PDA

View Full Version : Psst. No shutdown during a 'government shutdown'



Sev
02-26-2011, 07:00 AM
<span style='font-size: 14pt'><span style="color: #006600">The things the left would have you believe if the government shut down. Apparently it would not be cataclysmic after all. We might not even notice its gone.

</span></span>

<span style="color: #006600"><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Fewer than 1 in 4 government workers would be effected. Might actually be a good time to thin the herd</span>.
</span>

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WHAT_SHUTDOWN?SITE=KVUE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

<span style="color: #000000">Feb 25, 1:56 PM EST

Psst. No shutdown during a 'government shutdown'

By ANDREW TAYLOR
Associated Press


AP Photo/Bradley C Bower


Buy AP Photo Reprints


WASHINGTON (AP) -- Social Security checks would still go out. Troops would remain at their posts. Furloughed federal workers probably would get paid, though not until later. And virtually every essential government agency, like the FBI, the Border Patrol and the Coast Guard, would remain open.

That's the little-known truth about a government shutdown. The government doesn't shut down.

And it won't on March 5, even if the combatants on Capitol Hill can't resolve enough differences to pass a stopgap spending bill to fund the government while they hash out legislation to cover the last seven months of the budget year.

<span style="color: #990000">Fewer than half of the 2.1 million federal workers subject to a shutdown would be forced off the job if the Obama administration followed the path taken by presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton. And that's not counting 600,000 Postal Service employees or 1.6 million uniformed military personnel exempt from a shutdown.</span>

So we're talking fewer than one in four federal workers staying at home. Many federal workers get paid on March 4, so it would take a two-week shutdown for them to see a delay in their paychecks.

The rules for who works and who doesn't date back to the early 1980s and haven't been significantly modified since. The Obama administration hasn't issued new guidance.

<span style="color: #990000">The air traffic control system, food inspection, Medicare, veterans' health care and many other essential government programs would run as usual. The Social Security Administration would not only send out benefits but would continue to take applications. The Postal Service, which is self-funded, would keep delivering the mail. Federal courts would remain open.</span>

The cherry blossoms in Washington would bloom as usual, and visitors to the city would be able to park and see them in all their glory around the Tidal Basin.

But they wouldn't be able to take the elevator up the Washington Monument, visit museums along the National Mall or take a White House tour. National parks would be closed to visitors, a loss often emphasized in shutdown discussions.

The Capitol would remain open, however. Congress is deemed essential, despite its abysmal poll ratings.

The IRS wouldn't answer its taxpayer hotline - at the height of tax-filing season. Under IRS precedents, the agency would process tax returns that contain payments. But people getting refunds would have to wait.

All sides say they don't want a so-called shutdown like the two separate partial government closings in 1995-1996, when President Clinton and a then-new GOP majority in Congress were at loggerheads over the budget. Republicans took most of the political blame, and the episodes gave Clinton critical momentum on his way to re-election.

There haven't been any shutdowns since then. The politics stink.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'><span style="color: #990000">But from a practical perspective, shutdowns usually aren't that big a deal. They happened every year when Jimmy Carter was president, averaging 11 days each. During President Reagan's two terms, there were six shutdowns, typically of just one or two days apiece. Deals got cut. Everybody moved on.
</span>
</span>In 1995-96, however, shutdowns morphed into political warfare, to the dismay of Republicans who thought they could use them to drag Clinton to the negotiating table on a balanced budget plan.

Republicans took a big political hit, but a compendium of the other hardships experienced reads like a roster of relatively minor inconveniences for most Americans: closed parks, delays in processing passport applications, 2,400 workers cleaning up toxic waste sites being sent home, and a short delay in processing veterans' claims. A new government standard for lights and lamps was delayed.

To be sure, furloughs can be a major hardship for federal workers. Even those in essential jobs - and required to work - could see their paychecks delayed if a stalemate dragged on.

Lawmakers, however, typically provide back pay, even for employees who weren't required to work. A repeat of that could raise hackles with some in the tea party-backed House GOP freshman class. A spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, wouldn't address whether furloughed federal workers would receive back pay if there is a shutdown this time.

Regardless, federal contractors would lose out. Many contract workers could be furloughed without pay and not receive lost wages retroactively, especially in an extended shutdown.

Under a precedent-setting memorandum by Reagan budget chief David Stockman, federal workers are exempted from furloughs if their jobs are national security-related or if they perform essential activities that "protect life and property."

In 1995, that meant 571,000 Defense Department civilian employees, some 69 percent, remained at post, while 258,000 other Pentagon workers were furloughed. Eighty-five percent of Veterans Administration employees went to work as did 70 percent of Transportation Department workers.

But just a handful of Environmental Protection Agency employees and only 7 percent of NASA workers were on the job, according to Clinton administration data.

This year, NASA would face widespread furloughs that suggest a shutdown could interrupt preparation for space shuttle flights this spring - though the "life and property" rules would almost certainly be invoked so that the Space Shuttle Discovery could land as scheduled on March 7. It took off Thursday afternoon.

Just 4 percent of employees at the Department of Housing and Urban Development went to work in the 1995 shutdown, as did 11 percent of Department of Education employees. The National Archives shut down completely, as did the tiny Selective Service System.

<span style="color: #990000">Then there's Social Security. Current beneficiaries need not worry; their payments wouldn't be affected. And given the most recent precedent from the Clinton administration, those eligible to apply for benefits would be able to do so.
</span>
During the first shutdown in 1995, the Social Security Administration initially furloughed 93 percent of its workers and stopped enrolling new beneficiaries. But it reversed course in the second shutdown and kept 50,000 additional workers on the job.

If the federal government is shut down for several days, the Census Bureau could miss its April 1 legal deadline to provide 2010 redistricting data to the states. The bureau is currently in the midst of checking its population tallies, which are broken down by race and ethnicity down to the neighborhood level, for many states.

By the March 4 deadline, the bureau expects it will have distributed the data to about roughly half the states, with big states such as California, New York and Florida potentially left hanging if the government closes down.

---

Associated Press writer Hope Yen contributed to this report.</span>

Sev
02-26-2011, 08:25 AM
We'll keep this on top for our lefty's.

pooltchr
02-26-2011, 11:13 AM
A "Government Shutdown" is nothing more than another game played by politicians to give them ammunition to use against the other party.

America does very well when we have a "government shutdown".

I'm thinking all jobs in Washington should be part time. Think of all the money and agrivation we could save!

Steve

Chopstick
02-26-2011, 11:34 AM
The government of Belgium has been shutdown for 10 months. No prime minister, no parliament or anything else, only basic services. Apparently they have proved they don't need one. One thing is for sure. They are not increasing their national debt.

If they want to shut down the government I say good. I will even hold the door for them while they leave.

pooltchr
02-26-2011, 11:44 AM
I'm not sure I could advocate no government at all, but I am certain we could do very well with far less government.

Steve

Chopstick
02-26-2011, 11:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm not sure I could advocate no government at all, but I am certain we could do very well with far less government.

Steve </div></div>

Why? What have they done for you? Would you even know it if they came to work or not?

pooltchr
02-26-2011, 01:28 PM
There are several functions of the federal government that are necessary. Boarder protection, although they don't seem to do that very well, defense, and, uh....well i'm sure they actually do a few other important things.
What we don't need is for them to thrust themselves into the middle of our healthcare and education. We don't need them subsidizing farms or automobile manufacturing, or getting involved in any number of other areas that is beyond the scope of the duties outlined in the constitution.

Steve

(still trying to think of things our government does that are important, and that they do well. I guess I'll have to get back with you on that one!)

Sev
02-26-2011, 03:58 PM
Well Steve its good for running up massive debt.

JohnnyD
02-26-2011, 05:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The government of Belgium has been shutdown for 10 months. No prime minister, no parliament or anything else, only basic services. Apparently they have proved they don't need one. One thing is for sure. They are not increasing their national debt.

If they want to shut down the government I say good. I will even hold the door for them while they leave. </div></div>
Don't let the door hit them in the buttock's.

LWW
02-27-2011, 05:46 AM
The silence from the left has again been deafening.

LWW

pooltchr
02-27-2011, 07:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The silence from the left has again been deafening.

LWW </div></div>

They have been told that a government shutdown must be considered to be a bad thing in order for their plan to blame the right for it to be effective.

If a government shut down isn't a bad thing, then their is no crisis for them to exploit.

Steve

Sev
02-27-2011, 08:03 AM
Its the democrats setting it up. It appears that they are not aware that the public sentiment is different than when it was during the Clinton administration.

What they also fail to acknowledge is that republicans held on to power for 10 years after that particular shutdown.

pooltchr
02-27-2011, 08:13 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its the democrats setting it up. It appears that they are not aware that the public sentiment is different than when it was during the Clinton administration.

What they also fail to acknowledge is that republicans held on to power for 10 years after that particular shutdown. </div></div>

Nobody ever said the Dems were smart!

Steve

LWW
02-27-2011, 09:57 AM
What amazes me is that we have so many "NON ESSENTIAL" federal employees in the first place.

LWW

pooltchr
02-27-2011, 10:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What amazes me is that we have so many "NON ESSENTIAL" federal employees in the first place.

LWW </div></div>

A fact that many of us have been concerned about for years!

Steve

LWW
02-27-2011, 10:45 AM
Unions are the greatest cause of non essentials IMHO.

LWW

pooltchr
02-27-2011, 10:54 AM
Some people keep their job based on their productivity, and their contribution to their employer's needs.

Others keep their job based on strong arm tactics and threats.

Some people have integrity...some don't.

Steve

Soflasnapper
02-27-2011, 01:19 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its the democrats setting it up. It appears that they are not aware that the public sentiment is different than when it was during the Clinton administration.

What they also fail to acknowledge is that republicans held on to power for 10 years after that particular shutdown. </div></div>

Nobody ever said the Dems were smart!

Steve </div></div>

Nobody said Republicans can remember history.

Gingrich's erratic leadership got him an attempted coup from the GOP to remove him, and although that failed, costing Bill Paxson both his leadership position and his seat and poor Sandy Hume, Britt Hume's son, his life (when hardball-playing Gingrich was about to reveal the gay love affair of Paxson with the younger Hume, Sandy committed suicide via shotgun to the head), Gingrich himself had to resign after pushing his disastrous lame duck impeachment through the House.

Yeah, that genius Gingrich! Let the GOP take his counsel now-- what could go wrong?

LWW
02-27-2011, 02:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its the democrats setting it up. It appears that they are not aware that the public sentiment is different than when it was during the Clinton administration.

What they also fail to acknowledge is that republicans held on to power for 10 years after that particular shutdown. </div></div>

Nobody ever said the Dems were smart!

Steve </div></div>

Nobody said Republicans can remember history.

Gingrich's erratic leadership got him an attempted coup from the GOP to remove him, and although that failed, costing Bill Paxson both his leadership position and his seat and poor Sandy Hume, Britt Hume's son, his life (when hardball-playing Gingrich was about to reveal the gay love affair of Paxson with the younger Hume, Sandy committed suicide via shotgun to the head), Gingrich himself had to resign after pushing his disastrous lame duck impeachment through the House.

Yeah, that genius Gingrich! Let the GOP take his counsel now-- what could go wrong? </div></div>

Do you rent your bridge or did you buy it.

Your post is a vicious lie for reasons that I can't begin to comprehend.

What moonbat crazy leftist source spewed this bile onto the spoon foir your willing consumption?

LWW

Sev
02-27-2011, 02:36 PM
It would seem to me Sandy Hume was to week to handle the decisions he made in life and then committed a singularly selfish act to which he deserves no sympathy.

Soflasnapper
02-27-2011, 05:16 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Do you rent your bridge or did you buy it.

Your post is a vicious lie for reasons that I can't begin to comprehend.

What moonbat crazy leftist source spewed this bile onto the spoon foir your willing consumption?

LWW </div></div>

Your post is a vicious lie

Which part? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Soflasnapper
02-27-2011, 05:21 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It would seem to me Sandy Hume was to week to handle the decisions he made in life and then committed a singularly selfish act to which he deserves no sympathy. </div></div>

A closeted gay, threatened with exposure of that fact because he was the journalistic channel facilitating a GOP leadership change, commits suicide, and we should have no regrets or sympathy?

M'kay, if you say so.

Sev
02-27-2011, 08:13 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It would seem to me Sandy Hume was to week to handle the decisions he made in life and then committed a singularly selfish act to which he deserves no sympathy. </div></div>

A closeted gay, threatened with exposure of that fact because he was the journalistic channel facilitating a GOP leadership change, commits suicide, and we should have no regrets or sympathy?

M'kay, if you say so. </div></div>

2 years ago while I was working away from home one of my uncles died. His younger son came home from Arizona. He gave a great eulogy. He went back to his mother house and took his wifes service revolver out and blew his brains out. That made 2 funerals. His older brother ended up having to clean up the mess.

I have no sympathy what so ever for those that commit suicide unless it is in the sacrifice for others.

LWW
02-28-2011, 02:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Do you rent your bridge or did you buy it.

Your post is a vicious lie for reasons that I can't begin to comprehend.

What moonbat crazy leftist source spewed this bile onto the spoon foir your willing consumption?

LWW </div></div>

Your post is a vicious lie

Which part? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif </div></div>

This part:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[Nobody said Republicans can remember history.

Gingrich's erratic leadership got him an attempted coup from the GOP to remove him, and although that failed, costing Bill Paxson both his leadership position and his seat and poor Sandy Hume, Britt Hume's son, his life (when hardball-playing Gingrich was about to reveal the gay love affair of Paxson with the younger Hume, Sandy committed suicide via shotgun to the head), Gingrich himself had to resign after pushing his disastrous lame duck impeachment through the House.

Yeah, that genius Gingrich! Let the GOP take his counsel now-- what could go wrong? </div></div>

And, thanks for admitting you see humor in propagating it.

LWW

Sev
02-28-2011, 09:25 AM
OH my!!

LWW
02-28-2011, 10:30 AM
He asked.

LWW