New House GOP Rule Lets Lawmakers Fire Individual Federal Workers

[owebo]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

You a ,gov worker?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

Let them get a real job in the private sector
the fucking government should not be the largest employer in the country

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

Why does the Left so heavily rely on "if it had been" to make their arguments, instead of simply recognizing the nature of power.

Trump has every right to choose his own representatives, and no obligation to continue providing Obama supporters with a paycheck.

 

[danielpalos]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

they usually start with district attorneys.

 

[BlueGin]

I thought all people deserve jobs.

Everybody does deserve a job.

BTW, you getting minimum wage here?

Sshhh. She thinks it's an entitlement.

 

[RodISHI]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

Adding burden via government jobs regardless of the level of government city, county, state or federal that requires more and more that taxes be raised on an already burdened populous makes good business sense. Way too much cronyism in government agencies has led to a very corrupt government that now needs to have a very good house cleaning.

 

[danielpalos]

A right to work should be an entitlement in an Right to Work State.

 

[RodISHI]

Too bad US citizens can't fire dead weight Congressional members and staff...

They can it is called a "vote".

 

[Seawytch]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

You a ,gov worker?

Not one that Mango Mussolini could effect. The money I get from the Feds is a retirement check. Also not something the Gropenfuhrer could do much about.

 

[Seawytch]

Let's wait and see who they start firing.

Imagine if this had been a rule that Obama had put into place at the onset of his administration. I can just hear the cries of "partisan witch hunt".

In the game of politics, Republican hypocrisy will rule supreme.

Why does the Left so heavily rely on "if it had been" to make their arguments, instead of simply recognizing the nature of power.

Trump has every right to choose his own representatives, and no obligation to continue providing Obama supporters with a paycheck.

Federal workers are not "his representatives". They are not political appointees. Ask your buddy with the smoking Spock avatar if he's have like Obama to have the ability to fire him personally.

 

[BlueGin]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

Adding burden via government jobs regardless of the level of government city, county, state or federal that requires more and more that taxes be raised on an already burdened populous makes good business sense. Way too much cronyism in government agencies has led to a very corrupt government that now needs to have a very good house cleaning.

Yep. Walk into most government agencies and you will find that a worker and all their relitives and friends work there. It's not what you know...but who.

 

[Seawytch]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

Adding burden via government jobs regardless of the level of government city, county, state or federal that requires more and more that taxes be raised on an already burdened populous makes good business sense. Way too much cronyism in government agencies has led to a very corrupt government that now needs to have a very good house cleaning.

Yep. Walk into most government agencies and you will find that a worker and all their relitives and friends work there. It's not what you know...but who.

Really? You can support that claim with a link of some sort, right?

 

[danielpalos]

If the right wants to enforce a work ethic, then they should also enforce an employment ethic in Right to Work States.

 

[RodISHI]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

Adding burden via government jobs regardless of the level of government city, county, state or federal that requires more and more that taxes be raised on an already burdened populous makes good business sense. Way too much cronyism in government agencies has led to a very corrupt government that now needs to have a very good house cleaning.

Yep. Walk into most government agencies and you will find that a worker and all their relitives and friends work there. It's not what you know...but who.

Yep and take that one further and you can link family members in the commerce sections that have "their people" in the agencies that should be regulating the commerce sector. It makes for an easier way to cover up the fraud in certain agencies. It has gotten pretty bad.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

even funnier is the fact that the left has been complaining that the right is for big government, wont do anything to reduce the size of it, always wants to grow it. Now that the right does something that will allow them to trim the workforce to proper levels, and get rid of agencies that serve no real purpose, the left claims that the right is trying to destroy jobs.
This is needed to shrink the government to managable levels. As it is, if you are a federal employee working for the department of blow jobs, and that department gets cut, the government pretty much has to find a new agency to place you in. What good does it do to shrink the government by getting rid of an agency or department when all of the people that make up that specific department just get moved somewhere else. Bottom line is that not only does the payroll stay the same, but you now get another agency that is way over staffed ( so the left can complain that the right is hiring people that are not needed)
The left really needs to make up their minds on exactly what it is they want. they want to reduce government payroll, but they want to do it without getting rid of anyone. They complain that government workers are overpaid and only do 1/4 of the work that they would do if they were private, but they insist on nobody losing their jobs.
Could someone explain to me how you reduce the size of government, and reduce the federal payroll while at the same time not only keeping all of the workers, but even giving the a raise while we are at it?
You want smaller less intrusive government? this is the only way to do it.
I wonder if there would be any complaints from the left if the people losing their jobs worked for the ATF or the DEA.

 

[miketx]

Trump’s transition team has been asking for names of specific government employees.

WASHINGTON ― House Republicans resurrected a decades-old provision in their new rules package that allows lawmakers to lower the salary or eliminate the job of individual federal employees.

Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, championed the arcane provision, called the Holman Rule for the Indiana congressman who created it in 1876, as a tool to allow lawmakers to make targeted spending reductions or eliminate positions they deem unnecessary. In an interview with The Washington Post, Griffith said he would like members to use the Holman Rule like a sniper rifle instead of like a shotgun.

Democratic lawmakers representing districts in the Capitol region, where many federal employees work, said in a statement that the rule would “undermine civil service employee protections by stripping away necessary safeguards.” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) called the measure “the Armageddon Rule,” and said it’s “a backdoor way for Republicans to dismantle the federal workforce.”

Democrats also said they feared the rule gives Republicans the tools to root out individual federal workers who hold views or perform work that is not favored by the incoming administration. President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team reportedly asked for the names of individual Department of Energy employees who worked on the Paris climate accord.

“The Republican Rules package provides them with the surgical tools necessary to reach into the inner workings of the federal government and cut away each part and employee that runs afoul of their ideological agenda,” Connolly said in a statement. “This, coupled with the President-elect’s proposed federal hiring freeze and the nomination of individuals to head agencies they openly oppose, could be devastating to the critical mission of the federal government.”

Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.) called the rule “political theatre.”

“With the inclusion of the Holman Rule in the House rules package, House Republicans have made it clear that they plan to continue their assault on our nation’s civil servants and to subject hardworking federal employees to the ideological and political whims of Congress,” Sarbanes said in a statement.

Congress has always held the power to appropriate or cut funds for executive-branch agencies. What makes the Holman Rule unique is that it allows individual members of Congress to cut the salaries or entirely eliminate the jobs of individual workers. These targeted cuts would override existing federal workplace protections.

More: New House GOP Rule Lets Lawmakers Fire Individual Federal Workers

I feel sorry for government workers who will now be subjected to this McCarthyism bullshit.

I fee sorry for America having scum like you in it.

 

[BlueGin]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

even funnier is the fact that the left has been complaining that the right is for big government, wont do anything to reduce the size of it, always wants to grow it. Now that the right does something that will allow them to trim the workforce to proper levels, and get rid of agencies that serve no real purpose, the left claims that the right is trying to destroy jobs.
This is needed to shrink the government to managable levels. As it is, if you are a federal employee working for the department of blow jobs, and that department gets cut, the government pretty much has to find a new agency to place you in. What good does it do to shrink the government by getting rid of an agency or department when all of the people that make up that specific department just get moved somewhere else. Bottom line is that not only does the payroll stay the same, but you now get another agency that is way over staffed ( so the left can complain that the right is hiring people that are not needed)
The left really needs to make up their minds on exactly what it is they want. they want to reduce government payroll, but they want to do it without getting rid of anyone. They complain that government workers are overpaid and only do 1/4 of the work that they would do if they were private, but they insist on nobody losing their jobs.
Could someone explain to me how you reduce the size of government, and reduce the federal payroll while at the same time not only keeping all of the workers, but even giving the a raise while we are at it?
You want smaller less intrusive government? this is the only way to do it.
I wonder if there would be any complaints from the left if the people losing their jobs worked for the ATF or the DEA.

That's because the majority of jobs Obozo created were related to the government.

 

[PredFan]

Trump’s transition team has been asking for names of specific government employees.

WASHINGTON ― House Republicans resurrected a decades-old provision in their new rules package that allows lawmakers to lower the salary or eliminate the job of individual federal employees.

Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.), a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, championed the arcane provision, called the Holman Rule for the Indiana congressman who created it in 1876, as a tool to allow lawmakers to make targeted spending reductions or eliminate positions they deem unnecessary. In an interview with The Washington Post, Griffith said he would like members to use the Holman Rule like a sniper rifle instead of like a shotgun.

Democratic lawmakers representing districts in the Capitol region, where many federal employees work, said in a statement that the rule would “undermine civil service employee protections by stripping away necessary safeguards.” Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.) called the measure “the Armageddon Rule,” and said it’s “a backdoor way for Republicans to dismantle the federal workforce.”

Democrats also said they feared the rule gives Republicans the tools to root out individual federal workers who hold views or perform work that is not favored by the incoming administration. President-elect Donald Trump’s transition team reportedly asked for the names of individual Department of Energy employees who worked on the Paris climate accord.

“The Republican Rules package provides them with the surgical tools necessary to reach into the inner workings of the federal government and cut away each part and employee that runs afoul of their ideological agenda,” Connolly said in a statement. “This, coupled with the President-elect’s proposed federal hiring freeze and the nomination of individuals to head agencies they openly oppose, could be devastating to the critical mission of the federal government.”

Rep. John Sarbanes (D-Md.) called the rule “political theatre.”

“With the inclusion of the Holman Rule in the House rules package, House Republicans have made it clear that they plan to continue their assault on our nation’s civil servants and to subject hardworking federal employees to the ideological and political whims of Congress,” Sarbanes said in a statement.

Congress has always held the power to appropriate or cut funds for executive-branch agencies. What makes the Holman Rule unique is that it allows individual members of Congress to cut the salaries or entirely eliminate the jobs of individual workers. These targeted cuts would override existing federal workplace protections.

More: New House GOP Rule Lets Lawmakers Fire Individual Federal Workers

I feel sorry for government workers who will now be subjected to this McCarthyism bullshit.

That's good news, thanks.

 

[miketx]

Funny. The side that is supposed to be about "bringing back jobs" now shows it's true colors - it's about making people jobless.

Typical stain deflection. What jobs has the government lost? Oh, what? None, that's what. The government is more bloated than ever. I hope you're one of them that loses their useless job and starves.

 

[Darkwind]

I know plenty of federal workers who work hard and do a good job. If it's about making it easier to fire non-performing workers, that is one thing. If it's all about firing for ideological reasons, then that is another.

The fact that people are gleeful that they will be losing their jobs is a bit disgusting. They are just as worthy of respect as workers as the people in manufacturing.

What this is really about is those places like "foggy bottom" at State department and people at the EPA or any branch of government who think that they have the right to resist a new administration. There is a discussion that people at the EPA, now and in the past, doing their utmost to slow or stop any administrative agenda based on nothing more than they dislike the incoming President or his or her politics. That is wrong. No one elected them and they need to be held accountable for any insubordination.

State department often does as it pleases with regard to foreign policy and negotiations regardless of who is President or what policy is in place. They do this because they think they simply have to wage a holding action against any administration they disagree with until that administration is changed. This directly thwarts the States and places their own special interests above that of the nation.

This law will go a long way toward stopping this kind of practice. It is not aimed at individuals who come to work, do their job, and go home. Although, I have little doubt that is exactly what the left will make it about.

People like the OP and the Democrats in office are fighting this because they are counting on the federal employees in certain portions of the government to fight against Trump where they cannot show their hand.