WASHINGTON – House Democrats defeated a Republican-led provision to deny raises to federal employees who have been disciplined for sexual misconduct.
Lawmakers in the House of Representatives on Wednesday voted to give civilian federal employees a 2.6 percent pay raise this year. However, Democrats successfully blocked a GOP provision that would have withheld raises for employees penalized for sexual misconduct.
“During calendar year 2019, no increase in pay as authorized under this Act may be provided to any Federal employee who has been disciplined for sexual misconduct under chapter 75 of title 5, United States Code, or any other provision of law,” read the text of the provision.
The proposal, despite receiving support from 189 Republicans and 17 Democrats, was ultimately defeated by a vote of 216-206.
“As Washington Democrats continue their ill-advised push for unilateral pay raises for federal employees, regardless of their performance, Republicans continue to ask Democrats to amend their legislation,” Erin Perrine, a spokeswoman for House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy, said in a statement provided to The Daily Caller News Foundation. “Currently this bill treats victims the same as their harassers. That makes no sense.”
Among the Democratic lawmakers who voted against the proposal were California Reps. Tony Cardenas and Eric Swalwell and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard.
Cardenas, who chaired the vote for the Democrats on Wednesday, was sued in 2018 for allegedly drugging and molesting a then-16 year old girl in 2007 when he was a member of the Los Angeles City Council. Gabbard is the first House Democrat to officially mount a 2020 presidential campaign. Swalwell is also mulling a presidential run.
Follow Jason on Twitter.
Disclaimer: News articles on this site contain opinions of the author, and if opinion, may not necessarily reflect the views of the site itself or the views of the owners of The Published Reporter. Any charges are accusations and defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. For more information on our editorial policies please view our editorial policies and guidelines section in addition to our terms of service.