Slashdot Mirror
Feds Prep For E-Gov Shutdown
dcblogs writes "If the federal government is shutdown midnight Friday, the feds plan to stop updating government Web sites that aren't delivering essential services. 'Most Web sites will not continue, only those Web sites that are part of these accepted activities would continue to operate,' the senior White House official said Tuesday. 'Accepted activities,' refers to essential, life and safety-related government services. The IRS, however, will continue to accept tax returns filed electronically and to process payments. 'We need to be able to collect the money that is owed to the U.S. government,' the official said. Paper-based returns won't be processed."
Electronic tax returns will be processed but paper ones won't? Don't they need the money whether it shows up electronically or as a check?
If lawmakers can't agree to a budget for the time period starting 7 MONTHS AGO, how are they going to get a FY2012 budget done?
Federal managers aren't spending more than the Continuing Resolution levels, and should be saving some money in case of cuts. Funding them over the CR level would just lead to waste spending in the 'use it or lose it' model (They have until September to spend it all).
They need to pass a status quo budget for FY2011, and get started on FY2012. That is where the problem lies, and where a solution can take place.
What is the meaning of 'shut-down?'
Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes... The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
The federal shutdown is only affecting 800,000 employees out of a few million uniformed servicemen, civilian employees and contractors. I would be surprised if it's even 25% of the federal workforce.
What this shutdown means is that until the budget goes through, the feds aren't buying any new toys and those considered "non-essential" to the mission of their agency (or department, in some cases) will be treated like dead weight.
Ironically, this would be an excellent time for an audit of the federal labor force and contracts to see who should be permanently let go and/or have their contract torn up.
it was permanent. This shutdown only brings a temporary respite to the oppression the American people suffer at the hands of it's own government.
Yes, my work on automation software flight plan management for the FAA is very oppressive to you. Douchebag.
The real truth of the matter is, the Democrats while in power refused to pass a budget for this fiscal year. Worse they refused to even submit one to the floor all because they were afraid of the ramifications of doing so before the election. In other words, if they had submitted their budget they would have had to campaign with that large deficit number hanging over their heads.
I am all for a government shut down, the problem I have is the press is still giving Obama a free pass. When the press decides to come back to the side of the public and keep Obama honest we might see some progress. Right now they are making this all out to be a Republican anti-(insert minority group/poor here) issue instead of pointing out that if Pelosi had not purposefully ignored her duty we would be fighting over the FY2012 now instead of fighting over something that should have been in place before the election.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
If the FAA is shut down then twitter could be used to transmit ICAO messages (FPL, CHG, APR, etc) and mobile pbone use on aircraft could be made compulsory.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
This is true only if Congress agrees to make it so after the fact. It would be political suicide to not pay active duty. Civilian employees might be a toss up depending upon whether they get lumped into the same bill as the active duty.
As the budget situation now is significantly worse than 15 years ago, it seems unlikely that Civilian employees will be made whole after the fact. I love the republicans talking about 'where are the jobs' and then deciding to furlough close to 4 times the number of workers that were added in the latest jobs report over the sum of ~$7B. If the government is closed for a week, that's less than the interest on the National Debt.
The Active Duty military people will be forced to remain, even those that fulfill office type jobs, and will be unpaid until a resolution comes.
This is worse than rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. This is arguing deck chair arrangement theory.
Here's a handy little tip for you. As long as you are able to complain about being oppressed by a government in a public forum, you aren't.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
It would certainly be political suicide, unless carefully phrased(you can do a lot of crazy stuff to the troops in the name of supporting them, if your spin-fu is good); but, arguably, not paying the civilians might actually present more of a practical problem.
The more heavily active-duty a soldier is, the greater the degree, and likelihood, that some or all of his basic logistical necessities(food, housing, some degree of medical care) will be being taken care of by Uncle Sam. They might not like not being paid; but they won't be starving in the street(and, because it's the military, just leaving qualifies as desertion...)
Civilian employees, by contrast, with a few possible exceptions in isolated bases or research facilities or the like, are generally only seeing wages+benefits, and are responsible for turning those into food, housing, etc. on the local market. You won't have to go too far down the pay grade before you start running into civilian employees who are not too many weeks away from being unable to make minor little payments like 'rent' and 'groceries'. Quitting wouldn't necessarily be a good career move; but it isn't something their employer can do anything about, and they won't have much of a choice about at least moonlighting elsewhere, if not quitting entirely and job-hunting, if they can't keep food on the table.
BigWingzDaddy: I'm in ur airspace, landing on ur runways (JFK #7) #jfk
TehFlyinator: Hai guise you know what my altitude is in feet? IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAAAND! #lolz
CommercialCeilingCat: Now taking off my zig (JFK #2) #jfk
LearJetGangsta: Sorry I nearly hit u CCC, was holding the damn iPhone wrong #nearcollision #holdingitwrong
CommercialCeilingCat: np
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Officially, civilians don't get paid. Not sure about the military. Last time, when they finally passed the resolution they opted to retroactively restore pay for those days (even though no work got done) as a good faith measure. they also realize what a paltry sum federal employee wages are when compared to the actual debt total, so it was a relatively cheap form of goodwill from the guys that just finished pissing off most of the country.
To say it screws everyone equally is wrong.
Most higher income citizens couldn't care less, personally, about nearly all government programs. They still may support their funding and existance, but they wouldn't personally be hurt much if programs went away entirely.
So no, it is not 'equal screwing' in reality, only politically - and in the end who's politics wins or loses is meaningless.
wow, you need to find different pendants to listen too from time to time.
You might want to fact check a little.
the 2010 budget passed. I"m not sure why you think otherwise.
There was some discussion with Blue dogs.
The republican stalled the government through many tactics that where, quite frankly, abusive.
To answer your question:
The republican created an unrealistic and harmful budget. The current Republicans idea of compromise is 'Do it our way or you not compromising.'
So yes, the blame rest solely on the Republican/Tea Party.
Oh, I just read your sig. I should have done that first and not bothered. Clearly you can't think beyond whatever you neo-con masters claim. Her is an interesting fact: That 'whistle blower' situation was manufactured by the media. Specifically: Fox News.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
just leaving qualifies as desertion
Slavery is illegal. There have been a number of lawsuits where people have tried to enter voluntary slavery schemes, and every one was found illegal. Them not paying you but requiring you to be there is slavery (well, actually indentured servitude, which is legally identical at this point). Additionally, you sign a contract to enlist. That contract indicates that you'll get paid for your service. Once they don't pay you, they have breached the contract. The contract may require grievances within the contract be handled by the UCMJ, but legal precedent has indicated that a contract requiring one type of remedy only for violating the contract is effectively invalid if one side determines that the remedy is unfair.
This underscores the problem with using civilian contractor for front line supplies and services.
What, that when you violate your contract with active duty personnel, they will still work for free under penalty of firing squad (or whatever the penalty is for desertion in a time of war), but the civilians won't work for free because you can't shoot them? How is that a problem? If you can't afford to pay for them, perhaps you should evaluate policy of making war while bankrupt. There's nothing wrong with paying civilians for critical services. They are no less reliable than military (and in many cases are ex-military). There's a problem with slavery, whether you are civilian or military.
Learn to love Alaska