pull down to refresh

With So Many Cooks In The Kitchen Speaker Johnson's CR Was Always In Trouble
719 sats \ 4 comments \ @Cje95 9h Politics_And_Law
In case you haven't seen, within the last few hours, the bipartisan funding package announced yesterday to prevent a Government Shutdown has crumbled before our eyes. What started as Elon Musk airing his issues with it has turned into an avalanche as the Freedom Caucus, President Trump, and JD Vance have also joined in. Not only are the same Republicans as normal against this bill as is, but we have seen at least one Democrat come out publicly and denounce it (Maine Rep. Jared Golden).
This is a multi-pronged disaster for Speaker Johnson as not only could the Government shut down right before the holiday season creating a huge amount of economic chaos but also scuttle his chances of being elected Speaker next year. Now there still is plenty of time to hammer something out but Johnson is at this point forced to rely on Democratic votes to offset the automatic no-votes that certain Republicans do for any CR no matter what the reason is. Some Republicans are highly likely to hold Johnson relying on Democrat votes to keep the Government open against him even though he doesn't have another option because he doesn't have enough time.
Looking at this you can only shake your head because it is classic having too many cooks in the kitchen type of theater. Elon highlighted from the beginning how many pages it was and yeah it is huge at over 1,500 pages but that is what happens when you have to reference code for everything (Code is previously passed and signed into law legislation). Having written some bills that have touched code has made adding a single sentence go from a single line to a page to a page and a half because you have to reference the code and then that code links with another and it snowballs. It's all legal crap that has to be put into the bill so that it can't get sued over and tanked.
I mean not only was this a funding bill which is NEVER short but it dealt with disaster aid, the farm bill, and various other tidbits. While I am a huge supporter of what Elon is trying to do with cutting the fat from the Federal Government there is a time to do that and it is when your party controls Congress and the Presidency not just one chamber of Congress. His calls to shut down the Federal Government till January 20th would be nothing short of an absolute disaster. At the end of the day the biggest employer in the US is the Federal Government for better or worse and to stop everyone's paychecks for a month would just wreak havoc on the US economy since so many people already are living paycheck to paycheck.
This would mean Trump would inherit a freaking mess of drastic size and instead of hitting the ground running like he said he wanted to do he would be forced to get this hashed out and fixed. To make matters worse numerous employees will end up being furloughed by the Federal Government at this time and then be given backpay essentially paying them to stay home which is the exact opposite of what DOGE is supposed to do.
In the eyes of the international community, we would have a huge black eye just like what is going on in France and Germany as well as cause businesses to worry. Our adversaries would have a field day with this and they wouldn't have to lift a finger instead just point and laugh. Letting the Government shut down would only amplify efforts to make us look weak and weaken our national security. Sure saying it sounds great and people will think oh wow we are saving money but that isn't how it works at all and this isn't factoring in a credit agency possibly downgrading our debit which has happened before and makes borrowing just that much more expensive.
write
preview
related posts
137 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 8h
I totally disagree. Most of these bureaucrats are paid substantially more than their private sector counterparts. They can handle a little squeeze.
However, the main reason I don't agree is that the best possibility for DOGE having any success is to come in during a shutdown and only selectively bringing back the minority of government workers that they want to keep.
During shutdowns, it's illegal for the bureaucrats to use their work resources, which will make it much more difficult for them to undermine the efficiency efforts.
I don't think there's any requirement to bring everyone back, so this is much easier logistically than mass firings. Also, you might get some of the bureaucrats to look for other work preemptively, if this strategy is publicized.
reply
28 sats \ 1 reply \ @Cje95 OP 8h
So idk what you think people in the Federal Government are making but let me tell you you make DRAMATICALLY more in the private sector. I think you are mixing up the beurocrats and the federal contractors and those contractors shutting down the government is a bad move since they already either got paid or have legally binding contracts with the Government. Not to mention the unions in the Federal Government and the Biden Admin just extndd the CBA for the biggest ones for 5 years to “protect” them from DOGE.
If you lay off millions of people suddenly you tank an economy and the federal government employs I want to say ~3 million directly and then almost another 20 mil through state, local, and other services.
A ton of people are also going to be listed as essential think FAA, Customs, etc. and they are required to work as if they are getting paid without getting paid. Horrible for moral and has been linked before to well criminal activity so its a security risk.
Lastly the court of public opinion because of this paralysis and economic downturn will be dramatically against the Republican Party. Every shutdown has led to Republicans losing control in the next election.
reply
75 sats \ 0 replies \ @Undisciplined 8h
I'm not mixing anything up. I'm a labor economist and this is a known thing. For comparable job descriptions, the Feds pay more and require less. What is true is that industry will often pay more for the same profession, but they're different jobs and are generally much more demanding.
Laying off unproductive people does not tank an economy. That makes no sense and is just more Keynesian nonsense. I think there are more than four million federal workers, but they don't all get sent home during shutdowns, as you said. I don't know what the ratio is of "essential" and "non-essential" workers, though. Three million is probably about right. I was under the impression that the essential workers still got paid, but I certainly may be wrong about that.
Why bring up state and local? They don't shutdown when the feds do.
The last point is probably true, but I'm not a Republican, so I don't care. I get why that factors in to what's likely to happen, though. If they can make a permanent (or long-lasting) dent in the bureaucracy, I want them to take the opportunity. No other plan that I've heard strikes me as remotely plausible (and you didn't really contend with that).
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 4h
With regard to the 1,500 pages... there should be some rule which limits the total size of all laws, as measured by reading time, to a certain amount.
It's just crazy how bloated the system has become.
Of course, the lawyers would never go for it
reply