WASHINGTON — The Daily Iowan spoke one-on-one with U.S. Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks, R-Iowa, to get her thoughts on the federal government shutdown and backpay for furloughed federal employees. 

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

The Daily Iowan: The White House has signaled the possibility of not giving furloughed employees back pay. Do you support that decision?

Miller-Meeks: I think that will be a constitutional decision whether or not that happens, so I would wait to see what a ruling is on that — have to check into the legalities of that. It actually is a new process, so in the past, it has not occurred. 

But, if you think about it, typically, what does it mean to be furloughed? It’s without pay. So this would be delayed pay if people are not working but then are paid for not working, and then you have to ask yourself, how fair is that to the rest of the individuals who, if they’re laid off or furloughed, they’re without pay? So why should federal employees be treated any differently? 

I think that there is an issue that people can have a discussion about, but I would have to wait to see what the legalities are. As far as I understand, it may be questionable legally to do so. So from that standpoint, looking at individuals and saying, if they’re unnecessary — which you have to do in business all the time, in my own business, you have to do this — then you have to rethink their positions. But it’s kind of a little challenging in the federal government.

Would you support a resolution to prohibit not giving back pay?

I haven’t thought about that, so it would be something I’d have to give a lot of thought to. You have to take into consideration the difficulty there is to hiring people within the federal government, pay that’s within the federal government, retention, and keeping people. 

My staff frequently get poached by other offices because we’re an office that works very hard, and all of our staff do that, so they’re prized staff for other offices. You want to be able to retain employees, and you also want to be able to retain that knowledge. 

You have to ask yourself and decide, is it counterintuitive to do something like that? So to me, I’d have to really research it and determine what’s the best thing going forward.

Some federal workers have gone without pay since Oct. 1. What is your reaction to these workers having to go without a paycheck?

It’s why I signed on to the Eliminate Shutdowns Act. I don’t think shutting down the government should be a political football. It’s also why I withheld my own pay, so I’m not getting paid. I did that deliberately in solidarity with my military and veteran community, who are not getting paid. 

I’ve been there growing up in a military family, so I think it’s challenging for people, it’s difficult for people. People have bills that are due, they’re counting on a particular income, and it creates a lot of uncertainty and a lot of anxiety. 

So I think it’s challenging for individuals, but the Eliminate Shutdowns Act, the Pay Our Troops Act — another bill that I’m a co-sponsor on is that members of Congress don’t get paid if there’s a shutdown — I think that gives my sentiment on how I feel about them.

President Trump has said he will lay off thousands of federal employees as part of the shutdown instead of furloughing them. Do you support that move?

The vernacular in the federal government is challenging — essential versus nonessential employees — if people are not essential, what’s their role in the federal government? 

But I do think it brings the broader question on working through agencies, working with your secretaries of agencies, and then division or bureau chiefs to determine what personnel you really need? Are they necessary as part of the function of government? What is the size of government appropriate? Is the bureaucracy so sclerotic that you can’t get things done and get them done in a timely fashion? If someone is unnecessary to do their job, do they need to be there? So I think it brings up a broader context. 

I’ve been heavily criticized in the past four years I’ve been in Congress — during President [Joe] Biden’s administration — to vote to fund the government, and it’s because it costs a lot of money to shut down the government, it costs a lot of money to reopen the government if you’re giving people back pay for not working. 

That’s why I say I would use the vernacular “delayed pay,” not furloughed, because they’re still being paid. Now, it’s not helpful to be paid because you’re not paying your bills going into it, but I do think that there are broader questions that have to be answered. 

I think that what President Trump is doing, which he often does, is he will say something because he wants to stimulate that thought process and debate, and that’s among members of both sides of the aisle. So I would say it’s a broader question that all of us have to answer in the nature of government.

Do you have a message for your constituents who are federal employees navigating this situation?

I would say it’s challenging for all of us. It’s, again, why I withheld my pay so that I’m in the same circumstance as other individuals. 

People, when they go to work, expect to be paid for the job they’re doing right now. These people are not working, and they will get back paid. That can be a small consolation if you have bills that are due. 

However, people get laid off all the time. My daughter got laid off earlier this year. So people lose jobs. At least federal employees will have back pay even though they’re furloughed. So that’s some measure of consolation, that they’re not working, but yet they will get a paycheck even though it’s back pay. 

But again, you have to take into consideration why both parties use shutdowns and lack of government funding or not funding the government as a political football? Which is why I joined the Eliminate Shutdowns Act. 

How do you feel about Democrats blaming Republicans for the shutdown?

If you go back and look at the press in the past shutdowns where Republicans have been the ones that have voted not to fund the government, Republicans have been vilified for that. I don’t see Democrats being treated in the same way for not voting to fund the government as I have Republicans. 

Even in my time in Congress, 13 times, [U.S. House Minority Leader] Hakeem Jeffries and [U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck] Schumer have voted to fund the government. As a matter of fact, most Democrats have voted to fund the government and have voted for clean continuing resolutions. So why is this one any different? 

So I do think that the Democrats voted no to fund the government. There are not enough votes — you need 60 votes in the Senate. That’s not a new thing, but people seem to forget that you have to have 60 votes in the Senate. That’s the reason why there are reconciliation bills. 

It’s the reason the Democrats did a reconciliation bill for ARPA funding, or COVID-19 funding. It’s the reason why the Democrats did reconciliation bills for Obamacare. It’s the reason why Democrats did reconciliation bills for the Infrastructure and Jobs Act, and why they did reconciliation bills for the [individual retirement arrangements], because you don’t need 60 votes in the Senate. 

So you have to have 60 votes in the Senate. The Republicans voted to open the government, to fund the government. The Democrats did not, with the exception of three of the senators. So I would say, who is responsible? They voted no to fund the government. They’re responsible for shutting down the government, and I think they ought to be treated in the same manner in which the press has treated Republicans in the past. It would be nice to see some fairness and objectivity. 

Furthermore, when you look at what they’re asking for and demanding — $1.5 trillion in new spending over seven weeks. What’s our annual budget? What’s the annual spending? It was $4 trillion under Biden. It was $6 trillion, $1.7 to $1.9 trillion deficit spending every single year, and they’re asking for $1.5 trillion over a seven-week period. 

We also won the election in 2024, and in winning the election, there were certain things we campaigned on, which we have done and which we passed in the reauthorizing of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and the Working Families Tax Cut Act. They want to undo some of the stuff that we have done, which we won the election to do. They want to upend the democratic process. 

I think that their demands are unreasonable; in addition to this, there was negotiation before the funding bill came up. What did the Democrats ask for? The Democrats specifically asked for a short-term continuing resolution and a clean continuing resolution. This is what they asked for in negotiations with the Chair of House Appropriations, Tom Cole. So there were negotiations that took place. 

We wanted a longer continuing resolution — my preference would have been for a longer continuing resolution. They wanted a short-term continuing resolution and a clean continuing resolution. We put up a short-term continuing resolution and a clean continuing resolution on the floor, but they still voted against it. 

Now, when the Democrats were in charge, I voted for continuing resolutions even though it was a challenge for me. They can do the same thing. They can vote for people. Instead, they’re voting for politics.

If not it were not attached to the continuing resolution, would you support extending the Affordable Care Act tax subsidies for families under 400 percent of the federal poverty level?

The premium tax credits, which go up to 400% of the federal poverty level, aren’t expiring, so that’s not even on the table. The Democrats are lying when they say that the premium tax credits aren’t being continued, and we’re putting everybody’s health care at risk. They’re in the regular appropriations process. 

If they want to have a conversation about the premium tax credits in the Unaffordable Care Act, then they should reopen the government so we can have that conversation.

Is there anything else that you’d like to add about the government shutdown?

We’re here in Washington, D.C., hoping to move Democrats to vote to reopen the government and then continue that negotiation process, which occurs through the appropriations committee. I know that our leadership is committed to do that. I know that the Senate is — [U.S. Senate Majority Leader John] Thune has said he is — but I think that there are consequences to individuals. 

I talked to an individual last night at our town hall who works at the Corps of Engineers. I spoke with General [Stephen] Osborne yesterday, who is the head of our Iowa National Guard troops, and they have about 500 federal employees currently not working. But more importantly, it’s getting parts, getting things that you need, doing repair and maintenance — I think they said there were 48,400 hours of maintenance that’s not getting done while people are furloughed. 

So there are real consequences to people. We were concerned about [Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for] Women, Infants, and Children, and people being able to have access to milk and to formula and to cereal — things for their young children, to protect both mothers and children. Luckily, President Trump has moved some funds so that the program can continue. 

But I’ll remind people what happened during the Obama administration, which had a very long shutdown. President Obama cordoned off and sent the U.S. Park Police down to the World War Two Memorial, wouldn’t allow people to have access to outdoor memorials, closed off national parks, and President Trump has said we’re not going to do that. We’re not going to hurt the American people because the Democrats have shut down the government, and I think that takes a lot of command presence. 

You could make it more in your favor, but instead of hurting the American people, he’s going to continue to work — just put forth a historic peace agreement with Israel and Hamas, and we’re hoping that lasts. We saw the release of all the living hostages. We hope the remains are returned as well. And we hope that there is lasting peace that comes through this, and now we can work on peace in Ukraine as well. 

So I think that there has been a very different tenor over this shutdown, which has not been to make it as painful for the American people as possible. But we heard what the Democrats said, which was we’re not going to open the government until planes fall out of the sky. 

Chuck Schumer was very vocal in saying that every day that this shutdown goes on, it’s better for us — better for us, The Democrats, better for me, Senator Schumer, not better for the American people. So again, I would ask them to vote for people. Stop voting for politics.