New House GOP Rule Lets Lawmakers Fire Individual Federal Workers

[owebo]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

You a ,gov worker?

Not one that Mango Mussolini could effect. The money I get from the Feds is a retirement check. Also not something the Gropenfuhrer could do much about.

English?

 

[Seawytch]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

even funnier is the fact that the left has been complaining that the right is for big government, wont do anything to reduce the size of it, always wants to grow it. Now that the right does something that will allow them to trim the workforce to proper levels, and get rid of agencies that serve no real purpose, the left claims that the right is trying to destroy jobs.
This is needed to shrink the government to managable levels. As it is, if you are a federal employee working for the department of blow jobs, and that department gets cut, the government pretty much has to find a new agency to place you in. What good does it do to shrink the government by getting rid of an agency or department when all of the people that make up that specific department just get moved somewhere else. Bottom line is that not only does the payroll stay the same, but you now get another agency that is way over staffed ( so the left can complain that the right is hiring people that are not needed)
The left really needs to make up their minds on exactly what it is they want. they want to reduce government payroll, but they want to do it without getting rid of anyone. They complain that government workers are overpaid and only do 1/4 of the work that they would do if they were private, but they insist on nobody losing their jobs.
Could someone explain to me how you reduce the size of government, and reduce the federal payroll while at the same time not only keeping all of the workers, but even giving the a raise while we are at it?
You want smaller less intrusive government? this is the only way to do it.
I wonder if there would be any complaints from the left if the people losing their jobs worked for the ATF or the DEA.

That's because the majority of jobs Obozo created were related to the government.

Again with the appalling lack of links to support your claims.

You do realize that we have been experiencing the longest uninterrupted string of private sector job growth in our history, right?

 

[owebo]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

even funnier is the fact that the left has been complaining that the right is for big government, wont do anything to reduce the size of it, always wants to grow it. Now that the right does something that will allow them to trim the workforce to proper levels, and get rid of agencies that serve no real purpose, the left claims that the right is trying to destroy jobs.
This is needed to shrink the government to managable levels. As it is, if you are a federal employee working for the department of blow jobs, and that department gets cut, the government pretty much has to find a new agency to place you in. What good does it do to shrink the government by getting rid of an agency or department when all of the people that make up that specific department just get moved somewhere else. Bottom line is that not only does the payroll stay the same, but you now get another agency that is way over staffed ( so the left can complain that the right is hiring people that are not needed)
The left really needs to make up their minds on exactly what it is they want. they want to reduce government payroll, but they want to do it without getting rid of anyone. They complain that government workers are overpaid and only do 1/4 of the work that they would do if they were private, but they insist on nobody losing their jobs.
Could someone explain to me how you reduce the size of government, and reduce the federal payroll while at the same time not only keeping all of the workers, but even giving the a raise while we are at it?
You want smaller less intrusive government? this is the only way to do it.
I wonder if there would be any complaints from the left if the people losing their jobs worked for the ATF or the DEA.

That's because the majority of jobs Obozo created were related to the government.

Again with the appalling lack of links to support your claims.

You do realize that we have been experiencing the longest uninterrupted string of private sector job growth in our history, right?

Yes, democrats have made burger flipping a career, and the 58 hour work week the new normal....

 

[Seawytch]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

You a ,gov worker?

Not one that Mango Mussolini could effect. The money I get from the Feds is a retirement check. Also not something the Gropenfuhrer could do much about.

English?

Yes, that was English. I'm retired military working for local government. Nothing that Twitler's administration can do much about. Oh sure, he and the GOP can fuck up the VA and privatize it (against the wishes and desires of actual veterans), but I don't use the VA.

 

[owebo]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

You a ,gov worker?

Not one that Mango Mussolini could effect. The money I get from the Feds is a retirement check. Also not something the Gropenfuhrer could do much about.

English?

Yes, that was English. I'm retired military working for local government. Nothing that Twitler's administration can do much about. Oh sure, he and the GOP can fuck up the VA and privatize it (against the wishes and desires of actual veterans), but I don't use the VA.

You can tell you're a .gov worker....

 

[Seawytch]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

even funnier is the fact that the left has been complaining that the right is for big government, wont do anything to reduce the size of it, always wants to grow it. Now that the right does something that will allow them to trim the workforce to proper levels, and get rid of agencies that serve no real purpose, the left claims that the right is trying to destroy jobs.
This is needed to shrink the government to managable levels. As it is, if you are a federal employee working for the department of blow jobs, and that department gets cut, the government pretty much has to find a new agency to place you in. What good does it do to shrink the government by getting rid of an agency or department when all of the people that make up that specific department just get moved somewhere else. Bottom line is that not only does the payroll stay the same, but you now get another agency that is way over staffed ( so the left can complain that the right is hiring people that are not needed)
The left really needs to make up their minds on exactly what it is they want. they want to reduce government payroll, but they want to do it without getting rid of anyone. They complain that government workers are overpaid and only do 1/4 of the work that they would do if they were private, but they insist on nobody losing their jobs.
Could someone explain to me how you reduce the size of government, and reduce the federal payroll while at the same time not only keeping all of the workers, but even giving the a raise while we are at it?
You want smaller less intrusive government? this is the only way to do it.
I wonder if there would be any complaints from the left if the people losing their jobs worked for the ATF or the DEA.

That's because the majority of jobs Obozo created were related to the government.

Again with the appalling lack of links to support your claims.

You do realize that we have been experiencing the longest uninterrupted string of private sector job growth in our history, right?

Yes, democrats have made burger flipping a career, and the 58 hour work week the new normal....

So that's your way of minimizing the low unemployment rate? How will you spin it if it starts to go up when the Petulant Elect takes office?

Obama has had one of the slowest rates of growth in public sector jobs. When that number starts to go up under Cheetolini, I can't wait to see the fans of Putin's Puppet start to dance.

 

[imawhosure]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

You a ,gov worker?

Not one that Mango Mussolini could effect. The money I get from the Feds is a retirement check. Also not something the Gropenfuhrer could do much about.

English?

Yes, that was English. I'm retired military working for local government. Nothing that Twitler's administration can do much about. Oh sure, he and the GOP can fuck up the VA and privatize it (against the wishes and desires of actual veterans), but I don't use the VA.

You can tell you're a .gov worker....

And with that statement, I agree Owebo.

 

[Seawytch]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

You a ,gov worker?

Not one that Mango Mussolini could effect. The money I get from the Feds is a retirement check. Also not something the Gropenfuhrer could do much about.

English?

Yes, that was English. I'm retired military working for local government. Nothing that Twitler's administration can do much about. Oh sure, he and the GOP can fuck up the VA and privatize it (against the wishes and desires of actual veterans), but I don't use the VA.

You can tell you're a .gov worker....

Because of my tireless dedication to my fellow man? Thanks!

 

[Conservative65]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

It's about no longer paying people not doing any work a salary.

 

[Shrimpbox]

Trump’s transition team has been asking for names of specific government employees.

WASHINGTON ― House Republicans resurrected a decades-old provision in their new rules package that allows lawmakers to lower the salary or eliminate the job of individual federal employees.

Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, championed the arcane provision, called the Holman Rule for the Indiana congressman who created it in 1876, as a tool to allow lawmakers to make targeted spending reductions or eliminate positions they deem unnecessary. In an interview with The Washington Post, Griffith said he would like members to use the Holman Rule like a sniper rifle instead of like a shotgun.

Democratic lawmakers representing districts in the Capitol region, where many federal employees work, said in a statement that the rule would “undermine civil service employee protections by stripping away necessary safeguards.” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) called the measure “the Armageddon Rule,” and said it’s “a backdoor way for Republicans to dismantle the federal workforce.”

Democrats also said they feared the rule gives Republicans the tools to root out individual federal workers who hold views or perform work that is not favored by the incoming administration. President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team reportedly asked for the names of individual Department of Energy employees who worked on the Paris climate accord.

“The Republican Rules package provides them with the surgical tools necessary to reach into the inner workings of the federal government and cut away each part and employee that runs afoul of their ideological agenda,” Connolly said in a statement. “This, coupled with the President-elect’s proposed federal hiring freeze and the nomination of individuals to head agencies they openly oppose, could be devastating to the critical mission of the federal government.”

Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.) called the rule “political theatre.”

“With the inclusion of the Holman Rule in the House rules package, House Republicans have made it clear that they plan to continue their assault on our nation’s civil servants and to subject hardworking federal employees to the ideological and political whims of Congress,” Sarbanes said in a statement.

Congress has always held the power to appropriate or cut funds for executive-branch agencies. What makes the Holman Rule unique is that it allows individual members of Congress to cut the salaries or entirely eliminate the jobs of individual workers. These targeted cuts would override existing federal workplace protections.

More: New House GOP Rule Lets Lawmakers Fire Individual Federal Workers

I feel sorry for government workers who will now be subjected to this McCarthyism bullshit.

No, now maybe their tenure will be based on meritocracy instead of party affiliation. So many need to get the pink slip. For people like lack a coata no one should ever be fired. It's about time. Start pruning the dead wood.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

Why does the Left so heavily rely on "if it had been" to make their arguments, instead of simply recognizing the nature of power.

Trump has every right to choose his own representatives, and no obligation to continue providing Obama supporters with a paycheck.

Federal workers are not "his representatives".

I was speaking, of course, of his clearing of the ambassador pool.

 

[Seawytch]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

Why does the Left so heavily rely on "if it had been" to make their arguments, instead of simply recognizing the nature of power.

Trump has every right to choose his own representatives, and no obligation to continue providing Obama supporters with a paycheck.

Federal workers are not "his representatives".

I was speaking, of course, of his clearing of the ambassador pool.

Okay, but that was not the subject of the OP nor of my response. Political appointees are different and expected. Yes, it was assholey of Herr Drumph's team not to give the usual extensions for ambassadors with school aged children, but he's pissed about Obama throwing his boyfriends "diplomats" (spies) out.

 

[Papageorgio]

I know plenty of federal workers who work hard and do a good job. If it's about making it easier to fire non-performing workers, that is one thing. If it's all about firing for ideological reasons, then that is another.

The fact that people are gleeful that they will be losing their jobs is a bit disgusting. They are just as worthy of respect as workers as the people in manufacturing.

I don't dispute that the majority of federal workers work hard. There are jobs that perform or hold no real purpose and need to be eliminated. The purpose of an executive branch is to serve the people not just a few.

So I agree if this is to cut government waste and weed out under performers this is a great move and we might finally have a person who isn't afraid to clean up some waste. The article comes from Huffpo which is a slanted left source. The OP is a nutjob, so I will wait and see. I have no glee in people losing their jobs, I don't mind eliminating waste.

 

[Seawytch]

I know plenty of federal workers who work hard and do a good job. If it's about making it easier to fire non-performing workers, that is one thing. If it's all about firing for ideological reasons, then that is another.

The fact that people are gleeful that they will be losing their jobs is a bit disgusting. They are just as worthy of respect as workers as the people in manufacturing.

I don't dispute that the majority of federal workers work hard. There are jobs that perform or hold no real purpose and need to be eliminated. The purpose of an executive branch is to serve the people not just a few.

So I agree if this is to cut government waste and weed out under performers this is a great move and we might finally have a person who isn't afraid to clean up some waste. The article comes from Huffpo which is a slanted left source. The OP is a nutjob, so I will wait and see. I have no glee in people losing their jobs, I don't mind eliminating waste.

Nobody minds eliminating waste except those getting rich off it...and I assure you, Federal workers are not getting rich off of waste.

Presidential administrations should not be able to individually hire and fire the Federal workforce. Yes, there actually should be "career" people in Federal government.

There is a conservative poster here, can't remember his name, that uses Spock smoking as his avatar...he works for the Federal government. Ask him if he'd like it if Obama could personally fire him.

Update: Mudwhistle...that's his name. Conservative federal employee. I'm sure he'd be thrilled if Obama could personally fire him...

 

[blastoff]

Sounds like DC under president Trump is off to a fantastic start to me. With lots more to come I'm sure.

Bureaucracy, deadbeats, waste, fraud, business as usual, etc., etc. we're coming to get you!

 

[The Irish Ram]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

The PRIVATE sector.....Fewer public sector workers means revenue actually is spent on essentials.

I thought all people deserve jobs.

I hear McDonald's is hiring.

We need smaller government.

 

[danielpalos]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

The PRIVATE sector.....Fewer public sector workers means revenue actually is spent on essentials.

I thought all people deserve jobs.

I hear McDonald's is hiring.

We need smaller government.

there is no unemployment problem, only underpayment under Any form of capitalism.

 

[hadit]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

The PRIVATE sector.....Fewer public sector workers means revenue actually is spent on essentials.

I thought all people deserve jobs.

I hear McDonald's is hiring.

We need smaller government.

there is no unemployment problem, only underpayment under Any form of capitalism.

That's because there's no enough wealth to pay everyone a high salary.

 

[danielpalos]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

The PRIVATE sector.....Fewer public sector workers means revenue actually is spent on essentials.

I thought all people deserve jobs.

I hear McDonald's is hiring.

We need smaller government.

there is no unemployment problem, only underpayment under Any form of capitalism.

That's because there's no enough wealth to pay everyone a high salary.

Henry Ford had enough wealth to double salaries and realize gains from efficiency.

 

[Papageorgio]

I know plenty of federal workers who work hard and do a good job. If it's about making it easier to fire non-performing workers, that is one thing. If it's all about firing for ideological reasons, then that is another.

The fact that people are gleeful that they will be losing their jobs is a bit disgusting. They are just as worthy of respect as workers as the people in manufacturing.

I don't dispute that the majority of federal workers work hard. There are jobs that perform or hold no real purpose and need to be eliminated. The purpose of an executive branch is to serve the people not just a few.

So I agree if this is to cut government waste and weed out under performers this is a great move and we might finally have a person who isn't afraid to clean up some waste. The article comes from Huffpo which is a slanted left source. The OP is a nutjob, so I will wait and see. I have no glee in people losing their jobs, I don't mind eliminating waste.

Nobody minds eliminating waste except those getting rich off it...and I assure you, Federal workers are not getting rich off of waste.

Presidential administrations should not be able to individually hire and fire the Federal workforce. Yes, there actually should be "career" people in Federal government.

There is a conservative poster here, can't remember his name, that uses Spock smoking as his avatar...he works for the Federal government. Ask him if he'd like it if Obama could personally fire him.

Update: Mudwhistle...that's his name. Conservative federal employee. I'm sure he'd be thrilled if Obama could personally fire him...

Being terminated to end waste is okay by me. Being fired because of your politics is another.

Cuts in the federal government are not a problem. What would be better is taking layers of bureaucracy is welcomed. That will eliminate time and jobs. The VA is an example of over kill of red tape. It takes forever to get benefits that should be going to deserving soldiers.