House Majority Whip Jazz Lewis (D-Prince George’s), left, talks Wednesday about emergency legislation he’s sponsoring on behalf of recently laid-off federal workers in Maryland. House Minority Jason Buckel (R-Allegany), right, challenged one part of the measure. (Photo by William J. Ford/Maryland Matters)
House debate over a bill that would provide care for laid-off federal workers devolved Wednesday into a partisan squabble over who cares more.
The spat came during a debate on House Bill 1424, which would expand the use of two current employee-assistance funds so they could be used for federal workers laid off as the Trump administration rushes to slash the size of government.
Republicans in the House were questioning one part of the bill, that would let the attorney general file suit on behalf of laid-off federal workers. The debate was tame to begin, but tensions began to bubble up when Del. Jazz Lewis (D-Prince George’s) expressed skepticism of the Republican Party’s interest in supporting laid-off workers.
“This bill, ultimately, is about us protecting Marylanders. And to be clear, I hear a lot of concern from the floor leaders – I don’t know if this actually reflects the entire position of the minority party — but everything I’m standing up to say … our leadership is standing on, is about protecting our workers, our citizens all across the state,” Lewis said.
“I have not heard you all stand up once to talk about you’re going to stand up for the workers in your districts — particularly the federal ones,” said Lewis, the House Majority Whip and lead sponsor of the bill..
His remarks elicited groans from the chamber, and a sharp response from Del. Matthew Morgan (R-St. Mary’s).
“We’re more than willing to stand up for our citizens here,” Morgan said. “If the majority whip would like us to talk – let’s go.”
OPM, OMB memo sets off fresh round of concerns among Maryland Democrats
Speaker Pro Tem Dana Stein (D-Baltimore County) reminded Morgan that he had not been recognized to speak, as required, before allowing Morgan to continue.
“Those were disparaging remarks for the minority party in this chamber. We’ve been talking ad nauseam for five years on the business environment that the majority party has created in this state,” Morgan said. “We’ve been lied to consistently – we were told that crime reform, police reform, no cash bail bonds –”
At that point, Appropriations Committee Chair Ben Barnes (D-Prince George’s and Anne Arundel) interrupted to note that Morgan’s comments were “definitely not on the bill this point.” Morgan tried to argue that he was addressing Lewis’ remarks, before Stein stepped back in and gave the floor to Minority Leader Jason Buckel (R-Allegany), who tried to calm things down.
“We’re not here to impugn someone’s motive,” said Buckel, before steering the debate back to the bill and his amendment that was on the floor at the time.
It was an odd argument over a bill that appears to have general support in the House.
HB1424 would expand the state’s Catastrophic Event Account that is designed to let state agencies respond quickly to a natural disaster, a catastrophe, or a full or partial shutdown of the federal government. It would also effect the Federal Government Shutdown Employee Assistance Loan Fund, a state fund that makes no-interest loans to federal workers in the state who are not being paid because of a federal shutdown.
The bill would strike “shutdown” from the second fund’s name and allow state officials to tap those funds to help former federal workers who are in a financial bind because of “closure, relocation or mass layoff” of the government unit they worked at. It budgets $10 million for the new fund.
Lewis’ bill is largely in response to recent layoffs in the Trump administration as to works to slash the size of the government.
But the bill was amended in committee to expand the authority of the Maryland Attorney General’s Office so that it would sue on behalf of federal workers affected by a temporary shutdown or, in the current environment, a mass firing or agency closure. It adds $1.5 million to let the attorney general’s office pursue such cases.
“We are fighting to protect your constituents and everyone’s constituents in the state, regardless of whether they’re Eastern Shore, in Southern Maryland, in the far reaches of Western Maryland,” Lewis said on the floor. “We’re fighting with our front foot.”
But Buckel challenged the attorney general language on the floor Wednesday.
“We’re giving the attorney general the ability to sue on behalf of those people, not on behalf of the state,” Buckel argued. “The state doesn’t have a right to enforce the employment and labor laws of the federal government on behalf of private individuals.
“I’m going to bet money,” he said, “that if we do this and the attorney general brings a suit, then some court somewhere is going to say, ‘No, you can’t do that.’”
Buckel said the state would be “wasting $1.5 million to file lawsuits that probably won’t go anywhere,” if it retained the attorney general language.
Lewis insisted the bill gives the attorney general the “ability to fight on behalf of our workers.”
Once things calmed down after the partisan hubbub, Buckel’s amendment failed 97-39. HB 1424 is not currently scheduled for a final floor vote until next week.
Prior to Wednesday’s floor debate, Lewis said the bill is a step to ease the burden of Maryland’s federal workers in the face of mass layoffs being executed by the Trump administration.
“I just don’t understand the cruelty in the mindset of these people,” Lewis said of the administration. “But we have brought forward legislation to try to stand up for federal workers and show them that we appreciate their service, that we want them to stay in Maryland.
“While we can’t respond to everything that the federal government does, we’re going to do what we can to try to help these folks,” Lewis said.
– Maryland Matters reporter Jack Bowman contributed to this report.