In a test of conservative grass root clout, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker won 53% to 46% in the recent recall election.
Posted on 08/11/2012 9:11:03 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
The spending plan proposed by Rep. Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, Mitt Romney’s pick as the Republican vice presidential candidate, has drawn strong opposition from federal employees.
Under the proposed House Republican budget, which Ryan sponsored as chairman of the Budget Committee, savings from the federal workforce would total $368 billion over 10 years. The two-year freeze on basic federal pay rates, scheduled to expire at the end of this year, would be extended through 2015 for a total of five years.
“The Path to Prosperity,” as the budget plan is named, also calls on federal workers to make an unspecified “more equitable contribution to their retirement plans,” which means higher costs to employees. Additionally, the federal workforce would be cut, through attrition over three years, by 10 percent, which equals more than 200,000 positions.
Because the Departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Justice and Homeland Security have so many employees, the majority of the eliminated positions would come from these agencies, all of which are related to national security.
The budget document says its plans “reflect the growing frustration of workers across the country at the privileged rules enjoyed by government employees.”
Ryan’s budget justifies the employee-related cuts, saying “it is no coincidence that private sector employment continues to grow only sluggishly while the government expands: To pay for the public sector’s growth, Washington must immediately tax the private sector or else borrow and impose taxes later to pay down the debt.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
In a test of conservative grass root clout, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker won 53% to 46% in the recent recall election.
>>The spending plan proposed by Rep. Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, Mitt Romney’s pick as the Republican vice presidential candidate, has drawn strong opposition from federal employees.<<
That alone is reason to approve of him.
Ryan/Walker, now THAT would be a dream team!
Yup!
Those poor, poor federal workers. Poor dears.
Seems to me simply abolishing those agencies would give you all the personnel cuts you needed.
Oh, and selling off the public lands would do quite a bit to dispose of Department of Interior and all the problems they create.
They do invaluable work for you.
March 20, 2012 — “..... National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley took issue with both the substance and rhetoric in the Republican proposal in her statement Tuesday.
The Republican-proposed reforms could make federal jobs less attractive and a smaller workforce could lead to “a substantial increase in the use of unaccountable private contractors and a much higher cost of providing services,” Kelley said.
“It is almost as though the authors of this budget don’t know, don’t understand or don’t care about the key role federal employees play in helping keep our nation safe, ensuring that our food and medicines are safe and effective, that our air and water are safe, and performing so many other services that people not only expect and want, but need as well,” she said.”......
BOO HOO....they’ve slept on silk cushions in the lead car of the government gravy train long enough. It’s about time our public “servants” live like the taxpayers who are forced to keep them in their fat paychecks, Cadillac health care and undeserved benefits.
His willingness to rein in this outrageously bloated federal spending on paper-shufflers is a feather in Ryan’s cap.
“Oh, and selling off the public lands would do quite a bit to dispose of Department of Interior and all the problems they create. “
If they did this they’d spend the money rather quickly and it would be gone. No source of revenue will help without cutting spending - thus your point about cutting government agencies it the best approach.
Paul Ryan’s budget plan hits federal workers
Federal workers = oxymoron in most cases.
Okay, but what’s the downside?
works for me.
When did Government employees become accountable????????
Why stop there. Sell the public lands. Lock, stock and barrel. Sell the national parks as well.
The Federal workers still get their step and promotion increases..so their pay will still remain high with the Ryan proposal. Plus..those who live in expensive areas still get higher pay to cover houseing and living costs..like DC.
March 20, 2012 — .......[Gene] “Sperling [director of the White House National Economic Council] said he was also “disappointed” that Ryan’s plan proposes relieving the Defense Department from the Budget Control Act’s threat of sequestration just months after negotiations produced what both parties had agreed was an “offensive” threat of “mutually assured destruction.” Such a move, he said, would reverse for ideological reasons the one area of bipartisan consensus that is in the legislation and thus “actually create an incentive not to compromise.”......
Every citizen who calls himself/herself a "conservative" must begin to use every means available to connect the dots and direct relationship between what is called the "size of government" and the above fact!
Once ordinary working citizens understand the connection between the money "taken" from them, as shown on their pay stubs and the increase in size and pay/benefits of federal employees over recent years, they will understand why Ryan's plan makes sense for them.
So-called Democrat "progressives" promote an idea of moral equivalency between "jobs" in wealth-creating private companies and wealth-depeting jobs in all levels of government. Then, Democrats rely on what they believe to be economic ignorance of working people to make that connection.
Ryan may just be the person who can make the connection crystal clear.
What is "big government" but massive government employment, combined with politicians and bureaucrats? To reduce the size requires taking away the government "bottle" from the mouths of those who feed on the hard work of their private sector neighbors.
I would be much harder on them. First day fire half nonmilitary personnel. Close at least five cabinet level departments. Eliminate the BATF. Second day fire the another third of the Federal Workforce. Close three more cabinet level departments. Close the EPA.
That would get us to around twice the number of Federal workers we actually need.
If anyone complains explain that the door is right there, don't let it hit you on the way out.
You might work backwards a bit and see where the financial rupture is happening first.
“Because the Departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Justice and Homeland Security have so many employees, the majority of the eliminated positions would come from these agencies, all of which are related to national security.”
This is the old ploy used by Democrats in cities that needed to make cuts to stay solvent: “If we cut the budget, firemen and policemen will be laid off first.” They never want to cut the third and fourth assistants to the city manager. So they hold taxpayers hostage and the cuts are voted down.
And eventually the cities go bankrupt and firemen and policemen do lose their jobs when there is no more money to waste on those assistants to the city brass.
I’m a federal employee, and I’m cheering Paul Ryan’s selection.
The Monday morning “Occupy Starbucks” coffee run with my coworkers will be interesting. They’ll be frantic.
That probably arises from the fact civil service rules are so new to so many states ~ the old spoils system worked that way.
Postal workers are already overpaid $78 billion on their retirement plans and have been subsidizing the federal government the last few years.
Hear! Hear! You have my vote.
Not to rub this in but you haven't informed yourself enough on these matters to make comments.
My feelings exactly!
Could save a bundle by giving Civil Service System back to federal workers and eliminating the corruption and excess bonuses of the Senior Executive Service.
Good luck with that!
Word! I don’t give two flip-sh!ts what any Federal Employee thinks.
They added a block to our pay stub that shows how much the government contributes toward our health care, retirement, etc. I think that’s a great idea... most government employees have no idea the amount of taxpayer money goes into their benefits on a monthly basis. We pay almost nothing toward our own retirement other than the TSP contributions we make, but even then the government matches up to 5%.
Feds (I am one) need to understand who they work for.
Private contractors are accountable to their bids and written contracts. How can they forget the GSA guy in the bathtub?
My daughter works for a large county government. After growing up with our private business she absolutely hates the politics and prevalent work ethic. Seems like day care for idiots.
Actually, just to head that argument off, that's not the way it was done with the ORIGINAL states added before the purchase of Louisiana. In those states the federal government SOLD the land and kept the money!
Later on the federal government purchased every last single acre added to the United States ~ so that land must be sold and the money reverted to the federal treasury ~ not to the states.
Now if a state wants to buy that land, I"d expect market value, not book value!
‘everyone who is anyone knows that if you fired all the federal employees and murdered all the federal retirees in their beds, when you woke up the next morning you’d still be running a massive deficit.’
True, but it is a good start!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2917190/posts
.....[Paul] Ryan has spent much of the past year describing the election in similar terms—not simply as a referendum on Barack Obama’s presidency, but a choice between two competing, and very different, American futures. And Ryan has said he thought Mitt Romney shared that view. Here’s how Ryan put it in an interview with THE WEEKLY STANDARD on May 3:
“It’s very clear from his [Romney’s] last three or four speeches – and he’s very involved in writing these, setting this message – that he wants to bring this to a choice. Not just a referendum on Obama’s bad stewardship but on the American idea itself and a choice of two futures. It seems clear to me – because he’s embraced the kind of economic reforms we need to get the American idea back on track and prevent a debt crisis – that he is willing to bring this thing to the clear, clean choice it needs to be to give to the country. And that he’s ready to do that. And that for all the risk-aversion stories that have been written about him he seems to me that he’s gotten himself in the mindset of understanding the moment we are facing and the need to bring this real clear conversation to the country about the choice they have to make. And that these founding principles are really important. And so I really feel like – this is probably not the election he thought he was going to run, say two years ago when he first decided to run, but I think he’s become extremely comfortable and accepting of what it is and what it needs to be. Everything he says and does gives me a sense of that.”..................
God forbid that a government job might not be a lifetime of sloth and an even longer pension! These idiots think it is fine for the public sector to struggle, but talk about eliminating govt workers and they are PISSED!
Since that agency is almost totally unionized (Except for top level staff and management) everybody knew those things already.
In any case, the reason compensation for health care is made directly by the employer is so that you avoid income taxes on that amount. Anything paid by your employer as compensation or as a benefit is accounted for by the employer as an employee expense, and that's whether you are dealing with the private sector or the government.
If folks want to pay their employees more up front, and subject them to taxes they wouldn't otherwise have to pay, I suppose they'll be willing to supplement those payments to make up for the additional tax liability on the employee, right?
Of course not ~ they won't do that. Every employer has people in personnel and accounting whose job is to nickel and dime everything to save every penny.
It is to the company's advantage to pay people such that the employee's tax liability is minimized while the utility of their compensation is maximized.
What happens to tax payers who want a greater burden of market level compensation placed on their employees is they get to pay higher taxes down the road.
overpaid $78 billion on their retirement plans and have been subsidizing the federal government the last few years.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Makes you feel ‘good’ to realize the Fed is ‘guarding the chicken coop’ in regards YOUR retirement fund doesn’t it..
Now you know how us SSA types feel. Did you go private sector after USPS retirement? Of course CM’s contributions went into your fund .....
You still up by the substation?
Sounds like a deal eh!
I would sure hope so. I doubt if it hits them hard enough though.
NONMILLITARY.
Get the governemnt out of the areas it should NEVER have been and the country can absorb all the effective and useful governemnt workers into a booming economy quite easily. Both of them!
By now you should have figured out no one trusts the federal government ~ never did.
You could also privatize the FDA and USDA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.