Don't Cut Social Security and Medicare, Cut Unfunded Wars and the Military; Cut Unnecessary and Unconstitutional Federal Agencies, Departments and Programs, Cut the Federal Workforce and Federal Compensation; and Stop Using the Public Treasury to Fund Agenda 21
The Federal Workforce Cost the U.S. Taxpayers $447 Billion This Year
For a nation battered by layoffs, plant closings and double-digit unemployment, Uncle Sam's hiring largesse should be a source of hope and inspiration. However, 98 percent of working Americans aren't federal employees, and many are wondering aloud why federal civil servants haven't faced the wage freezes, layoffs, furloughs, pay cuts and hiring freezes that many in the general work force have endured. - Should federal workers be asked to take pay cut, too?, McClatchy Newspapers, May 19, 2010November 10, 2010
Don Surber - Wall Street has nothing on this administration.
At least $35 billion a year in pay and bonuses — more than $200,000 a year — is going to the 10% of federal workers.
The number of federal workers receiving $150,000 — $3,000 a week — to push their pencils has doubled under Barack Obama as the president pays back all those public employee unions.
They cannot be fired and they enjoy the best fringe benefits in the world.
They are our Overlords.
Enough.
Civil servants should not be unionized. Republicans should ban all federal unions — and make anyone GS 12 or above a will-and-pleasure employee.
That 171,689 of them now make $150,000 a year — or more — $200,000 a year when those Cadillac fringe benefits are included — is sickening.
That is $16 billion in pay and fringes.
And Barack Obama dares to demonize Wall Street compensation?
It is not all his fault. In 2005, we overpaid “only” 12,399 of them.
If they can do better in the private sector, then let them go.
From Glenn Reynolds: CHANGE:
“Retiring at 62 became law in France on Wednesday, a victory for President Nicolas Sarkozy’s conservative government and a defeat for the unions that waged massive strikes and street protests to try to stop the austerity measure.”
But while we scoff at France, let us remember that federal employees can retire at 56. It will take another 17 years for that minimum to rise — be still my heart — to 57.
So who is the fool this time, fool?
Cuts in federal personnel must be made. And they must be deep. And they must be painful.
The government is broke.
This is what bankrupt companies do.
Bring in Romney. He knows how to turn a bankrupt company around.
The USA Today report.
Federal Worker Salaries of $150,000+ Double on Obama’s Watch
Hmmm...interesting. Social Security recipients don't get a raise, yet government workers do?November 10, 2010
The Blaze - Federal government workers have notoriously earned more than — in many cases more than double — their private sector counterparts for a while. But a new analysis from USA Today sheds light on the shocking size and scope of pay increases for federal workers, most notably in recent years. According to USA Today, the number of federal workers earning salaries of $150,000 or more has increased tenfold over the past five years and doubled since President Obama took office in January 2009.
While the rest of the U.S. economy remains stagnant, the fast-growing pay of federal employees has raised eyebrows among conservative
Republicans. Though the GOP made significant gains during last week’s midterm elections, Republicans are wary of Democrats’ plans to approve a 1.4 percent across-the-board pay raise to 2.1 million federal workers during the upcoming lame-duck session. USA Today reports:Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, who will head the panel overseeing federal pay, says he wants a pay freeze and prefers a 10% pay cut. “It‘s stunning when you see what’s happened to federal compensation,” he says. “Every metric shows we’re heading in the wrong direction.”National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley counters that the proposed raise “is a modest amount and should be implemented” to help make salaries more comparable with those in the private sector.
Federal salaries have grown robustly in recent years, according to a USA TODAY analysis of Office of Personnel Management data. Key findings:
• Government-wide raises. Top-paid staff have increased in every department and agency. The Defense Department had nine civilians earning $170,000 or more in 2005, 214 when Obama took office and 994 in June.
• Long-time workers thrive. The biggest pay hikes have gone to employees who have been with the government for 15 to 24 years. Since 2005, average salaries for this group climbed 25% compared with a 9% inflation rate.
• Physicians rewarded. Medical doctors at veterans hospitals, prisons and elsewhere earn an average of $179,500, up from $111,000 in 2005.
Federal workers earning $150,000 or more now make up 3.9% of the country’s workforce, up from just 0.4% in 2005. In addition, federal workers enjoy more robust benefits packages than their private sector counterparts.
Since 2000, federal pay and benefits have increased 3% annually above inflation compared with 0.8% for private workers, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Members of Congress earn $174,000, up from $141,300 in 2000, an increase below the rate of inflation.
Coalition Launches Drive to Fight Social Security Cuts
November 19, 2010AFL-CIO Now Blog - As Social Security turns 75 years old Aug. 14, the nation’s most successful social program likely will be under attack by the federal budget deficit commission, which, by all accounts, is considering benefits cuts and raising the retirement age.
Today, more than 60 groups, including the AFL-CIO, announced the creation of the coalition Strengthen Social Security…Don’t Cut It. The group is launching a major mobilization to push back the commission’s phony assertions, backed by the Wall Street spin machine, that claim Social Security is a major component of the budget deficit and is teetering on the brink of disaster.
In a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., the group outlined plans to build support in Congress to fight benefits cuts and press candidates this election to pledge to fight any move to raise the retirement age or privatization scheme. Says Ed Coyle, executive director of the Alliance for Retired Americans:
The Strengthen Social Security campaign unites everyone here to improve—not weaken—Social Security. We are united against any cuts in benefits, such as increases in the retirement age, and to any form of privatization of Social Security.
We will stand united if the commission calls for any cuts to Social Security. We are launching a major lobbying campaign for Congress to block their recommendations.
Speaking at the press conference, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said that:
Raising the retirement age is a benefit cut, plain and simple. It is a cut that is unnecessary and one that Americans can ill-afford.
He also says it unfairly singles out workers in demanding physical occupations,
Workers like my father who spent his life in the mines and couldn’t work another day by the time he qualified for Social Security—and those older workers who may no longer be able to find work due to age discrimination.
Social Security benefits are the largest source of retirement income for most retirees. For six of 10 seniors, Social Security represents more than half of their income. In addition, nearly one-half of older unmarried women and widows, and one-third of all beneficiaries, have little other than Social Security and rely on its monthly benefit for 90 percent or more of their retirement income. Says Terry O’Neill, president of the National Organization for Women (NOW):
Social Security is the mainstay for millions of older women. Every year, a major share of the nearly 24 million women age 62 and older who receive benefits are kept out of poverty because of Social Security. Often that monthly Social Security check is their only income.
A new Gallup Poll out today shows that by a nearly 2-to-1 margin, Americans oppose raising the retirement age and, by an even bigger margin, say the best way to strengthen Social Security is to ensure the wealthiest pay their fair share.
Currently, all workers pay the Social Security payroll tax on the first $106,000 of their earnings. Earnings above $106,000 are exempt from the Social Security payroll tax. That means a grocery clerk or warehouse worker pays a bigger chunk of income to Social Security than a hedge fund manager. By a 67 percent to 30 percent margin, the public supports raising the Social Security payroll tax to cover all earnings.Also taking part in the press conference, AFSCME President Gerald McEntee says the deficit commission is trying to turn Social Security into a scapegoat for the deficit. Social Security is not the problem.
Social Security—with a $2.6 trillion surplus projected to grow to $4.3 trillion by 2023—is not the cause of the nation’s deficit. Says O’Neill:
The fiscal commission should address the real causes of the deficit—unfunded wars, irresponsible tax breaks for the wealthiest, and an economic crisis caused by financial regulatory failures.
This fall, says Coyle, coalition members will be “demanding clear, unequivocal answers from the candidates on where they stand on Social Security.”
As McEntee warns congressional candidates:
If you break promise from 75 years ago, we will hold you accountable. Keep your hands off our Social Security.
A Formula for Real Economic Growth: Cut Public Employee Pay by 20%
February 8, 2010Big Government - Slate’s Jacob Weisberg came unhinged on Friday and gave the country the finger.
“Down with the People!” he screams from Bill Gates lap. As Jacob sees it, we the people are demanding two mutually exclusive things: premium government services and tax cuts; and when we can’t have what we want, we become unruly children.
There is of course a third option, and I think it is the voting issue for the 2010 elections. It frankly amazes me that TPM-style Democrats going after Paul Ryan’s Roadmap, don’t see it coming…
You can thank me later, but I just saved the United State of America at least $278,309,600,000.00 PER YEAR. You read that right. $278 BILLION per year. That’s almost entirely what Medicaid will spend this year for children and the disabled. That’s what our normal deficit looks like without TARP and stimulus.
The crazy thing is how easy it was to do. It took me like three minutes. And since I’m a big open source, creative commons guy I’m even posting my magical formula shown here using 2008’s budget:
Somebody start printing bumper stickers baby, so everyone can see how much we save when we cut federal, state, and local public employee pay by 20%.*
Amazing isn’t it? And Obama, Weisberg, and SEIU are out of their friggin minds if they think 20% government pay cuts aren’t on the table come next November. What are they going to do? Quit? Strike? Bring it on. Newt’s 1994 revolution will look uneventful by comparison. We call them civil “servants” for a reason.
We don’t need to be politically delicate about this, we aren’t advocating a single program cut, no school closed, no park uncleaned, no fireman not coming to save you.
All of that will continue to happen.But the government employees doing all this marvelous stuff for us are going to earn 20% less…. and from now on their future pay increases will be tied to private wage inflation.
Our country is in deep financial straits, and it is time for government workers to share our pain and get their interests aligned with ours. They’ll make more money when we do.
Yes, there are further budget issues we face, entitlements must be humanely reigned in, but before we can seriously look at future debt projections, we must first return sanity to the public labor market. Until we cut government pay down to size, we can’t honestly talk about which programs to fund… because right now they all cost too much.
Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats should refuse to deal with any other issue until this one is fixed. They should make Senator Shelby’s 70 holds seem a trifle. Want a jobs bill? Let’s fix government pay so main street can have a tax cut. $278 BILLION as small business tax relief at the federal, state, and local level is one hell of a jobs program. Real jobs. The kind that don’t have the dirty taint of government on them.
China will LOVE us. Wall Street will soar. It will be serious proof Washington DC has been cracked to the core. It will be morning in America.
I can’t imagine a single Indie voter not rushing to the voting booth on this one. Politicians courting the tea party, listen up: this gets completely around the false choice the left wants the voters to have to make. Instantly, the debate changes.
*Of course, Josh Marshall, there will be no military cuts. Minus military wages, the Bureau of Economic Analysis places government compensation in 2008, at $1,391,548,000,000.00
Cut Federal Pay to Help Reduce the Deficit Before Cutting Social Security Benefits
Feds working under the old retirement system CSRS might retire if they have 30 plus years and 55 years old. The ones under the new system FERS have 1/3 of their retirement under Social Security. The minimum age for Social Security motivates the FERS fed worker retirement plans. Freezing the pay increase will not cause a massive exodus of fed workers except for the ones under the older system CSRS. Many of them know that RIFs (reduction in force) are coming with the new Congress and budgetary problems. The DoD/NASA workers went thru this during Bush 41 and Clinton, but the non DoD workers are going to face culture shock as their departments face layoffs and reductions. - Poundstone, Frozen Assets (Pay Raise for Federal Employees), March 2, 2010March 2, 2010
Federal Times - The federal government is borrowing too much and costs too much to run. If it were a private company, it would have cut employee salaries [and department budgets] a long time ago to make ends meet, say two economists in a column for Forbes magazine.
And that’s what the federal government needs to do to show it’s serious about fiscal responsibility and reducing the deficit, write economists Robert Stein and Brian Wesbury.
If private companies operated like the federal government, creditors and analysts would have serious concerns about the companies’ fiscal health and reconsider doing business with them, they write. And with unemployment hovering at 10 percent, the remaining employed workforce — many of whom have dealt with pay cuts, furloughs and pay freezes — shouldn’t keep giving their income to provide for pay raises for federal employees, they write.
The pay increase in his budget would actually be the smallest in 20 years. But total compensation per federal worker — cash earnings plus fringe benefits – now averages twice that of the private sector. So cutting cash earnings by 10 percent across the board seems not only reasonable, but justified.A 10 percent cut would save $15 billion a year, not a lot when compared to the $14 trillion deficit, they write. But “with today’s interest rates, the present value of all future outlay savings would total roughly $750 billion,” they calculate.
What say you? Debates over federal pay can often get heated, so let’s have a vigorous debate — but keep it civil.
# Lo Jo Says:
March 2, 2010
This is a no-brainer! WHY hasn’t the federal government ordered an across-the-board FURLOUGH of all government workers, (except the public safety “essential” workers) to a 4 day (80%) workweek equivalent?# Jim Says:
This would yield close to a 15-20% reduction in labor costs, again exempting those “public safety positions” which would require more in-depth research before trimming.
Most interesting, in thanks to a paralyzing snowstorm, District area government was closed for almost a week and no one in the citizenry seemed to notice any difference!
Second are the benefits: medical care, paid leave, holidays, travel and training, relocation expenses when they CHOOSE to transfer – all of this at taxpayers’ expense. It is very unfair!
And let’s not stop with federal employees. Let’s put the “servant” back into public servant. REDUCE Congress’ pay to stipends/per diems only. Let’s see how many really want to SERVE when all they will be compensated for is room and board during their tenure. Maybe they will actually accomplish something during their first term so that they don’t have to be reelected for 20 years. Eliminate Congressional pensions and provide them all with medical care and/or hospital care at the public hospitals!
When I was the CEO of a firm, coming in after the previous CEO left a huge operating deficit, I addressed all the employees PERSONALLY and showed them the options of losing positions OR everyone sharing equally in the cutbacks by furloughing to a 4-day workweek until the deficit was closed.
The employees sided with an across-the-board furlough because they all felt EQUALLY part of the solution. There was enough flexibility for some to take a full day off per week, while others chose less hours every day for family-personal reasons. Since no particular individual was lost, all skills were still available and no re-hiring or training was required to stay operating.
The budget gap was closed AHEAD OF SCHEDULE, and the following fiscal year revenues were healthy enough to restore original salaries as well as a year-end bonus across-the-board.
LEADERSHIP is required to get that kind of willing sacrifice and teamwork.
I know several professional and executive workers in the government sector and, for the life of me, I can’t figure out what they actually DO. Oh sure, they keep BUSY, but most of their time is spent on non-productive tasks that make that sitcom, “The Office” look like a serious corporation!
Trainings and committee meetings absorb the majority of their time, and I am not seeing any tangible product or service yielded. Where is the public sector’s report card? Schools and teachers are regularly picked on for non-performance, but what about all those federal government agencies’ employees?
So many of these departments serve no (visible to the public) useful purpose anymore, but they remain. If the federal agencies were independently audited like all the private sectors it would be a first step in the right direction to show their worth and value to the citizens.
July 10, 2010
Federal employees get bad press because your services are not “sold” to us, but rather forced. I think IBM or Microsoft would love the government model: They’ll provide software and services for “free” all while coercively garnishing wages of employers and employees to cover their not-for-profit “expenses.” We “whine” because almost no one would pay for your service voluntarily. The rest of us, who aren’t colluding with government, have to provide a service or product that people actually are willing to pay for.
I work in the technical sector and their is little to no pay difference. If you figure in the benefits, then the government employees are well ahead. The reason why I and others chose not to take the jobs (I was offered a job with the NSA after contracting through a private company) was because of the work environment. The NSA was/is a good agency to work for, but I’ve also seen other agencies like the DOL and SSA, which are a complete joke.
In fact, I rarely hear others use salary as the main reason not to take a fed job. Its generally because there is no competition, little incentive to provide a good product (most of that is done by the contractors) and those that do work are unfairly burdened by the unmotivated majority.
The problem is lack of accountability and competition. Certain agencies should just be dismantled and the remaining should be severely cut, with contractors being some of the first to go. Those that remain should compete for high-paying jobs, with no guaranteed pensions or union protections.
Exploring Federal Pay for Cuts
June 22, 2010The Committee for Responsible Federal Budget - As our Budget Simulator grows in popularity, more and more people have taken the spending challenge to voice how they would like to see government spending cut. One popular suggestion has been that something be done regarding federal pay and benefits, which have fared relatively well in this economy while the private sector has felt the stronger sting of the recession.
Truth be told, federal employees do quite well for the most part. In fact, a recent USA Today analysis found that in a job-to-job comparison, a typical federal employee is paid about 20% more than his private sector counterpart.
It is true that much of this difference is due to differing levels of education attainment, as Peter Orszag explains here. But in addition to high wages, federal employees receive extremely generous benefits. Among them are a very generous health care plan, life and disability insurance, two types of retirement benefits (a DB pension and a 401(k)-type plan with a match), and a significant amount of paid time off. Not to mention flexible work schedules and a level of job security unheard of in the private sector.
The gap between federal and private employees has worsened some as the recession has taken hold. Over the past two years, government wages have grown 4.5% while private wages have grown only 2.2%. Over the last year, private wage have actually fallen. In other words, government wages have maintained strength over the course of the recession, while private sector wages have suffered.
Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis, National Income and Product Accounts Table, 6.6D
One recent analysis actually found that 19% of civil servants earn salaries above $100,000 – compared to 14% before the recession. Few other industries have been so lucky. To us, this suggests that federal compensation might be an area ripe for reform.
And military compensation must be on the table as well as civilian compensation. The 2008 Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation found that service members made a larger salary than 80 percent of comparable civilians. And a Defense Department sponsored study by CAN Corp. found in 2006 that enlisted service members made over $13,000 more (including benefits) than their civilian counterparts. Officers were found to make almost $25,000 more.
To be sure, we cannot solve our debt woes just by reining in on federal wages and benefits. If the pendulum swings too far in the other direction, the quality of our federal workforce could suffer.
Still, there are a number of ways we could begin to pare back some of the generosity in federal compensation. Some of the options highlighted below could help produce savings for our fiscally-strapped government:
| Policy Option | Savings (billions) |
| Reduce military pay raises by 1 percent for five years | $15 |
| Calculate federal pension benefits based off five years of earnings to conform with private sector | $4 |
| Base COLAs for federal and military pensions and veterans' benefits on alternative measures of inflation | $23 |
| Increase federal employees' contributions to pension plans | $9 |
| Reduce benefits under the federal employees' compensation act | $2 |
| Freeze federal civilian pay for 1 year | $30 |
| Freeze federal civilian pay for 3 years | $90 |
| Base federal retirees' health benefits on length of service | $1 |
| Adopt a voucher plan for the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program | $33 |
| Increase health care cost sharing for family members of active-duty military personnel | $7 |
| Introduce minimum out-of-pocket requirements under TRICARE for life | $40 |
| Increase medical cost sharing for military retirees who are not yet eligible for Medicare | $25 |
| Require copayments for medical care provided by the Dept. of Veterans Affairs to enrollees without a service-connected disability | $7 |
| Remove tax exclusions on certain allowances for federal employees abroad | $18 |
| Remove the tax exclusions of military pay and benefits | $68 |
| Remove tax exclusions on veterans' disability compensation and pensions | $43 |
How Is It that Federal Workers and Federal Retirees Owe $3.3 Billion in Back Taxes and Yet Still Receive Their Government Checks?
November 16, 2010CNBC - According to an IRS study last year, federal employees and retirees owed a staggering $3.3 billion dollars in delinquent tax payments to the government.
The federal agency with the largest back-tax bill? The US Postal Service, where hundreds of thousands of employees owed a total of more than $283 million, said the report.
Also high on the list is the Department of Veterans Affairs, where employees had more than $156 million in back taxes.
The biggest group, though, is retired military personnel. That group owed more than $1.5 billion dollars.
And even the White House folks are behind in their taxes. Employees in the executive office of the president, which includes nearly 2,000 employees, owed more than $831,000 to Uncle Sam, the IRS found.
Read More...
No comments:
Post a Comment