New House GOP Rule Lets Lawmakers Fire Individual Federal Workers

[Claudette]

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.

Bout damned time.

They should be able to be fired just like everyone else.

Hell. Half of the federal "workers" could disappear tomorrow and no one would even notice.

 

[danielpalos]

In this day and age Henry Ford could not make it, the federal government would choke him out… fact

Sadly, this is the truth.

only lousy capitalists, say that.

Only people that have no clue what they are talking about need to make such asinine statements like 'only lousy capitalists.' Starting a business in this day and age of government meddling is extremely difficult and costly for almost any sector. This is one of the core reasons that wealth has been moving in the direction it has been - competition is stifled.

Yet, businesses get started all the time. Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages, not minimum wages, and realized gains from efficiency.

He was able to afford raising pay that much because he was already making a lot of money. Companies operating on a 3% profit margin cannot do that, but you knew that already because I already told you that.

Businesses get started all the time and fail all the time. I'll let you look up how many business startups fail in the first year.

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

 

[hadit]

Sadly, this is the truth.

only lousy capitalists, say that.

Only people that have no clue what they are talking about need to make such asinine statements like 'only lousy capitalists.' Starting a business in this day and age of government meddling is extremely difficult and costly for almost any sector. This is one of the core reasons that wealth has been moving in the direction it has been - competition is stifled.

Yet, businesses get started all the time. Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages, not minimum wages, and realized gains from efficiency.

He was able to afford raising pay that much because he was already making a lot of money. Companies operating on a 3% profit margin cannot do that, but you knew that already because I already told you that.

Businesses get started all the time and fail all the time. I'll let you look up how many business startups fail in the first year.

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

You've taken a good first step by acknowledging that your statement about businesses starting all the time is not a good foundation for your argument.

 

[Iceweasel]

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.

The private sector calls it trimming useless fat. Liberals think government is there to provide jobs, we need to seriously drain the swamp.

 

[Iceweasel]

Sadly, this is the truth.

only lousy capitalists, say that.

Only people that have no clue what they are talking about need to make such asinine statements like 'only lousy capitalists.' Starting a business in this day and age of government meddling is extremely difficult and costly for almost any sector. This is one of the core reasons that wealth has been moving in the direction it has been - competition is stifled.

Yet, businesses get started all the time. Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages, not minimum wages, and realized gains from efficiency.

He was able to afford raising pay that much because he was already making a lot of money. Companies operating on a 3% profit margin cannot do that, but you knew that already because I already told you that.

Businesses get started all the time and fail all the time. I'll let you look up how many business startups fail in the first year.

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

Most startups fail from not making enough to pay the bills. That could be not charging enough (trying to break into the market) or having products or services that aren't valued enough by the marketplace. And government regulations, fees, taxes, etc.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

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.

What a great, great idea! Lonnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnng overdue

 

[martybegan]

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.

No issue here. The civil service has been expanded into policy level positions, where it was never meant to be. Civil servants are supposed to the executors of policy designed by political office holders and their appointees. Couple that with the current civil service basically being an extension of one party, and you have a situation that was not accounted for when Civil Service Rules were voted in.

The system has to be changed to return neutrality to the Civil Service.

 

[danielpalos]

only lousy capitalists, say that.

Only people that have no clue what they are talking about need to make such asinine statements like 'only lousy capitalists.' Starting a business in this day and age of government meddling is extremely difficult and costly for almost any sector. This is one of the core reasons that wealth has been moving in the direction it has been - competition is stifled.

Yet, businesses get started all the time. Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages, not minimum wages, and realized gains from efficiency.

He was able to afford raising pay that much because he was already making a lot of money. Companies operating on a 3% profit margin cannot do that, but you knew that already because I already told you that.

Businesses get started all the time and fail all the time. I'll let you look up how many business startups fail in the first year.

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

You've taken a good first step by acknowledging that your statement about businesses starting all the time is not a good foundation for your argument.

Yes, it is; businesses get started all the time. only lousy capitalists whine they can't make it.

 

[danielpalos]

only lousy capitalists, say that.

Only people that have no clue what they are talking about need to make such asinine statements like 'only lousy capitalists.' Starting a business in this day and age of government meddling is extremely difficult and costly for almost any sector. This is one of the core reasons that wealth has been moving in the direction it has been - competition is stifled.

Yet, businesses get started all the time. Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages, not minimum wages, and realized gains from efficiency.

He was able to afford raising pay that much because he was already making a lot of money. Companies operating on a 3% profit margin cannot do that, but you knew that already because I already told you that.

Businesses get started all the time and fail all the time. I'll let you look up how many business startups fail in the first year.

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

Most startups fail from not making enough to pay the bills. That could be not charging enough (trying to break into the market) or having products or services that aren't valued enough by the marketplace. And government regulations, fees, taxes, etc.

undercapitalization. venture capital has to take that into account.

 

[Iceweasel]

Only people that have no clue what they are talking about need to make such asinine statements like 'only lousy capitalists.' Starting a business in this day and age of government meddling is extremely difficult and costly for almost any sector. This is one of the core reasons that wealth has been moving in the direction it has been - competition is stifled.

Yet, businesses get started all the time. Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages, not minimum wages, and realized gains from efficiency.

He was able to afford raising pay that much because he was already making a lot of money. Companies operating on a 3% profit margin cannot do that, but you knew that already because I already told you that.

Businesses get started all the time and fail all the time. I'll let you look up how many business startups fail in the first year.

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

Most startups fail from not making enough to pay the bills. That could be not charging enough (trying to break into the market) or having products or services that aren't valued enough by the marketplace. And government regulations, fees, taxes, etc.

undercapitalization. venture capital has to take that into account.

Running a business isn't just about collecting startup money. Market supply and demand will dictate success or failure.

 

[danielpalos]

Yet, businesses get started all the time. Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages, not minimum wages, and realized gains from efficiency.

He was able to afford raising pay that much because he was already making a lot of money. Companies operating on a 3% profit margin cannot do that, but you knew that already because I already told you that.

Businesses get started all the time and fail all the time. I'll let you look up how many business startups fail in the first year.

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

Most startups fail from not making enough to pay the bills. That could be not charging enough (trying to break into the market) or having products or services that aren't valued enough by the marketplace. And government regulations, fees, taxes, etc.

undercapitalization. venture capital has to take that into account.

Running a business isn't just about collecting startup money. Market supply and demand will dictate success or failure.

you have to be able to keep going, until that happens or doesn't happen.

 

[Iceweasel]

He was able to afford raising pay that much because he was already making a lot of money. Companies operating on a 3% profit margin cannot do that, but you knew that already because I already told you that.

Businesses get started all the time and fail all the time. I'll let you look up how many business startups fail in the first year.

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

Most startups fail from not making enough to pay the bills. That could be not charging enough (trying to break into the market) or having products or services that aren't valued enough by the marketplace. And government regulations, fees, taxes, etc.

undercapitalization. venture capital has to take that into account.

Running a business isn't just about collecting startup money. Market supply and demand will dictate success or failure.

you have to be able to keep going, until that happens or doesn't happen.

I've owned a business for 32 years. I'll keep going.

 

[danielpalos]

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

Most startups fail from not making enough to pay the bills. That could be not charging enough (trying to break into the market) or having products or services that aren't valued enough by the marketplace. And government regulations, fees, taxes, etc.

undercapitalization. venture capital has to take that into account.

Running a business isn't just about collecting startup money. Market supply and demand will dictate success or failure.

you have to be able to keep going, until that happens or doesn't happen.

I've owned a business for 32 years. I'll keep going.

good for you; why do, less capital Capitalists, complain so much?

 

[Iceweasel]

Most startups fail from not making enough to pay the bills. That could be not charging enough (trying to break into the market) or having products or services that aren't valued enough by the marketplace. And government regulations, fees, taxes, etc.

undercapitalization. venture capital has to take that into account.

Running a business isn't just about collecting startup money. Market supply and demand will dictate success or failure.

you have to be able to keep going, until that happens or doesn't happen.

I've owned a business for 32 years. I'll keep going.

good for you; why do, less capital Capitalists, complain so much?

I don't get the question. First off, it's you that are making the noise, you asked and I've answered.

 

[danielpalos]

undercapitalization. venture capital has to take that into account.

Running a business isn't just about collecting startup money. Market supply and demand will dictate success or failure.

you have to be able to keep going, until that happens or doesn't happen.

I've owned a business for 32 years. I'll keep going.

good for you; why do, less capital Capitalists, complain so much?

I don't get the question. First off, it's you that are making the noise, you asked and I've answered.

why do some fellow capitalists whine so much about regulations and taxes, instead of making like Good capitalists.

 

[Iceweasel]

Running a business isn't just about collecting startup money. Market supply and demand will dictate success or failure.

you have to be able to keep going, until that happens or doesn't happen.

I've owned a business for 32 years. I'll keep going.

good for you; why do, less capital Capitalists, complain so much?

I don't get the question. First off, it's you that are making the noise, you asked and I've answered.

why do some fellow capitalists whine so much about regulations and taxes, instead of making like Good capitalists.

Why do you ask so many goddamn questions?

 

[danielpalos]

you have to be able to keep going, until that happens or doesn't happen.

I've owned a business for 32 years. I'll keep going.

good for you; why do, less capital Capitalists, complain so much?

I don't get the question. First off, it's you that are making the noise, you asked and I've answered.

why do some fellow capitalists whine so much about regulations and taxes, instead of making like Good capitalists.

Why do you ask so many goddamn questions?

it is how i find out, if those of the opposing view, are merely full of fallacy.

 

[depotoo]

Not only that. Govt. jobs are represented by the union, and the Dem's knew when they got it inside it would guarantee them votes from most of those employed there, as they won't vote against what they consider their own best interests. And follow Dem's wishes. They can't get fired without agencies having to go through hoops for months, even years, even though they are dead weight, or guilty of infractions. It is easier to shuffle them than get rid of them. That's why the Dems got the union in the door. We even pay for their employees to be present there, once again, it has to do with nothing but almost guaranteed votes and ends up with corruption, dead weight, etc. in our federal govt. but that matters not to them.

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.

No issue here. The civil service has been expanded into policy level positions, where it was never meant to be. Civil servants are supposed to the executors of policy designed by political office holders and their appointees. Couple that with the current civil service basically being an extension of one party, and you have a situation that was not accounted for when Civil Service Rules were voted in.

The system has to be changed to return neutrality to the Civil Service.

 

[martybegan]

Not only that. Govt. jobs are represented by the union, and the Dem's knew when they got it inside it would guarantee them votes from most of those employed there, as they won't vote against what they consider their own best interests. And follow Dem's wishes. They can't get fired without agencies having to go through hoops for months, even years, even though they are dead weight, or guilty of infractions. It is easier to shuffle them than get rid of them. That's why the Dems got the union in the door. We even pay for their employees to be present there, once again, it has to do with nothing but almost guaranteed votes and ends up with corruption, dead weight, etc. in our federal govt. but that matters not to them.

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.

No issue here. The civil service has been expanded into policy level positions, where it was never meant to be. Civil servants are supposed to the executors of policy designed by political office holders and their appointees. Couple that with the current civil service basically being an extension of one party, and you have a situation that was not accounted for when Civil Service Rules were voted in.

The system has to be changed to return neutrality to the Civil Service.

The idea of civil service unions is idiotic. You either get union protection, or civil service protection, not both.

 

[hadit]

Only people that have no clue what they are talking about need to make such asinine statements like 'only lousy capitalists.' Starting a business in this day and age of government meddling is extremely difficult and costly for almost any sector. This is one of the core reasons that wealth has been moving in the direction it has been - competition is stifled.

Yet, businesses get started all the time. Henry Ford doubled autoworker wages, not minimum wages, and realized gains from efficiency.

He was able to afford raising pay that much because he was already making a lot of money. Companies operating on a 3% profit margin cannot do that, but you knew that already because I already told you that.

Businesses get started all the time and fail all the time. I'll let you look up how many business startups fail in the first year.

Most startups fail due to under capitalization. just high hopes and pipe dreams and even hard work, may not be enough.

You've taken a good first step by acknowledging that your statement about businesses starting all the time is not a good foundation for your argument.

Yes, it is; businesses get started all the time. only lousy capitalists whine they can't make it.

Only capitalists start businesses. Socialists wait for someone else to do it, then demand a piece of action.