>{{Cite web |url = http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20170102/115-HRES5-SxSv2.pdf |title = H.Res. 5, Adopting the Rules of the 115th Congress: Section-by-Section Analysis |last = |first = |date = 2017 |publisher = U.S. House Committee on Rules |page = 5 |access-date = January 23, 2017 }}</ref> It allows during the [[115th United States Congress|115th Congress]], "any provision or amendment ... that retrenches expenditures by—(1) the reduction of amounts of money in the bill; (2) the reduction of the number and salary of the officers of the United States; or (3) the reduction of the compensation of any person paid out of the Treasury of the United States."<ref>{{Cite web |url = https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hres5/BILLS-115hres5eh.xml |title = Text of H. Res. 5—Adopting rules for the One Hundred Fifteenth Congress |last = |first = |date = January 3, 2017 |publisher = U.S. House Committee on Rules |access-date = January 23, 2017 }}</ref> == History == @@ -20,7 +19,12 @@ The rule was first passed in 1876, rescinded in 1895, and restored in 1911.<ref>{{Cite journal |last = Fisher |first = Louis |year = 1979 |title = The Authorization-Appropriation Process in Congress: Formal Rules and Informal Practices |url = http://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol29/iss1/4 |journal = [[Catholic University Law Review]] |volume = 29 |issue = 1 |pages = 51–105 }}</ref> It underwent several modifications until it reached its final state in 1911.<ref name=":2" /> It was named for [[Indiana]] Representative [[William S. Holman]].<ref name=":0" /> It was initially used to eliminate [[Spoils system|patronage]] positions prior to the establishment of the [[Merit system|merit-based employment system]].<ref name=":3">{{Cite news |url = http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/holman-rule-house-gop-chilling-effect-federal-workers |title = Fed Employees Wary Of New Rule Allowing Congress To Cut Their Salaries At Will |last = Kirkland |first = Allegra |date = January 6, 2017 |work = |newspaper = [[Talking Points Memo]] |access-date = January 14, 2017 }}</ref> It was also used for targeted cuts to, and caps on, the number and salary of federal employees, though its use was rare in modern times.<ref name=":1" /> It was removed in 1983 due to objections from Speaker of the House [[Tip O'Neill]].<ref name=":0" /> -The rule was reinstated as part of the rules package enacted at the beginning of the [[115th United States Congress|115th Congress]] for a period of one year, unless extended by Congress. It was championed by [[Freedom Caucus]] member [[Morgan Griffith]], Republican of Virginia, who favored empowering individual members of Congress to strategically reassign workers according to policy needs, and to cut programs perceived as wasteful. Republicans said that the rule change would increase accountability and streamline the appropriations process, and said they did not intend it as a broad change to the appropriations process.<ref name=":0" /> +=== Revival === +The rule was reinstated as part of the rules package enacted at the beginning of the [[115th United States Congress|115th Congress]] in 2017 for a period of one year, unless extended by Congress. It was championed by [[Freedom Caucus]] member [[Morgan Griffith]], Republican of Virginia, who favored empowering individual members of Congress to strategically reassign workers according to policy needs, and to cut programs perceived as wasteful. Republicans said that the rule change would increase accountability and streamline the appropriations process, and said they did not intend it as a broad change to the appropriations process.<ref name=":0" /> -Democrats criticized the revival of the Holman Rule as undermining civil service protections, and allowing the possibility that specific individuals could be targeted for political reasons.<ref name=":0" /> Federal employee unions, such as the [[American Federation of Government Employees]], raised similar concerns.<ref>{{cite news |first = Carten |last = Cordell |url = http://www.federaltimes.com/articles/federal-employee-union-wary-of-holman-rule-reemergence |title = Federal Employee Unions Wary of Holman Rule Reemergence |work = Federal Times |date = January 5, 2017 }}</ref> The rule was also criticized for taking hiring decisions out of the hands of [[Cabinet of the United States|Cabinet]] and other members of the executive branch.<ref name=":3" /> +Democrats criticized the revival of the Holman Rule as undermining civil service protections, and allowing the possibility that specific individuals could be targeted for political reasons.<ref name=":0" /> Federal employee unions, such as the [[American Federation of Government Employees]], raised similar concerns.<ref>{{cite news |first = Carten |last = Cordell |url = http://www.federaltimes.com/articles/federal-employee-union-wary-of-holman-rule-reemergence |title = Federal Employee Unions Wary of Holman Rule Reemergence |work = Federal Times |date = January 5, 2017 }}</ref> The rule was also criticized for taking hiring decisions out of the hands of [[Cabinet of the United States|Cabinet]] and other members of the executive branch.<ref name=":3" /> Some Republicans also criticized the rule, such as [[House minority whip|House Minority Whip]] [[Steny Hoyer]]<ref name=":0" /> and [[Tom Cole]], chairman of [[United States House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies|a House Appropriations Subcommittee]].<ref name=":4">{{Cite news|url=https://www.rollcall.com/news/policy/house-gop-renews-holman-rule-targeting-federal-pay|title=House GOP Renews ‘Holman Rule’ Targeting Federal Pay|last=Mejdrich|first=Kellie|date=2018-03-20|work=Roll Call|access-date=2018-10-01|last2=Mejdrich|first2=Kellie|language=en}}</ref> + +There were several attempts to use the rule in 2017 as amendments to the [[2018 United States federal budget|fiscal year 2018 appropriations bill]]<nowiki/>s. A proposal offered by Morgan Griffith to eliminate 89 jobs at the [[Congressional Budget Office]] failed on July 26, 2017 on a vote of 116–309.<ref name=":5">{{Cite news|url=https://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2017/07/republicans-take-first-shots-slashing-individual-federal-employees-salaries/139799/|title=Republicans Take First Shots at Slashing Individual Federal Employees’ Salaries|last=Katz|first=Eric|date=2017-07-27|work=Government Executive|access-date=2018-10-01}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://federalnewsradio.com/workforce/2017/07/republicans-use-holman-rule-to-propose-89-personnel-cuts-at-cbo/|title=Republicans use Holman Rule to propose 89 personnel cuts at CBO|last=Ogrysko|first=Nicole|date=2017-07-25|work=FederalNewsRadio.com|access-date=2018-10-01|language=en-US}}</ref> There were also two additional amendments offered by [[Ron DeSantis]] that were approved by the [[United States House Committee on Rules|House Rules Committee]] but did not receive a floor vote: one aimed at employees working on [[Guantanamo Bay Naval Base]] policy, as well as one for a single individual at the [[United States Army Corps of Engineers|Army Corps of Engineers]].<ref name=":5" /> + +The Holman Rule was extended to the end of the 115th Congress in March 2018.<ref name=":4" /><ref>{{Cite news|url=https://federalnewsradio.com/your-job/2018/03/house-republicans-want-to-bring-back-the-holman-rule-for-another-year/|title=House Republicans just brought back the Holman Rule for another year|last=Ogrysko|first=Nicole|date=2018-03-20|work=Federal News Radio|access-date=2018-10-01|language=en-US}}</ref> In April 2018, the [[Republican Study Committee]] budget plan supported use of the rule to remove positions considered unneeded.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2018/04/house-gop-group-envisions-massive-changes-civil-service-budget-proposal/147784/|title=House GOP Group Envisions Massive Changes to Civil Service in Budget Proposal|last=Wagner|first=Erich|date=2018-04-26|work=Government Executive|access-date=2018-10-01}}</ref> In June 2018, [[Paul Gosar]] proposed using the rule to cut the [[Western Area Power Administration]] Administrator Mark Gabriel's salary to $1 for alleged misconduct.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/2018/06/06/rep-paul-gosar-lets-cut-pay-power-agency-boss-1-year/675283002/|title=Rep. Gosar seeks to cut top federal power agency boss' salary to $1 per year|last=Wagner|first=Dennis|date=2018-06-06|work=AZ Central|access-date=2018-10-01|language=en}}</ref> This amendment failed by a vote of 139–276 on June 7, 2018.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2018/roll249.xml|title=Final vote results for Roll Call 249|last=|first=|date=2018-06-07|website=U.S. House of Representatives|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=2018-10-01}}</ref> == References == '