On the recordJuly 7, 2016
I am going to start backwards here. We are not going to call for a vote on this, and the reason for it is, when people read your amendment, they are going to realize someone didn't write it correctly. It doesn't speak to the IRS. It actually allows for this cut to be across the board on the whole bill, which should make our chairman not very happy, and I am interested in my chairman's happiness. I rise to oppose the amendment. This amendment would prevent agencies under this bill from giving employees in the Senior Executive Service bonuses. This seems to be aimed at the IRS since the summary on the Rules Committee Web site emphasizes the IRS, but it would have the same effect across the board. No one is saying that poor performance should be rewarded, but this takes one class of employees and punishes all of them regardless of their individual merits. It will cause us to lose good employees, which is not what we need. I realize Members on the other side of the aisle are eager to get their kicks in against the IRS--they even put them in bills when they are not the only ones in the bill--but I argue that this amendment would have unintended consequences. Rather than somehow making the IRS or any other agency better, this is likely to make it worse. This amendment is going to simply ensure that we have less accomplished employees at the IRS and at other government agencies.…
