9:02 pm, March 6, 2015

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 17
       

  • Hatch Bill to Freeze Fed Employee Level
    sandyinohio
    Hatch is our hero! I remember reading and seeing tv programs during Clinton/Lewinsky era about fed workers with no work to do, but come in everyday & read the paper, talk on phone, etc. I'm sure some agencies, bureaus, commissions, committees, departments, institutes, operations, programs, regulators, societies, and think tanks are guitier than others! We have something like 600 or so agencies and that is TOO MUCH. Maybe govt would function properly if they stuck to their delegated duties per constitution. Ya'think???
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • No...
    HarryObrian
    If 'they' want to do something constructive to reduce spending and power influence then the workforce freeze should be at 1992 levels. The reason for this is that since 1992 almost every government worker hired has been hired to support either Illegal Aliens, the welfare system or internal security that has done absolutely nothing to truly protect the American citizen.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • No... not that briar patch!
    dragon2eden
    Harry, You are entitled to your own opinion. But not your own facts. Holding it to 1992 levels would actually be an INCREASE in the size of the federal workforce. See: http://www.opm.gov/feddata/ Better luck next time!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • If you believe that...
    HarryObrian
    I have a bridge you can buy. It is ridiculous for anyone to believe that the current fed workforce is barely larger than that of 1962. But if we must, then let us enjoy the fruits of deflation and reduce the present pay of federal employees to an equivalency of the present private sector or less and remove or reduce the generous pensions and Cadillac healthcare plans they receive. There is not and never has been one government worker worth more than an equivalent private sector worker http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-03-04-federal-pay_N.htm
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • It's not that hard to imagine...
    dragon2eden
    It's ridiculous if you don't know your facts and you think all civil servants are lazy slobs because you've never really met any, let alone been one yourself. ******** In fact, the number of federal employees **has** stayed relatively constant (I know, for you, gravity is probably only a theory, too, but stay with me), BUT the number of contractors skyrocketed since Reagan's initiative toward outsourcing DOD work began in the early 1980s -- one estimate I saw from George Mason U. estimated the current contractor workforce at ~7 million. You may or may not recall this, but during the "peace dividend" period of the 1990s, a lot of government downsized (even as the country kept growing in population), and there was a federal hiring freeze for quite a number of years -- one of the big reasons we have a bubble of retirees but not enough Gen Xers coming in to fill those gaps. The number of contractors all across the government is now massive -- read the recent WashPo series on the intelligence community. In DHS alone, there is roughly one fed per contractor. These trends were disturbing enough to be discussed in hearings in Congress. If you want to downsize something, pull more of that contractor work into the federal government, where much of it really belongs.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Reply Abuse Vote
    Bill would freeze federal workforce at 2009 levels...
    jnsesq
    Personally, but for the military, I would prefer 1909 levels.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Bill would freeze federal workforce at 2009 levels...
    dragon2eden
    Yeah. Good idea. Maybe we can take a lot of things back to the 1909 level. Mine safety. Airline safety. Food safety. Enforcement of child labor laws. Medical care for disabled veterans. Serial killer investigations. Intelligence gathering on our enemies. ***** Yeah, come to think of it, 1909 gets me all misty-eyed, too.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • That actually sounds great....
    HarryObrian
    Natural selection is much more efficient than government selection. Government control under the guise of safety is so overplayed and has been for the last 50 years.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • All that safety is so bad for you...
    dragon2eden
    I can picture you in my mind -- thinking how bad the government is while you're driving your 27 m.p.g. car, wearing your three-point safety belt, protected from accidents by airbags. Those darn bureaucrats!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Bill would limit Federal workforce at 2009 levels
    alhorvath
    Not good enough. The Federal work force grew significantly between 2008 and 2009 as it did during the previous 4 years. Furthermore, government employee slaries are now running about 11-12% higher than similar positions in private sector. The benefits of government employees are at least 25% higher than private sector. Here is what needs to be done: 1. Cut all government employee salaries by 11% 2. Cut or require increased employee contributions to the tune of 25% for government employees. 3. Increase eligibility age, for all government employees age 55 and under to age 70 4. Cut and limit Federal workforce to 2006 levels 5. Eliminate some Federal agencies/departments altogether
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Bill would freeze federal workforce at 2009 levels...
    Just me
    Ah, but this bill ISN'T about REALLY reducing the cost of government, it's about pretending to do so. If Orrin Hatch were sincere in his efforts, then he would be compelled to admit that the vast majority of growth, in the federal government, has occurred in CONTRACTED SERVICES. IF he really believes that government is too big, then he should be looking to cut the outsourcing of work and freeze federal employment levels. This would FORCE the taxpayers to make a choice: They can either keep their pork, and fund it through increased taxes, or they can opt to have lower taxes and fewer services provided through the government.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }