One Simple Trick Can Save Taxpayers Billions of Dollars

While most lawmakers fiddle and flounder, a select few members of Congress are understandably eager to cut federal spending. The national debt is now over $33 trillion, and trillion-dollar deficits will spell disaster for millions of working families across the country. But, cutting administrative waste is a time-consuming, seldom-successful procedure, leading lawmakers to look for shortcuts. One tool that has gotten plenty of press lately is a 150-year-old legislative procedure called the “Holman Rule,” in which lawmakers can easily tuck cost-cutting provisions into appropriations bills. Federal workers’ salaries and dubious programs can be slashed practically overnight without the usual, required review process. While this rule can go a long way toward reducing spending waste, lawmakers must wield this powerful tool carefully to craft better budgets. With some simple “rules of the road” in place, the appropriations process can be a boon for taxpayers.

The Holman Rule isn’t exactly popular among highly compensated federal workers and unions. According to the National Federation of Federal Employees, the procedure is a “choice vehicle for ethically corrupt members of congress who seek to purge the operational funding of agencies and programs that run counter to their outside political interests (such as law or regulatory enforcement agencies that keep industry captains and the most powerful people in check).” But, as FedSmith contributor Ralph Smith notes, the history of the Holman Rule doesn’t support this cynical interpretation. Throughout the 1930s, for instance, the rule was used to eliminate 37 Customs positions. Given that spending was perpetually on the upswing in the 1930s and tariff policies were exacerbating the Great Depression, this winnowing was warranted. The rule has also been wielded prudently to prevent agencies from filling vacancies until they get their budgets under control.

A more valid concern is that slashing bureaucrats’ compensation may make it more difficult for agencies to hire competent personnel. And, when executive authority is entrusted to employees that are not up to the job, all sorts of problems can arise. That is why the Holman Rule works best when applied to agencies with consistently high pay compared to private sector counterparts. According to the 2022 Office of Personnel Management Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, about 56 percent of federal employees are satisfied with their pay compared to about 27 percent who are dissatisfied (the rest being ambivalent).

These numbers mask considerable variation among agencies. For example, only about 21 percent of Department of Education employees are dissatisfied with their pay, while about 64 percent are satisfied. These numbers are bolstered by high average department salaries (more than $100,000 per year) compared to lackluster education salaries almost anywhere else. So, even if lawmakers used the Holman Rule to zero out programs and funding relating to lending irregularities, for example, it’s unlikely that the blow to morale would prompt an employee exodus. The same can likely be said for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which registers consistently high job and pay satisfaction metrics. And, there’s plenty of funding to cut from that agency after decades of scandals such as Fast and Furious.

The truth is that there’s a long list of government programs that should be on the chopping block, and the normal legislative process just isn’t fast enough to make much difference. Taxpayers need the Holman Rule now more than ever to keep the debt and deficit under control.

David Williams is the president of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.