Monthly Archives: September 2024

Congress has just a few days left to approve a short-term government funding bill before the shutdown deadline, though leaders in the Republican House and Democratic Senate haven’t felt the need to start negotiations just yet.

House GOP leaders, instead, attempted to pass a six-month continuing resolution Wednesday that carried with it a bill requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote, but were unsuccessful.

The 202-220 vote in the House, with two members voting present and 14 Republicans in opposition, came shortly after Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump called on lawmakers to force a government shutdown as leverage to enact the voter ID law.

“If Republicans don’t get the SAVE Act, and every ounce of it, they should not agree to a Continuing Resolution in any way, shape, or form,” Trump wrote on social media, doubling down on a shutdown statement he made last week.

The unsuccessful House vote could provide space for Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, to negotiate with the Senate.

But, with just one week left in the session before Congress departs for a six-week election break, there’s not much time for leaders to find consensus, draft a bill, hold votes in both chambers and secure President Joe Biden’s signature.

Johnson, asked repeatedly by reporters Wednesday about the possibility of a shutdown, didn’t entirely rule out a funding lapse beginning on Oct. 1.

“We’ll see what happens with the bill,” Johnson said before the vote. “We’re on the field in the middle of the game, the quarterback is calling the play, we’re going to run the play.”

Blaming the Senate

Johnson criticized the Senate for not being further along in the annual appropriations process, seeking to place the blame for a stopgap spending bill and a possible shutdown on that chamber.

The Senate Appropriations Committee approved 11 full-year government funding bills with broadly bipartisan votes this summer, but experienced challenges with the Homeland Security funding measure.

The House Appropriations Committee approved all dozen of its bills along party-line votes and was able to move five of those across the floor with GOP support, but not broad backing from Democrats.

House and Senate leaders haven’t allowed the two chambers to begin conferencing the bills that have either passed out of committee or off the floor, despite that being a regular occurrence in past years.

It’s highly unlikely leaders will bring any more of the full-year spending bills to the floor this fall, making the election results the biggest piece of the puzzle that will change between now and the end of the calendar year.

McConnell: Shutdown would be ‘politically, beyond stupid’

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has repeatedly called on his colleagues to avoid a shutdown, though he hasn’t jumped in to negotiate a stopgap bill and doesn’t seem inclined to do so.

“I think we first have to wait and see what the House sends us,” McConnell said during a Tuesday press conference. “My only observation about this whole discussion is the one thing you cannot have is a government shutdown. It would be, politically, beyond stupid for us to do that right before the election because, certainly, we’d get the blame.”

McConnell then referenced the saying that there’s no “education in the second kick of a mule” and noted funding the government for a few more months will “ultimately end up being a discussion between” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Johnson.

“I’m for whatever avoids a government shutdown,” McConnell added.

Election year drama

Leaning on a stopgap spending bill has been a regular part of Congress’ annual appropriations process for nearly three decades. During that time, lawmakers have consistently failed to approve all the full-year government funding bills before the Oct. 1 deadline.

The September struggle to approve a continuing resolution, which is intended to give lawmakers a bit more time to reach bicameral agreement on the full-year spending bills, has become increasingly dramatic with election-year politics ratcheting up the posturing this year.

In divided government, any legislation to fund the government must be bipartisan, or it all but guarantees a shutdown.

The House’s failed six-month continuing resolution also wasn’t supported by most Senate Republicans.

GOP senators argued it was too lengthy and could have hindered that chamber’s ability to confirm the next president’s Cabinet during the first few months of 2025.

Senate Republicans and defense hawks in the House also said that leaving the Department of Defense on autopilot for half of the next fiscal year was an abdication of Congress’ responsibility and a threat to national security.

December end date eyed

The final stopgap spending bill that Congress approves in the days ahead will likely last through Dec. 20, the final day this year that Congress is scheduled to be in session. It is also unlikely to include the voter registration ID component.

That final, bipartisan continuing resolution could also include a plus-up in spending for the Secret Service or a provision that allows the agency to spend its stopgap allocation at a faster rate to bolster Trump’s security following two apparent assassination attempts.

Florida Republican Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart, chairman of the State-Foreign Operations spending panel, said Wednesday that if he was a betting man, he’d expect Congress to pass a stopgap spending bill through mid-December.

“The first thing is, we can’t have a shutdown,” Díaz-Balart said. “I think most people here understand that that would be catastrophic, particularly when half the world is in flames.”

During a government shutdown, some federal workers continue reporting to the office without pay while the rest are furloughed until Congress approves a new funding bill. All federal employees impacted by a shutdown receive back pay.

A shutdown this October would affect all the departments and agencies funded within the annual process, including the departments of Agriculture, Defense, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security and State.

Idaho Republican Rep. Mike Simpson, chairman of the Interior-Environment appropriations subcommittee, said he was sure there would be no shutdown but didn’t detail how exactly Congress would broker a bipartisan agreement in the days ahead.

“I don’t think anybody wants to shut the government down,” Simpson said. “That’s not a viable option.”

Arkansas Advocate is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arkansas Advocate maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sonny Albarado for questions: info@arkansasadvocate.com. Follow Arkansas Advocate on Facebook and X.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Vanderbilt University students who want to land prestigious intelligence, defense or public safety internships in Washington, D.C. may soon find themselves working at a government agency where national security isn’t the most obvious mission area.

That’s the hope from Gen. Paul Nakasone, who is leading the effort to make this vision a reality at Vanderbilt’s newly launched Institute of National Security. Nakasone spent the final years of his decades-long career in an encryption and signals intelligence capacity, but he said that the threats facing society have taken on new forms.

 “A lot of the time, we think only of the military element of our national power, but there’s a diplomatic and informational and economic element to it,” he noted.

The Commerce Department, for instance, has closely monitored semiconductor supply chains as officials work to onshore domestic chip manufacturing and strengthen U.S. military capabilities.

“Why not have an internship — someone here from Vanderbilt — being in the Department of Commerce? Hard to believe that there’s any place more important right now with regards to semiconductors than the Department of Commerce,” he said.

He also floated the idea of a student internship in the State Department’s Bureau of Cyberspace and Digital Policy. While State has a separate intelligence bureau, its cyberspace service has focused more on shaping international internet governance norms and managing emerging tech matters like AI and quantum computing.

Nakasone, who retired from his dual-hat post as head of NSA and U.S. Cyber Command in February, spoke to reporters at a news conference leading up to the launch of the Vanderbilt institute, where he is slated to head the program meant to jockey younger talent into national security roles. 

These less-expected positions than those at DOD, CIA and other parts of the defense and intelligence community let students build more diverse critical thinking skills to address global security problems, he said. The institute is setting a “25 for 2025” goal to put 25 Vanderbilt interns into different government national security roles next year.

The center will be housed in the university’s engineering school but plans to connect students across engineering, medicine, education, business, law and the humanities, according to a university press release. The center builds on Vanderbilt’s annual Summit on Modern Conflict and Emerging Threats, which has brought in military and intelligence community officials to discuss the state of the global threat landscape.

Officials in 2024 have frequently warned of a peak in global threats, citing Chinese hackers infiltrating U.S. critical infrastructure and increased U.S. military spending in congressional bills. Heightened election participation worldwide has further amplified concerns, with AI-driven disinformation playing a key role in the space. 

Policymakers are trying to address the issue by focusing on cyber and national security workforce matters, opening up pathways for young Americans to enter the arena at educational institutions.

“Gen Z will be the number one sector within our workforce. Okay, that’s great. But it also requires that knowledge and skills and ability that have just left us — whether or not they’re baby boomers like myself or millennials — you’ve got to be able to pass that information on,” Nakasone said earlier this year at the DEF CON hacker conference in Las Vegas.

A bipartisan pair of senators are urging their colleagues to include language in the anticipated stopgap continuing resolution that would avert a potential pay cliff impacting overseas Foreign Service officers and other civilian workers.

When Congress passed the Federal Pay Comparability Act in 1990, the measure inadvertently excluded some federal workers, such as members of the U.S. Foreign Service, stationed outside of the continental U.S., from locality pay. In response to this oversight, officials developed Overseas Comparability Pay, which steps in and provides the equivalent of Washington, D.C., area locality pay to those excluded under the 1990 law.

But the legal authorization to make those payments expires at the end of the month, alongside the deadline to avert a government shutdown. If Congress goes over the pay cliff, Foreign Service officers would see pay cuts averaging 22% beginning in October.

The full list of impacted positions includes Foreign Service officers serving overseas under the State Department, U.S. Agency for International Development, the Commerce Department’s Foreign Commercial Service and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, U.S. Agency for Global Media and the Peace Corps.

Sens. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., and Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, who co-chair the Senate Foreign Service Caucus, sent a letter Monday to Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell urging that language be included in any continuing resolution to keep the government funded past this month to temporarily reauthorize the Overseas Comparability Pay program for the length of the spending agreement’s duration.

“Foreign Service officers serve our country in some of the most dangerous and difficult places in the world,” Van Hollen and Sullivan wrote. “A potential lapse of OCP would compound the challenges they face, imperiling the long-term effectiveness of the Foreign Service, and its ability to recruit and retain the most talented officers.”

The provision is one in a long laundry list of requests for temporary reauthorization of existing programs or funding boosts to targeted agencies that the Biden administration and lawmakers say need to be in a continuing resolution. Among the requested funding boosts over fiscal 2024 levels are a sizeable proposed increase in the Social Security Administration’s long-neglected administrative costs and an additional $24 million for the Office of Personnel Management for its planned rollout of the new Postal Service Health Benefits Program this fall.

But talks appeared to remain in limbo, as 14 House Republicans joined all Democrats to defeat House Speaker Mike Johnson’s proposed bundling of a six-month continuing resolution with controversial voter ID legislation Wednesday. Senators and some House lawmakers from both parties and the White House have signaled a willingness only to approve a three-month spending deal, which would place a new deadline amid the December holidays.

One of the questions I am asked most often is, “Why do I need Medicare if I already have lifetime health insurance coverage under the Federal Employees Health Benefits program?” For some retirees, the answer is, “It’s required.”  This includes:

• Military retirees must enroll in Medicare Parts A and B to be eligible for Tricare for Life (TFL). TFL is “Medicare-wraparound” coverage. There are no enrollment fees, but you must pay Medicare Part A and Medicare Part B monthly premiums. Federal retirees may suspend FEHB coverage and premium payments at any time. Visit www.opm.gov/forms  to get a Health Benefits Cancellation/Suspension Confirmation form (RI 79-9). You can learn more about TFL here: https://www.tricare.mil/Publications/Handbooks/tricare_for_life 
• Postal retirees who retire after Jan. 1, 2025, and are younger than age 64 on that date, are required to enroll in Medicare Part B when they become eligible to keep their health insurance coverage under the new Postal Service Health Benefits Program. These employees’ family members are also required to enroll in Medicare Part B when they become eligible for Medicare. You can learn more about the new PSHB program here: https://www.opm.gov/healthcare-insurance/pshb/ 

For other federal employees, the decision to enroll in Medicare is optional. To test your understanding of the coordination of Medicare and FEHB, here are 10 True or False questions. You will find the answers at the end.

1. True/False Some FEHB plans will give money back to enrollees for paying the Medicare Part B premium.
2. True/False All FEHB plans waive their cost-sharing (deductible, copayments, and coinsurance) when Medicare is the primary payer.
3. True/False Medicare Part B will cover drugs that are administered by a health care provider, or through medical equipment at home such as drugs that are injected or infused.
4. True/False Many FEHB plans offer a Medicare Advantage option to plan enrollees.  You’ll continue to pay your Part B premium with the Medicare Advantage plan. It provides the same coverage as Original Medicare but with additional benefits you wouldn’t get, such as $0 deductible and excellent prescription benefits. Plus, many of these plans will reduce your Medicare Part B premium by $100 or more per month. You may also get access to programs that may help you reach your health potential, such as SilverSneakers® fitness membership and more.
5. True/False Federal retirees who cancel their FEHB coverage to enroll in Medicare Parts A and B can later reenroll.
6. True/False Another name for Medicare Advantage Plans is Medicare Part C.
7. True/False Retirees who choose not to enroll in Medicare Part B at age 65 or at retirement (if later), can enroll at a later age without incurring a late enrollment penalty.
8. True/False Employees who retire after age 65 may delay Medicare Part B enrollment without incurring a late enrollment penalty during a Special Enrollment Period that lasts eight months after retirement.
9. True/False To find the best FEHB plan to enroll in when Medicare is the primary payer, you should choose one with the most expensive premiums.
10. True/False Starting in 2024, some FEHB plans have enrolled retirees who have Medicare Part A and/or Part B in a Part D, Medicare Prescription Drug Program (MPDP).

Answer Key:

1. True. As an incentive to enroll in Medicare Part B, some FEHB plans offer a partial rebate for Part B premiums or a health fund to use to pay some of the premium.  These rebates vary from plan to plan but are often between $800 – $1,000 / year per individual enrolled in Part B.  
2. False. Check Section 9 of your FEHB plan brochure or your FEHB plan website to learn which of the provider’s plans coordinate best with Medicare Part A & Part B.
3. True. The key difference between drugs covered under Medicare Part B and Part D is that Part B generally covers drugs that require administration by a healthcare provider, like injections given in a doctor’s office, while Part D covers most prescription drugs that can be self-administered at home, like pills or inhalers you take yourself; essentially, Part B covers drugs usually administered during a medical service, while Part D covers most standard prescription drugs you buy at a pharmacy.
4. True. Many FEHB carriers have introduced a Group Medicare Advantage Plan for their members.  This provides a choice and value to members through new plan options. Once enrolled in the Medicare Advantage option, there will be the benefits of your original Medicare plan (Parts A and B), with prescription drug coverage (Part D) and additional benefits and features for no additional premium.
5. False. If you are a federal retiree who continued your FEHB coverage and you decide to cancel your FEHB enrollment, you should be aware of the consequences.  You CANNOT re-enroll in the FEHB Program; it is a one-way ticket out of the program.  The only exception is if you are canceling your enrollment be covered under your spouse’s FEHB enrollment. You and your enrolled family members will not be eligible to enroll in temporary continuation of coverage or convert to a nongroup contract; in addition, the 31-day extension of coverage does not apply to cancelled enrollments.
6. True. “Medicare Part C” and “Medicare Advantage” are the same thing; they both refer to a type of health plan offered by private companies that provides coverage like Original Medicare (Parts A and B) and they often include additional benefits like prescription drug coverage (Part D) and sometimes dental or vision care. You may suspend your FEHB coverage to enroll in a Medicare Advantage plan using the medicare.gov plan finder or you can remain enrolled in your FEHB plan while enrolled in a Medicare Advantage Plan.  Some FEHB plans offer this coverage as an enhanced benefit of the FEHB plan, or you may enroll in a “commercial” Medicare Advantage Plan through https://www.medicare.gov/plan-compare/#/?year=2024&lang=en 
7. False. If you did not enroll for Part B during your initial enrollment period (IEP) which began three months before you reached age 65, the month of your birthday, and three months after your birthday, you may qualify for a Special Enrollment Period (SEP) to sign up for Part B anytime as long as you or your spouse is working and you’re covered by a group health plan through that employment.
8. True. For federal employees who are covered by FEHB through their current employment (or their spouse’s current employment), there is an 8-month SEP which starts the month after your employment ends. If you sign up during an SEP, the late enrollment penalty will not apply.  Other than your IEP or SEP, you can only sign up for Part B during the General Enrollment Period (GEP), which runs from January 1 to March 31 each year. Your coverage will begin the first of the month following the month you enrolled during the GEP. You will pay a permanent penalty equal to 10 percent of the standard Part B premium for every 12-month period that you could have been enrolled in Part B but weren’t.
9. False. The premium cost of the FEHB plan is not the only factor that determines the quality of the plan as some of the best plans that coordinate benefits with Medicare are among the least expensive.  While it is true that some of the least expensive plans provide more “basic” coverage with higher cost sharing, many plans that work very well with Medicare are low-cost plans such as the following plan options as well as many HMOs that are specific to your area (premiums listed below are 2024 rates; 2025 rates will be available closer to open season): 
   1. BC/BS Basic, $ (Plan Code) $207.44 (111), $568.96 (112), $517.03 (113)
   2. APWU High Option, $ (Plan Code) $269.79 (472), $658.77 (472), and $530.73 (473)
   3. Aetna Direct, $ (Plan Code) $160.80 (N61), $405.51 (N62), $352.64 (N63)
   4. Aetna Medicare Advantage, $ (Plan Code) $125.00 (Z24), $331.25 (Z25), $275.00 (Z26)
   5. GEHA Standard Option $ (Plan Code) $151.99 (314), $403.76 (315), $326.79 (316)
   6. GEHA High Option, $ (Plan Code) $235.41 (311), $663.56 (312), $540.95 (313)
   7. MHBP Standard Option, $ (Plan Code) $174.65 (454), $405.88 (455), $402.01 (456)
   8. Foreign Service Benefit Plan, $ (Plan Code) $179.01 (401), $442.83 (402), $457.82 (403)
   9. Compass Rose Standard Option, $ (Plan Code) $114.55 (424), $274.92 (425), $252.00 (426)
   10. NALC High, $ (Plan Code) $237.05 (321), $480.54 (322), $554.36 (323)
   11. SAMBA Standard $(Plan Code) $185.03 (444), $422.13 (445), $398.24 (446)

True. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (Public Law 117-169) made some significant improvements in the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare Part D. As a result of these improvements, the Office of Personnel Management encouraged FEHB carriers to offer Medicare Part D benefits either through Medicare Advantage Group Waiver Plans (MA-PD EGWP) or Prescription Drug Plan (PDP) EGWPs through traditional FEHB plans.  For the 2024 plan year, 39 FEHB plans offered this prescription drug benefit.