Discussion · House of Representatives
Jill N. Tokuda Democrat
“I oppose this amendment. It tells the military to make a plan to cut 200,000 civilian jobs. Our troops rely on civilian workers to fix equipment, run childcare, and provide healthcare. Past cuts have already hurt living conditions on military bases.”
“Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose this amendment, which would require the Department of Defense to develop plans to eliminate 200,000 civilian employees. I have news for you: This administration already did that, and I saw the consequences with my own eyes. I had lunch with junior enlisted marines in Hawaii. They told me it took months to fix their broken washing machines, a full year to fix a sink in a barracks room. I saw windows duct taped and mold painted over. Childcare rooms were empty because they had no staff to care for servicemembers’ children. When I asked the base commander why it took a year to fix a sink, he said it is because almost all of the maintenance staff took the deferred resignation program, and with the hiring freeze, they couldn’t find replacements. There are 20,000 DoD civilian employees in Hawaii and about 800,000 worldwide. They are essential to readiness. At a time when Americans are struggling to make ends meet, they are good jobs. They have been and should remain stable jobs, too, allowing people to serve their country and care for their families. Bottom line, our war fighters rely on civilian employees for everything, from maintenance to acquisition, to healthcare, to childcare. They keep our subs and jets battle-ready and our servicemembers healthy. Mr. Chair, it is time we stop treating them as disposable. Instead, we should be investing in the civilian workforce, not continuing to threaten to cut their jobs. I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.”
Mr. Chair, I strongly oppose this amendment, which would require the Department of Defense to develop plans to eliminate 200,000 civilian employees. I have news for you: This administration already did that, and I saw the consequences with my own eyes. I had lunch with junior enlisted marines in Hawaii. They told me it took months to fix their broken washing machines, a full year to fix a sink in a barracks room. I saw windows duct taped and mold painted over. Childcare rooms were empty because they had no staff to care for servicemembers’ children. When I asked the base commander why it took a year to fix a sink, he said it is because almost all of the maintenance staff took the deferred resignation program, and with the hiring freeze, they couldn’t find replacements. There are 20,000 DoD civilian employees in Hawaii and about 800,000 worldwide. They are essential to readiness. At a time when Americans are struggling to make ends meet, they are good jobs. They have been and should remain stable jobs, too, allowing people to serve their country and care for their families. Bottom line, our war fighters rely on civilian employees for everything, from maintenance to acquisition, to healthcare, to childcare. They keep our subs and jets battle-ready and our servicemembers healthy. Mr. Chair, it is time we stop treating them as disposable. Instead, we should be investing in the civilian workforce, not continuing to threaten to cut their jobs. I strongly urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.