Utilizing Space Efficiently and Improving Technologies Act of 2023

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BEYER. Madam Chair, I rise in firm opposition to H.R. 6276, the Utilizing Space Efficiently and Improving Technologies Act.

Contrary to what the title would suggest, this bill is an irresponsible partisan effort that would seriously harm not only our Federal workforce located in the national capital region, but simply ignores the practical realities of Federal jobs.

While I agree that we should always help our agencies run more efficiently and decrease spending where we can, this bill reveals ignorance of the current process the GSA undertakes when it comes to contracting, evaluations, and consolidations.

Further, the bill exempts warehouses and laboratories from its space restrictions, but doesn't name secure classified information facilities, SCIFs, as an exempted category.

I am concerned that this would cause negative implications for local facilities that have been designed specifically for use of SCIFs and for our national defense work broadly.

Finally, this bill offers no consideration for workers with alternative work schedules, people who do field work, people who work nontraditional hours or days, or those who have telework arrangements.

Don't get me wrong, many of our colleagues and I support the idea of our Federal agencies consolidating spaces to repurpose parts of their budgets. They have already done that with the Patent and Trademark Office in my district, or to decrease spending, but this bill actually does the opposite because by cutting short contracts we increase spending.

GSA already assists agencies with consolidating unused spaces. If you take out the bill language that matches what GSA is already doing, it is easy to read this as just a partisan ploy to move agency headquarters out of the national capital region and attack Federal employees.

There is no need to introduce a bill to mandate work that GSA already does and to threaten to remove agency workspaces because of arbitrary building occupancy rates.

Madam Chair, I have invested in and managed real estate for many decades. This bill doesn't offer an appropriate metric to evaluate space usage, need, or work productivity. I didn't consider places in my car stores that are occupied by cars instead of people as wasted space. It is a matter of appropriateness. Any Member here who would allow their staff to work from home would be a hypocrite to oppose this bill.

We need the best and brightest to want to work for the Federal Government, and we want to utilize telework and nontraditional hours or days where it is appropriate. After all, we want the most productive and effective Federal workforce. Applying 1950s mentalities of butts in seats 5 days a week doesn't reflect the actual work that most Americans do. What if they need to spend every day in a SCIF or at a site visit?

For these reasons, at the appropriate time, I will offer a motion to recommit this bill back to committee.

If the House rules permitted, I would have offered the motion with an important amendment to this bill offered by Representative Titus.

Madam Chair, this amendment would ensure that all Federal employees, including those using alternative work schedules, are counted for utilization rates at Federal buildings. This amendment would significantly alleviate some concerns coming from workers who use alternative work schedules and whose access to reliable workspaces would be threatened by this bill.

Madam Chair, I include in the Record the text of the amendment.

Mr. Beyer moves to recommit the bill H.R. 6276 to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure with instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith, with the following amendment:

Strike paragraph (7) of section 2(a) of the bill and insert the following:

(7). Occupancy.--

(A) In general.--The term ``occupancy'' means the total number of employees covered under section 6101 of title 5, United States Code, that are provided a workspace in a public building or federally-leased space for purposes of carrying out in-person, official duties, as described under such section.

(B) Exceptions.--An employee shall be considered to be covered under subparagraph (A) if such employee is a full- time employee for whom a Federal agency has established an alternative workweek schedule pursuant to--

(i) section 6122 of title 5, United States Code; or

(ii) section 6127 of such title.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. BEYER. Madam Chair, I hope my colleagues will join me in voting for the motion to recommit.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source