Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 1:32 PM ET, 02/15/2011

John Boehner: If federal jobs are lost, 'So be it'

By Ed O'Keefe

Updated 6:25 p.m. ET
House Speaker John Boehner dismissed concerns about federal job cuts Tuesday, saying he believes the federal government can't afford to keep so many workers.

The Ohio Republican was asked at his weekly press conference about the prospect of federal job cuts if a House GOP plan to trim $100 billion in government spending ever passes.

"Over the last two years since President Obama has taken office, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs," Boehner said. "And if some of those jobs are lost in this, so be it. We're broke. It's time for us to get serious about how we're spending the nation's money."

The reporter who asked the question noted however that the government might have to pay federal unemployment assistance to any laid-off federal workers, potentially adding more costs to the government's already-thin resources

The Democratic National Committee and liberal groups immediately seized on Boehner's comments as insensitive and counter to the "Where are the jobs?" mantra adopted by congressional Republican candidates during the 2010 midterm elections.

"If this is the attitude of Speaker John Boehner when it comes to saving existing jobs, it's no surprise he's moving forward with draconian spending cuts that will cost even more -- take teachers out of the classroom, scientists out of the labs, and cops off the street," said Jesse Ferguson, a spokesman with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Nailing down the total number of federal jobs created since January 2009 is difficult, as some of Boehner's colleagues can attest. In separate conversations with The Federal Eye last September, two Republican lawmakers -- Eric Cantor (Va.) and Jason Chaffetz (Utah) -- used different numbers to describe federal job creation since January 2009.

Cantor said the government had grown by about 188,000 workers, or 15 percent, since Obama's inauguration. But Chaffetz said the government had added 130,000 new workers -- a total he said didn't include postal workers, temporary Census Bureau workers or the military.

Outside observers suggest the number of new hires is actually higher. John Palguta, vice president for policy at the nonpartisan Partnership for Public Service, said the total number exceeds 200,000.

According to Office of Personnel Management statistics, 82,692 full-time federal workers left the federal government in fiscal 2009 and agencies added 142,687 new hires, for a net gain of 59,995 jobs.

In fiscal 2010, 91,093 full-time feds left the government, while agencies added 138,155 new hires for a net gain of 47,062 new positions.

As the numbers demonstrate, most of the new hires were to replace employees who left the government. And when hires in both fiscal years are combined, it's safe to say the federal government added about 107,057 new positions -- not the 200,000 Boehner claims, Palguta said.

The Partnership -- and Obama's 2012 budget proposal unveiled Monday -- also note that the federal workforce is actually smaller relative to the population of the United States than in previous decades. Most of the growth in recent years has occurred at the departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Justice and Veterans Affairs -- in security or defense-related programs the GOP is unlikely to touch with the budget ax.

Leave your thoughts in the comments section below

RELATED: Boehner's comments revive debate on counting federal workers

By Ed O'Keefe  | February 15, 2011; 1:32 PM ET
Categories:  Congress, Workplace Issues  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Reagan Building partially reopens after fire
Next: Senate defeats measure that would have denied TSA workers collective bargaining rights

Comments

We are broke so says the speaker but my questions are these:

1) If we are broke how come we continue to give weelfare to corporations raking in billion?

2) If we are broke how come we continue to pass tax cuts for the wealthy?


3) If we are broke than why are we forcing the military to buy planes they say they can do without and an extra egine for a fighter?

4) If we are brokes how can we continue to.........

The answers are simple: trickle up effect and pork spending and politics as usual.

Posted by: Realistic5 | February 15, 2011 2:35 PM | Report abuse

...but...but private-sector employees are an expense on the back of the private-sector...if we're really concerned about debt then we need to trim expensive private-sector jobs as well...everyone should do more with less for the sake of America!

Let's all work 80 hours per week for free!

Posted by: tokenwhitemale | February 15, 2011 2:36 PM | Report abuse

Boehner just signed his own certificate of irrelevance....He has an image of a washington DC resident but these jobs are all over the country

Posted by: CultureClub | February 15, 2011 2:38 PM | Report abuse

Let's split it in the middle and cut 150,000 of the federal positions that Obama created.
There need to be drastic measures taken in order to make up for the mess of bailouts and economy failures! Draconian, no. In fact most of the journalists throwing around that word apparently do not know what it means. Cutting these jobs would not do more harm than good. We didn't need them before Obama, so we sure as heck don't need them now.

Posted by: hebe1 | February 15, 2011 2:43 PM | Report abuse

"The answers are simple: trickle up effect and pork spending and politics as usual. "

LOL Boehner is the chief idiot of a party of idiots, as usual. I guess that he thinks that the purpose of government is to earn a profit on tax-revenue. And certainly that will happen if the government lops $100B off its $4T budget! I think he's just not thinking that $100B is real money. But has it been wasted all along, all this time? If yes then it is probably just the tip of the polar ice-cap of government waste & fraud. If not then why cut it? Just to reach an arbitrary spending-cap? Yes, it is a great idea to lop less than 3% off the federal budget just to reach an arbitrary spending cap. And these are the guys who want to take over Congress and the White House LOL

They are making the entire federal government seem to be either a gigantic waste, or completely arbitrary if not both at the same time. I take it that that is only because Republicans are not in charge of the government.

Posted by: tokenwhitemale | February 15, 2011 2:45 PM | Report abuse

If I remember the constitution correctly, federal workers can vote.

Posted by: Fantheflames | February 15, 2011 2:51 PM | Report abuse

"Let's split it in the middle and cut 150,000 of the federal positions that Obama created. "

Wow, this will never end, will it. This hating on everything the government does because Obama is in charge of it.

Look, doof: Obama did not create 150,000 federal positions. No one created 150,000 federal positions, certainly not one person. The federal government may have hired an additional 150,000 people, but it also has replaced retiring workers, or workers who leave the Federal government for other reasons.

Its' not like you can just slice the difference between 2008 and 2010 total Federal employment and say that "half" of those workers are "waste and fraud" and getting rid of them would be a good idea.

Well, you could engage in such a simplistic analysis if you work for the Republican Congressional leadership, but as far as actually running the country that is hardly a good idea. At all. Much like you they were ostensibly hired to do a job that was required and to date do it well, earning their salaries. Or has that not occurred to you? Or do you secretly have something to tell your employer, and feel that the average Federal employee is much the same?

So let's assume that due to the stupid, thoughtless nature of your comment that you're dead-weight at your job. Which of the 4M Federal employees are like you? Should we just pick 75,000 of them at random and fire them based on your moronic opinion?

Posted by: tokenwhitemale | February 15, 2011 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Uh - you could cut the federal work force IN HALF and get the job done. From experience, both as a past employee and a contractor, lots of folks at the GS-11, 12, 13,14 level that could go and the job could still get done. A regular "RIFT' or "reduction in force" (like private firms practice all the time) would work wonders - keep the good, get rid of the bad. But with the Union's in play....the slugs keep their jobs.

Posted by: ReneesOpinion | February 15, 2011 2:54 PM | Report abuse

YOU NEED CUT ONLY ONE JOB IN WASHINGTON, DC TO STIMULATE THE USA ECONOMY BEYOND ANYONE'S WILDEST DREAMS--THAT OF THE CURRENT PRESIDENT OF KENYA(OOPS--THE USA)!

Posted by: fregameeate | February 15, 2011 2:54 PM | Report abuse

"If I remember the constitution correctly, federal workers can vote."

That's an interesting point but not really relevant to the Republican leadership if most Feds live and work in major cities and thus tend to be Democrat.

You have to realize that they are not seriously worried about the fiscal health of the nation. They are quite worried about cutting both the number of Democrats in government and Federal benefits for Democrats as a whole. This is simple party politics: casting Democrats as bad and Democratic actions and concerns as bad.

It would still happen if most Federal employees were Republicans and most Federal money were spent on programs that benefited Republicans directly. Because they'd want to fire the few Democrats and trim the few Democratic-oriented government programs. You see to them, only Republican employees and Republican-oriented government programs are good. Everything else is waste and fraud.

Posted by: tokenwhitemale | February 15, 2011 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Social Security needs to be completely restructured! We're sending weekly Soc Sec checks to spouses who have NOT worked at all, or have NOTworked the REQUIRED MINIMUM of 10 years. This is welfare for the wealthy! If someone has not worked ... they don't get disability, they don't get unemployment, they don't get worker's compensation ... so, why do they get a check that's equal to 1/2 the check that their working spouse also gets every month?? They did NOT pay into Soc Sec; they did NOT pay Medicare taxes; they did NOT pay federal taxes; they did NOT pay state taxes; no employer paid any of those taxes; they're NOT RETIRING!! If they didn't need to work & earn money between the ages of 22-62 (because their spouse earned enough money) ... why do they need to collect money every month (for 20-30 years) ... when they didn't even work 10 years???

Posted by: dmereh | February 15, 2011 3:04 PM | Report abuse

If reporters did their jobs they would ask Congresspeople for the following:
1. Why should you have better insurance coverage than your fellow Americans; when it's your fellow Americans who are paying for your salary and insurance coverage? Will you give up your coverage until pre-existing conditions; children-up to age 26-are allowed to stay on their parents insurance; etc., etc.
2. If federal employees aren't necessary doesn't that make you and your staff obsolete? How many employees are you cutting from your staff? Are you going to introduce a bill to lower your salary?

If these questions were asked over and over again I think Congresspeople would sing a different tune.

Posted by: rlj1 | February 15, 2011 3:04 PM | Report abuse

The government is bloated with paper-pushers and feather-bedders. It needs to be cut drastically so that the money currently being sent down the federal rathole can be used to retire our stunning debt.

Posted by: dan1138 | February 15, 2011 3:06 PM | Report abuse

"Uh - you could cut the federal work force IN HALF and get the job done. From experience, both as a past employee and a contractor, lots of folks at the GS-11, 12, 13,14 level that could go and the job could still get done. A regular "RIFT' or "reduction in force" (like private firms practice all the time) would work wonders - keep the good, get rid of the bad. But with the Union's in play....the slugs keep their jobs."

Nonsense. The union won't protect employees with poor job-performance ratings. Your problem is typical outsider jealousy. At best.

If those workers get consistently-bad ratings, they will not be on the Federal workforce for long, union or no union. There are too many people who want Federal jobs and too much money at stake to carry deadbeats.

No your real issue if you have one is why are they working those jobs in the first place. But the real question behind that is whether they are performing a service that is worth their salary. If they are, why would you want to fire them? I don't hear a single thought along these lines. It's all about numbers and money. Which tells me that it's all about whose numbers and where the money goes. You wouldn't hear a Congressman who considers himself to be a representative of Federal workers arguing for such gross cuts as "half of the growth in Fed employment since 2008 should be cut loose". You can surely expect calls for a cut of half of the growth in Federal programs in John Boehners' district over the same timeframe. He's willing to make those cuts, then we might be able to take his proposals seriously, and the same for his other Republican "budget-hawks".

But if they want to cut the Federal budget in other districts and preserve it in theirs, then we get a clear picture of what is really going on.

Posted by: tokenwhitemale | February 15, 2011 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, 'fregameat'. I didn't see Obama's birth certificate, so he must not be a US Citizen. I bet Kenya sent him here to take change from the White House couches and cold cuts from the fridge. Sneaky Kenya.

Posted by: goodtoknow | February 15, 2011 3:10 PM | Report abuse

WHY IS EVERYONE SO AFRAID TO CONFRONT OBAMA ON THE TRUTH OF HIS PLACE OF BIRTH. IT IS "NOT" RACISM TO EXPECT THAT EVERY PRESIDENT PROVE HIS STATUS PER THE US CONSTITUTION.

WE ALL KNOW HOW HARD IT IS TO PROVE A NEGATIVE--BUT HOW ABOUT PROVING A POSITIVE!

WHY HAVE WE NEVER SEEN "STUFF" ABOUT OBAMA? WE HAVE SEEN "STUFF" ABOUT SUCH PRESIDENTS AS GW BUSH; JFK; DDE; HST; FDR, AND, EVEN "STUFF" OF TEDDY ROOSEVELT.

"STUFF" IS DEFINED AS ALL THAT MEMORABILIA COLLECTED BT PARENTS AND GRANDPARENTS OF THE CHILDREN; "STUFF" SUCH AS PCIS/PHOTOS AS A CHILD RIDING A HOBBY-HORSE; OLD REPORT CARDS; RECITAL BROCHURES; DAYS AT THE BEACH; CRUDE, HAND-MADE DRAWINGS OF HEARTS WITH SENTIMENTS SUCH AS "..I LUFF U MUMMY", "HAPPY VALENTINE MOMMY", "YOU'RE THE WORLD'S BEST GRANDPA"; STICK FIGURE DRAWINGS OF THE FAMILY; COPY OF AN "A+" ESSAY WITH TEACHER COMMENTS; PIECES OF HAIR FROM THE FIRST HAIR-CUT; OLD BIRTHDAY CARDS--ALL THAT "STUFF" THAT TAKES UP SO MUCH ROOM IN DRAWERS, CLOSETS, ATTICS AND EVEN GARAGES.

I RECALL SEEING OLD SEPIA PICS OF TEDDY ROOSEVELT AS A CHILD WEARING CHAPS AND A COWBOY HAT; I RECALL PICS OF JFK AND RFK AT ABOUT 10 AND 6 YEARS OLD, RESPECTIVELY, ON A SAIL BOAT; I RECALL PICS OF DDE AS A VERY YOUNG CADET AT WEST POINT. THERE ARE EVEN PICS OF gENERAL US GRANT AS A HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT PRE-ENTERING WEST POINT.

BUT NO ONE, AND I MEAN NO ONE HAS SEEN ANY OF OBAMA'S 'STUFF".

TO PARAPHRASE AN OLD BILL BUCKLEY ADAGE, "..THAT WHICH AIN'T--CAN'T BE".

BURIANI OBAMA. FOR THOSE INTERESTED IN SWAHILI, IT MEANS "GOODBY OBAMA."

Posted by: fregameeate | February 15, 2011 3:13 PM | Report abuse

Along with cutting the Federal workforce, career politcians need to have thier salaries cut by two thirds, no pensions or health care coverage and they should be counted for what they are...part time employees who work mostly for special interests and not the public or our Republic.
Our economic problems are because Wall Street has: off-shored and out-sourced industries and jobs, looted and scammed our nation, communities and our citizens with immunity, bought and paid the cadre of vermin and filth career politcians to sell us out, double cross us and stab us in the back through criminal and treasonable trade treaties...and on and on.
What Wall Street and career politcians have done is not just theft and malfeasance, economic looting and excessive self-gain but treason because what they have done has been in time of war and national distress and emergency.
The only solution to our worsening economy is not spending cuts but real wealth creation and that can only be achieved by increasing manufacturing, farming and mining production...which Wall Street is against...and you all know why...that would endanger thier global empire and continued undermining of our Republic and the values of citizenship...think about it. Angry as the Egyptian citizens yet?

Posted by: 123Njord | February 15, 2011 3:16 PM | Report abuse

O so the jobs are going to be taken away the American people. Doesn't that go against your platform of bring back jobs, Mr. Speaker?

Posted by: Falling4Ever | February 15, 2011 3:16 PM | Report abuse

"But if they want to cut the Federal budget in other districts and preserve it in theirs, then we get a clear picture of what is really going on."

...indeed if it's all about cutting yours and keeping or even expanding mine, then things become quite clear. But let us hope that this puts the sharp focus on the Federal expenditures in the districts of those who claim that the government is wasteful. Surely they must be so keenly aware of such fraud and waste because they see it around them all the time, yet either haven't reported it to the proper authorities or have reported it for years without any positive effect. And certainly the last case is a real cause for concern, and I would expect the Republicans to leap eagerly on any claims of fraud or waste that have gone ignored by Federal management.

Surely they have plenty of evidence that the programs they want to cut are wasteful and fraudlent, likewise for the workers they want to fire!

Posted by: tokenwhitemale | February 15, 2011 3:17 PM | Report abuse

No surprise that Boehner just shrugs over the potential loss of federal jobs. During the Bush years he stood by and did nothing while his home state of Ohio suffered a net loss of more than 250,000 jobs in the private sector. Why should he care about the loss of federal jobs? As long as his own paycheck doesn't bounce this is a guy that could care less about anyone but potential and actual donors to the GOP.

Posted by: hairguy01 | February 15, 2011 3:17 PM | Report abuse

The teary eyed Boehner is acting like an ignorant fool! Several months ago he was making a ridiculous apples to oranges comparison of private and federal worker salaries. On Sunday he was on "Meet the Press" refusing to man up and criticize ignoramuses that believe Obama is a Muslim. He said they had a right as Americans to be ignorant which is true but what about his responsibility to correct ignorance when he finds it? I think he's spent to much time under the tanning lights and inhaling nicotine, and its affected his thinking.

Posted by: MrSagacious | February 15, 2011 3:18 PM | Report abuse

"you could cut the federal work force IN HALF and get the job done."
"The government is bloated with paper-pushers and feather-bedder"

This from the armchair experts who are sitting on their rear on a Tuesday whining about articles on WaPo.

Just fire the teachers, police, military personnel, firemen, the folks who run the treasury and the social security offices and and and. You mean gov't workers actually help run the gov't? Who'd a thought.

"It's all waste" say the bobble-heads who do seem to know how to waste time better than anyone.

Why does the right-wing seem so full of "experts" who know nothing about the details nor care to learn about them?

Posted by: josh13 | February 15, 2011 3:19 PM | Report abuse

Once again, 'fregameat', you are a genius! I just check my old family album and sure enough, no old photos of Obama as a child riding a horse! I asked my Mother and Father and they do not have any old birthday cards from him or any drawings. Your theory is hereby confirmed! If I wasn’t sure you are sitting around with nothing but a tutu on eating out of a bucket of KFC, I would hug you! You truly are a national treasure. Keep up the great rantings (don't take it off all caps either).

Posted by: goodtoknow | February 15, 2011 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Obama and his hidden childhood, that is the REAL problem... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-512430/Obama-releases-pictures-family-album-rides-Super-Tuesday-wave.html oh and here too... in case you don't believe the furiners http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/070323obama-early-photogallery,0,5458360.photogallery

But on topic, cut corporate welfare to companies that send jobs overseas, cut defense spending. And end the needless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Posted by: XYZS | February 15, 2011 3:23 PM | Report abuse

200,000 new Feds? Good grief where are they working? Not postal, not Census and not military. OK, where the heck are they?

Also, what are total number of Feds January 2009 and March,2011? That would give us a real picture of Fed job growth.

Posted by: caseyb1 | February 15, 2011 3:27 PM | Report abuse

How do private contractors on the government payroll play into this figure? No mention of the administration reducing those numbers. There should be an investigation into all government contracts for waste. You'll defintely find it. But Republicans wouldn't go for that since they are bankrolled by them.

Posted by: dan1005 | February 15, 2011 3:27 PM | Report abuse

200,000 new Feds? Good grief where are they working? Not postal, not Census and not military. OK, where the heck are they?

Also, what are total number of Feds January 2009 and March,2011? That would give us a real picture of Fed job growth.

Posted by: caseyb1 | February 15, 2011 3:28 PM | Report abuse

"Along with cutting the Federal workforce, career politcians need to have thier salaries cut by two thirds, no pensions or health care coverage and they should be counted for what they are...part time employees who work mostly for special interests and not the public or our Republic."

But that would be the case regardless of their salaries, and certainly cutting their salaries by 2/3rds would make that even worse. The life of the average congressman is to be feted by the corporate and political elite for two reasons. First their influence over Federal spending, second over Federal regulations. You're talking 500 men and women in charge of a $5T yearly budget and a $15T economy.

This is why the Founding Fathers originally specified that the Congress have 1 representative for every 5,000 American citizens. That ratio is now one in 700,000. We have states with fewer people than that.

You could easily make the argument that the House has become more powerful than the Senate. And it's only going to get worse as the population grows while the House abides by a self-made rule that limits the # of Congressmen.

Second this leads to severe distortion in representation as each state must have at least one representative...even states with less than 700,000 citizens. This means highly-populated states like California and Texas cannot have their proper representation.

So unfortunately the real answer to this problem is to increase both the total number and total budget for Congressmen which would make it that much harder for the private-sector to wine and dine them into agreeing with policies that are not in the best interests of the American public. Such as...having only 435 voting members in the House.

Posted by: tokenwhitemale | February 15, 2011 3:30 PM | Report abuse

"So unfortunately the real answer to this problem is to increase both the total number and total budget for Congressmen which would make it that much harder for the private-sector to wine and dine them into agreeing with policies that are not in the best interests of the American public."

...on the other hand they could always set them up with hookers and naive, impressionable young pages and interns. That problem never seems to go away, does it.

Posted by: tokenwhitemale | February 15, 2011 3:34 PM | Report abuse

These must be all Federal employees commenting here. Well, I can't argue with anyone trying to hold onto a job, but we all know there are a lot (but not all) of government employees who have barely anything to do. I also don't understand the rapid expansion in the past 2 years. It does seem a bit unreasonable.

Posted by: forgetthis | February 15, 2011 3:36 PM | Report abuse

Speaker Boehner, how many members of your staff have you laid off since becoming Speaker? How many staffers has Majority leader Cantor laid off?

Posted by: GreatStoneFace | February 15, 2011 3:37 PM | Report abuse


Phony Boehney,

Full o' baloney,

Has full control

Of his lachrymony.

But one can get his fears up,

And watch him when he tears-up,

For he's one who resents being pestered

About that lobbyist he keeps sequestered.

Posted by: clitteigh | February 15, 2011 3:40 PM | Report abuse

Simple. Cut 150K contractors and have the "excess" federal workers do those jobs. Easy to do. No need to pay UI/Healthcare to the bumped contractors either.
I wish we had just 1 amendment to help fix the economy. A State only gets back from the Federal Government exactly the amount dollar amount it put in. Time to pay your own way or shut the hell up about how high your taxes are and how bad you have it, damn free-loaders.

Posted by: muppeteer | February 15, 2011 3:46 PM | Report abuse

Cutting federal jobs is only one piece of the gargantuan federal pie. Not only are federal jobs going to have to go, but entitlement spending must be reined in. Retirement age upped and benefits means tested. Foreign affairs and foreign assistance spending must be cut. Defense spending, education and EPA (these depts can be abolished) cut.....every federal account can be cut and must be. The continued existence of the nation is dependent upon our getting our financial house in order. These clowns who just believe spending and tax increases are delusional. Their stupidity has gotten dangerous to the continued safety and security of the nation. Government must reorient its spending on growth. If money spent doesn't grow the economy, it doesn't get spent that way. We are at a crossroads where we can spend billions for unemployment or spend that money on growth. Shove the whiners aside and do it. Our spending must reflect clear, concise, coherent, and national interest friendly policies. Make the adjustments now because they will not be easier to do tomorrow. Even the WaPo is criticizing Obama for delaying it. Even he will have to live in the financial mess he helped make by not fixing it. He is not part of the solution, therefore he is part of the problem.

Posted by: panamajack | February 15, 2011 3:48 PM | Report abuse

So let's start with congressional staffs, no more than four per member of congress. Then cut the number of army generals in half to 150. The same for navy admirals and marine and air force generals.
Next, eliminate the 800,000 so-called intelligence experts cheney and rumsfeld hired after 9-11.

What's next?

Posted by: knjincvc | February 15, 2011 3:49 PM | Report abuse

John Boehner needs to set a good example, and reduce the federal payroll by one, HIMSELF!

Posted by: isenberg888 | February 15, 2011 3:51 PM | Report abuse

And some people said they didn't have a jobs program!

Posted by: jack824 | February 15, 2011 3:55 PM | Report abuse


It is time for some facts on corporate taxes.

The total of corporate income taxes in the US for 2012 is projected to be only 329 billion.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/30-years-spending-priorities-federal-budget-2012/?hpid=artslot

For context, Wall Street compensation in 2010 was 135 billion for only 25 publicly trade finance companies. Exxon alone in 2009 had profits of 30 billion on revenues of 383 billion. They paid no corporate income taxes in 2009
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704124504576118421859347048.html


And we need to cut corporate income taxes?

Posted by: FoundingMother | February 15, 2011 4:01 PM | Report abuse

If farm welfare is gutted, so be it!

Even for Ohio farmers, right, Mr. Speaker?

Posted by: Garak | February 15, 2011 4:01 PM | Report abuse

LOL @ Fantheflames. Yes, federal workers can vote. However, it is debatable for certain classes of federal workers (e.g., the military) actually having their votes (absentee) actually counted in certain locales.

Posted by: joeygish | February 15, 2011 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Of course these federal workers that the Republicans constantly abuse include members of our Armed Forces and veterans who have served this nation honorably and gone into other branches of government once leaving the service.

How would our military do if we eliminated the equivalent of our Gs11's, 12's, 13's, 14's etc? Let's remove half the captains, majors, lieutenant colonels, etc. and see how well things run. I'm sure they are "slugs" too.

Posted by: arcticpost | February 15, 2011 4:07 PM | Report abuse

Hebe1- You obviously didn't read the entire article. The jobs the House leadership are talking disingenuously about are not new jobs. They are new hires replacing the ones who left. The president nor the admonistration "created" new jobs. The real creation of "new" jobs in the civil service was the TSP under GW Bush.

Posted by: davejeri | February 15, 2011 4:08 PM | Report abuse

I've got news for the extremist Republican party:


Now that you have some actual power again (the House) you won't be able to get away with spending all of your time throwing verbal bombs at the Dems, going golfing and then hitting the DC cocktail circuit at night every day.


You either CREATE JOBS or you will be gone in 2012 so fast that your heads will spin!


Chop chop Repugs!


You've got two years!


Time's a wastin'!


.

Posted by: DrainYou | February 15, 2011 4:10 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter to John Boehner. He's got money and a job.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | February 15, 2011 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Gee if we are so "broke" why was it so important to give a giant extra tax cut to the richest 2%? Why is Boehner opposed to cutting the pork from defense, including the famous "extra engine" for the F-35? Why doesnt he get onboard with a public option for health care to help share the risk and lower costs?

Posted by: MarcMyWords | February 15, 2011 4:16 PM | Report abuse

And if Boehner gets beaten to death in his own backyard for being an aristocratic fascist, so be it.

Posted by: 2229 | February 15, 2011 4:22 PM | Report abuse

War and corporate criminal George Bush and his minions destroyed this country, its middle class,its corporate regulations, its relevance in the world and its standing as a beacon of freedom.

Bush did all that. He should be executed. Obama is George Washington compared to Meat Puppet Bush and his dictator pal Cheney.

Posted by: 2229 | February 15, 2011 4:25 PM | Report abuse

tokenwhitefemale:
"Surely they have plenty of evidence that the programs they want to cut are wasteful and fraudlent, likewise for the workers they want to fire!"

Where would you like to start in a discussion of government waste? The $60 billion/year of medicare waste? The $55 billion of stimulus wasted? The $5 billion or so of wasted questionable spending on government employee p-cards?

If you think federal government bureaucracies are the pinnacle of efficiency and wise fiscal management, and you have that much problem finding examples of waste in our government, you just aren't trying very hard :o).

Posted by: dbw1 | February 15, 2011 4:28 PM | Report abuse

I'm not sure this is the way to go about winning friends and influencing people.

Posted by: lddoyle2002 | February 15, 2011 4:30 PM | Report abuse

To tokenwhitemale: I should've guessed your name! By the way, you are a moron, not me. You are a moron for taking out your frustrations on me and focusing on 1 line that I wrote. You are a moron for all the hateful terms you use in your email. You are a moron for thinking there is no excees in the Federal Government. Finally, you are a moron because I say so, so there!
I feel like I'm on a playground!

Posted by: hebe1 | February 15, 2011 4:32 PM | Report abuse

DrainYou:
"You either CREATE JOBS or you will be gone in 2012 so fast that your heads will spin!"

Sorry to burst your bubble, but if there are no jobs created by next year it will be ALL Obama's fault.

See, Democrats spent the past couple years convincing America that everything that has ever gone wrong is the fault of the President alone, and the fact that Democrats held majorities in Congress before the Great Recession started didn't matter...it was still all GW's fault.

So, the chicken is coming home to roost. I know the President can't be faulted for everything. You know that, too. But Democrats have convinced Americans that the Presidency is a monarchy, and if something is wrong it's all the fault of the President. So guess who will be to blame come 2012?

Posted by: dbw1 | February 15, 2011 4:34 PM | Report abuse

The speake of the house earns more than the rest of congress. Let's fix that for America!

Posted by: jaygatsby27 | February 15, 2011 4:34 PM | Report abuse

This reminds me of the French revolution with Marie Antoinette teller her court "let them eat cake". The Republican House has done nothing under Boehner's watch except complain about Obama's plans. Where is there Plan For America and the other retoric they preach. I see no ideas or plans, its been almost 2 months, they gave the President 1 week before criticism.

Posted by: maxsam56 | February 15, 2011 4:38 PM | Report abuse

The Boehner position has some merit. The fact of the matter is that the federal government is poorly run. If it were a private enterprise it would be declaring Chapter Something, and a 2 year wage freeze would be considered a total nonstarter. Just from the tech perspective: Have you seen so many poorly designed websites in your life? And don't get me started on the 17 intelligence agencies. For overall performance for the taxpayer about a D minus.

Posted by: Tess6 | February 15, 2011 4:41 PM | Report abuse

If Raising taxes is the answer, then by that reasoning California is the most successful state in the union right? They have the highest taxes, it SHOULD… See people economics don’t work in “give it away land”. All the big tax generating “horrible” companies have gone. Unions are almost all that’s left. Many bash the “big business” but then wonder why they have no job. We are leaking money uncontrollably. Like a leaky boat, a bailing bucket (more taxes) will do little until we STOP THE LEAKS! Private sector jobs have been crashing for 4+ years, but the government has grown. How is that even remotely sustainable? Jut like those mom and pop companies I worked for in the past, if it gets bad layoffs are a reality. Why should the government not share the same? Why make someone else pay for YOUR morality? “We have a responsibility to take care of the poor!” In other words… “My morality is better than yours is, and I will MAKE you pay!” Talk about elitist attitudes.

“To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas
which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical”.
Thomas Jefferson

The father of the Democratic party is rolling over in his grave by the statements made here attacking others earnings.

Posted by: thatavkguy | February 15, 2011 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of tokenwhitefemale's vigorous defense of government efficiency, I just received a small package in the mail of an ebay purchase.

Now, by my map the package should have taken 2-3 days and traveled 410 miles across three states. But by the time our government postal service was done with it, the poor little package had gone on a 12-day, 5,012 mile journey back and forth across the fruited plain...nearly touching both coasts to get to my state in the Midwest....and the package looked like they gave it the claw-hammer treatment just for good measure.

Posted by: dbw1 | February 15, 2011 4:44 PM | Report abuse

I agree with the Leader. We should cut Federal employees. Let's startt with the programs he and his rabble really like. Lets cut SSA in half--retiree don't need social security checks. Next, lets cut VA by one third--we coddle our war veterans too much. Oh, and while we are at it, lets cut those lazy FDA and USDA workers--we don't need safe and effective drugs and food. GET THEPOINT PEOPLE!!!!

Posted by: rjstolba | February 15, 2011 4:45 PM | Report abuse

I agree with the Leader. We should cut Federal employees. Let's startt with the programs he and his rabble really like. Lets cut SSA in half--retiree don't need social security checks. Next, lets cut VA by one third--we coddle our war veterans too much. Oh, and while we are at it, lets cut those lazy FDA and USDA workers--we don't need safe and effective drugs and food. GET THE POINT PEOPLE!!!!

Posted by: rjstolba | February 15, 2011 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Let's start by cutting Boner's job. It'll be his pity party and he can cry if he wants to.

Posted by: sasquatchbigfoot | February 15, 2011 4:46 PM | Report abuse

So Boehner and his bund don't mind cutting federal workers' jobs as long as they can continue to give trillions in tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and untold more trillions to military industrialists for obsolete Cold War weapons systems. Typical of Republicans.

Posted by: ElectricBill | February 15, 2011 4:52 PM | Report abuse

So Boehner and his bund don't mind cutting federal workers' jobs as long as they can continue to give trillions in tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans and untold more trillions to military industrialists for obsolete Cold War weapons systems. Typical of Republicans.

Posted by: ElectricBill | February 15, 2011 4:53 PM | Report abuse

I heard Obama say this morning that the government has to make decisions like a family would, cutting out those things that are not critical (like the morning gormet coffee) while continuing to 'invest' (defined: "spending money you don't have") in important things like home repairs and the kids college fund.

So, would you agree with me that Obama just said he's willing to cut:
1) funding for the NEA to $0 (since a cash-strapped family would obviously quit going to movies, plays, and concerts)
2) funding for NPR/PBS to $0 (since one of the first things a family so short on funds would do would be to cut cable)
3) funding for high-speed rail (since a family would cut out all nice-to-haves, no matter how dreamy they sound)

It's so refreshing to hear Obama say he's willing to slash all these nice-to-have programs when we have reached a place where we have to borrow every dollar we want to spend on them....which the family in Obama's example could clearly never do.

Posted by: dbw1 | February 15, 2011 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Holy Fistal Conservative Batman, we gots some sharp shooters here. Cut this and cut that and we're broke and we can't do this and we can't do that and complain about the whiners.

they is yous!!

All these bright minded, experienced and oh so opinionated financial managers with the magic bullet of slash the government. y'all are beyond childish and the reality, when all the whining, wailing and gnashing of teeth is over - we are still going to need the services that federal, state and local workers provide. All this is nothing more than a trumped up tea party acting out and after it's over. Hey, it's over.

President Obama stated from day one the importance of sound investment and the critical need for our competitive future in the global economy. He was right and he's still right, and all the lies and smear and fear mongering won't change a thing. Now, JB and his team of house clowns will have to own up to their own policy initiatives. The American people will see this crap for what it is.

Oh, and someone put those birthers outside, they're getting a little ripe, did ya notice?

Posted by: right_as_rain | February 15, 2011 4:59 PM | Report abuse

I worked for a consulting firm for the Navy Department for 30 years. The level of incompetence and do-nothingness of the civil servants was unbelievable--I'm sure that's the reason my company was hired. We used to joke that easily if a 1/3 of the civil servants we worked for were fired, there would not be a ripple in productivity. So, though, I've always voted democrat, I'm all for cutting the federal workforce--a lot of them are useless. What's the saying, "civil service, you come for the pay and stay for the leave"

Posted by: bojarvis | February 15, 2011 5:04 PM | Report abuse

John Boehner: If federal jobs are lost, 'So be it'

==================

I wonder if that applies to Boehner's job too? He is wiling to quit, right? He's not important, right?

Posted by: fmamstyle | February 15, 2011 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Yes so be it, so we can afford the $70B in lost tax revenue from the top 2%. So let's fire feds, most of whom or middle class, create more unemployment claims, lost income tax revenue, and lost consumer goods spending that will hurt the economy even more. Let's cut funding from education, energy regulation, environmental protection, and health regulation and give yet more money to defense. Good choice in new leadership repubs. Got your new jobs yet?

Posted by: oro78 | February 15, 2011 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Let's cut the bloated DoD contractor work force! Beltway bandits account for over 2/3 of the entire DoD budget. All they do is get DoD contracts and pay their employees to do other work their business does. Blackwater, Haliburton...let's do away with them. They are what is known as "corporate welfare". Very socialist.

Posted by: fmamstyle | February 15, 2011 5:14 PM | Report abuse

The government is bloated with paper-pushers and feather-bedders. It needs to be cut drastically.

__________

I love statements like the one above. The knee-jerk, I hate big government line.... Without a thought about why or what the government supports...

As anyone can tell you minimal government works great!! Just ask most of the developing world -- Businesses absolutely thrive when they can't get goods to market, can't rely on a legal system that ensures contract compliance, can't hire educated workers, can't ensure the health and safety of their workers and customers, and so on.

I'm sure there are ways to make the government work better, but we might want to consider that having a robust government actually provides the structure for the business of business. Aspiring to a government the size it was when the US was a country of 10 million people and didn't support an industrialzed infrastructure might be a bit of a nutty thing to wish for.

Or, we could all move back on 40 acres with our mules and outhouses and gas lamps and live as subsistance farmers. That'd be just SWELL and it's an economic system can be supported by a tiny federal government!

If we want to balance the budget we absolutely need to look at entitlements and uneffective tax incentives and ask ourselves where we need to dolling out $$. What are the country's priorities? Farm subsidies, oil and gas subsidies, medicare, Social security? Do we need to continue the mortgage interest deduction? And where would a cut today be a cost tomorrow?

It's time for SOMEONE to get serious and start thinking about this like an actual budget - what do we want, and what's it going to cost? Not how can I make an ideological political point.

Posted by: DCLocal20 | February 15, 2011 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Isn't it time to invade another country & start a new war? I'm bored with Iraq & Afghanistan.

Posted by: TaxiDriver | February 15, 2011 5:15 PM | Report abuse

Let's say about ... 199,000 of the new federal jobs were for 'financial forensic investigators. Where's the beef? ... Can "we" hire 250,000 more in 2011? Please.

Posted by: deepthroat21 | February 15, 2011 5:21 PM | Report abuse

How about ending the stupid wars we are fighting? How about it Boener-boy?

Posted by: johng1 | February 15, 2011 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Where r these jobs they talked about btw?

It also see,s he doesnt care if the jobs go overseas

Posted by: Chops2 | February 15, 2011 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Boehner is a Boehn head. And I'm STILL mad that he can't pronounce his name correctly.

Anyway, this particular federal employee found data today evidencing that the demands of our services grew 25% from FY2008 through FY2010.

And yet, we've had a hiring freeze and cannot fill vacant positions.

And there that "Boehn head" is talking about cutting federal jobs because he doesn't think they're necessary.

Well... I don't think that HE is necessary. Let's fire him and save taxpayers at least $223,500 per year. (meanwhile, he's gonna fuss about a GS-5 making $23,000/year as being "redundant.")

What a goon.

Posted by: trambusto | February 15, 2011 5:28 PM | Report abuse

Fregameeate- so let me get this straight... because you haven't been given access to Obama's private memorabilia, that most assuredly means that he has not met the citizenship burden. Right? And what if you were given the opportunity to view a picture of him knee deep in apple pie, or standing in front of a poster of John Wayne or some other American icon in his bedroom? Would that represent the sort of confirmation you need? Why? Would it not be possible that he was born in Kenya, moved to Hawaii at age 6 months and then later came into possession of the pictures, report cards and other "STUFF" that you insist are essential to proving his citizenship? Because you once saw a picture of JFK at age 10 milling about RFK, this means that he was born in the United States?? Are you serious? Without more information and context, could it not be the case that he had just moved to the U.S. from Russia a week before and that photograph of him was the first taken of him upon his family's arrival in the US? Your argument in support of this notion that Obama is disqualified from being president is breathtaking. Literally.... as in I temporarily was unable to breath that someone could base their argument on such a flimsy and, frankly, ridiculous premise. Wow.

The birth certificate is all that matters and that has been produced. Come, join the rest of us on planet earth.

Posted by: zim66 | February 15, 2011 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Cutting federal jobs isn't something to accept, it's something to celebrate.

Posted by: getjiggly1 | February 15, 2011 5:36 PM | Report abuse


The United States of America is a failed state: economicaly, politically and militarily. I have stated over and over again about the vermin, filth and traitors on Wall Street and their cadre of career politcians, what they have done and are doing but I always seem to leave out those who are most at fault...us, we let it all happen without firing a single shot in our family, community and Republic's defence. Are we any less brave or dedicated then the unarmed Egyptian citizens who have stood up to tanks, troops, trained police, military jet aircraft and death threats from thier government for dreams of freedom, security and I hope Democracy...for far less then we have had taken from us by our government and Wall Street...after all millions of us citizens here are armed and veterans and can handle anything Wall street and Washington can do to us now.

Posted by: 123Njord | February 15, 2011 5:36 PM | Report abuse

One day the war against terrorism will be over.

Posted by: TaxiDriver | February 15, 2011 5:39 PM | Report abuse


This is what I want to hear from the überlegen of the House and his elf, Eric Cantor. I am ashamed to be a Virginian and glad I'm not from Ohio.


Posted by: mortified469 | February 15, 2011 5:44 PM | Report abuse

Give the federal employees the option of taking a 40% paycut like the rest of us have been faced with the last 4 years.
Make them pay their health insurance,
and no "lifetime" benefits for anyone!

Posted by: ohioan | February 15, 2011 5:51 PM | Report abuse

Higher taxes for the rich will help. They ain't hiring folks anyway. Stop bailing out Wall Street. All that money they got. Stop sending our brave men and women in wars that we should not be fighting anyway. We spend billions on Iraq, against one of Al-Kada's enemies. And stop sending folks to Washington that bicker all of the time instead of trying to getting things, contructive done. Democrats and Republicans alike. They talk much, but bicker and do nothing. Fire all of Congress, the Executive Branch and the Supreme Court. Fire all of them and start anew.

Posted by: roallenc | February 15, 2011 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Nor can we afford to keep John Boehner and other small Gov't Right-Wing Taunting Hack's on the Federal dole.

If this is how John Boehner feels about Federal Worker's, than he obviously feels the same way about himself.

Where does he think he is working and for who does he think he is working for?

The Private Sector.

Just asking...

Posted by: lcarter0311 | February 15, 2011 6:00 PM | Report abuse

"And these are the guys who want to take over Congress " - news flash tokenwhitemale (or is that tokingwhitemale?), they DID take over the congress :) But its ok, when Obumbler the community agitator in chief has forgotten the message we can't blame his faithful stooges for doing the same now can we :)

As for your other hillarious comment about private sector workers, this must be another epiphany for you, but the private sectore MAKES money, the government SPENDS that money, the government and so its workers produce NOTHING, therefore when you cut government spending, guess what, workers are also part of that government spending, why should they get a free ride?

Aren't you lefties all about 'fairness' *snicker*, so time to walk the talk kiddies, join Baracks unemployment line like the rest of the folks :)

Posted by: ForTheLulz | February 15, 2011 6:20 PM | Report abuse

If federal jobs are lost, if *any* public sector jobs are lost, I will cheer myself hoarse! Pubic sector workers make anywhere from 50% to 300% MORE than their private sector counterparts and their benefits have bankrupted states, citites, counties, all across the country. Fire them all!! There isn't one excuse for even ONE federal employee so long as they are rewarded with pay or benefits that no private sector worker can expect.

Posted by: mibrooks27 | February 15, 2011 6:22 PM | Report abuse

"Well... I don't think that HE is necessary." -trambusto,

Too bad for you that the American People disagree, its your Democrats and their lapdogs who are unnecessary, house cleaning began on Nov 2nd, will continue through 2012 and beyond, then you lefties can sit here and mope and gnash your teeth for our enjoyment on the Washington Compost message boards :)

I so love the tears from lefties losing it all :D

Posted by: ForTheLulz | February 15, 2011 6:26 PM | Report abuse

fregameeate -
Your screaming, irrational rants should cause law enforcement to keep a close eye on you. You are obviously delusional and can not accept reality. Please get help.

Posted by: pjohn3 | February 15, 2011 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Exactly the heartless bastard I thought he was.

Posted by: illiad2 | February 15, 2011 6:30 PM | Report abuse

mibrooks27 -
"If federal jobs are lost, if *any* public sector jobs are lost, I will cheer myself hoarse! Pubic sector workers make anywhere from 50% to 300% MORE than their private sector counterparts...."
-----
Please stop making up figures. You obviously do not have facts to back them up.

Posted by: pjohn3 | February 15, 2011 6:30 PM | Report abuse

Typical new GOP Tea Party attitude about feds. Of course hyperbole is nothing new to the new GOP. Note the section about the percentage of feds relative to population that the GOP ignores. But remember, this is the guy who already blames feds for enforcing the regulations Congress passes. So nothing new really. It is the federal workers' fault the recession occurred - not Wall Street. So Wall Street gets their bonuses,and we get pay cuts and potential job losses or furloughs. This Air Force veteran thanks you, Speaker Boehner. Gratitude lasts as long as it takes to say thank you for our Tea Party friends. Where is President G.H.W Bush when you need him?!

Posted by: cpusss | February 15, 2011 6:32 PM | Report abuse


"John Boehner: If federal jobs are lost, 'So be it'"

That's exactly how the Republicans caused the loss of millions of jobs in the first place, they just don't care, and they're ready to repeat each and every mistake they made in the first place that took the American Economy down a devastating path.

Posted by: lindalovejones | February 15, 2011 6:34 PM | Report abuse

First, I'm a Democrat. Never voted for a Republican for President yet.

Second, so much of what I hear from the Republican side is hogwash aimed at the cheap seats in their own house that it's a surprise when they say something extremely sensible.

But Boehner is right. We have to cut the budget. And that will have to involve laying off federal workers. Whether his particular number regarding hires is correct is immaterial. (We also need higher taxes to pay the way regardless of expense cuts, but neither side has the cojones to mention that.)

And this guy Pagluta is not exactly non-partisan on this issue. See this from his web site:

"More than 270,000 “mission-critical” jobs will need to be filled by 2012. Federal agencies need to attract highly skilled professionals to serve in these positions in order for the government to achieve its mission and serve the American people.

To help government attract top talent, the Partnership has launched a three-year pilot program to assist federal agencies build their capacity to recruit, hire and retain top entry-level talent in mission-critical jobs. "

In other words, he's a hire-more-federal-employees hawk. O'Keefe is showing wholesale dishonesty in quoting him on this at all.

One of my children works for the federal government. Dedicated public servant. Works hard and diligently 40 hours a week -- for $110k+ a year.

I know what she does. It is honest and beneficial work. A GOOD BIT OF IT IS ALSO ABSOLUTELY NOT NECESSARY AND SHOULD BE CUT FROM THE FEDERAL BUDGET. HER JOB SHOULD BE MERGED WITH THAT OF HER BOSS AND GIVEN TO HER. (HE'S AN ASS.)

Me: 60+. Own a business. Work 7 days a week and have for years. Like most small businesses, we relentlessly chase a buck so that our employees can get paid. I've laid off 30% of my work force in the past three years. When I gave raises this year, one person on the payroll got a pay cut -- me. I make about half of what my daughter does.

I like Boehner. He was a small businessman. Don't agree with some of his politics, but if I lived in his district, I might even hold my nose and vote for him over a Democrat. He's right about the budget. We have Clinton (to a degree) and Bush and the GOP (to a very large degree) to blame for getting us into this mess, but these tea party fools have latched onto something important about the federal budget. And Boehner is listening to their voices, among others. He seems to be the sort of principled but adaptive politician who can help guide us out of this mess.

I voted for Obama. But I thought then that he had a spine. The way he has let all those Wall Street criminals go has me thinking that he's the sort of President who likes being in the job rather than doing it.

Posted by: have2saysomething | February 15, 2011 6:54 PM | Report abuse

fregameeate:

Try this for evidence....

http://birthofanotion.com/home/?page_id=4

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

These sites includes pictures of Obama's 1961 Birth Announcements in both the Honolulu Advertiser and Honolulu Star-Bulletin in addition to other "STUFF" you were requesting. Ernest, I am not confident you can read but perhaps you can ask someone to read it to you. And yes Mr Strong we did indeed land on the moon in 1969.

Posted by: waxtraxs | February 15, 2011 7:02 PM | Report abuse

"First, I'm a Democrat. Never voted for a Republican for President yet. " - Have2saysomething,

Sir just one question, if what you write is true... why in the world are you a Democrat? Don't you know the 'rats HATE people like you? you are the EVIL business man, forget Wall Street, those clowns mostly vote 'rat for a reason, but when the 'rats raise taxes they know it won't hit their mega rich buddies on Wall Street and Hollywierd, etc, it hits people like you! Who just look rich on paper but work damn hard to do it.

Posted by: ForTheLulz | February 15, 2011 7:04 PM | Report abuse

Please-- enough of the CAPS freg-

We didn't get where we are during the Obama administration- try looking at the past eight years of Bush- . Obama inherited a mess and now many people want to blame him for everything that is bad???? It's like -- oh we have screwed up for the last 20 years and now we are going to fix it overnight. Nothing better than hind-sight.

Posted by: tplakeup | February 15, 2011 7:13 PM | Report abuse

I hope Boehner loses his federal job in the next election.

Posted by: randy28146 | February 15, 2011 7:18 PM | Report abuse

We are broke so says the speaker but my questions are these:

1) If we are broke how come we continue to give weelfare to corporations raking in billion?
BECAUSE THESE CORPORATIONS GIVE LOTS OF MONEY TO REPUBLICANS

2) If we are broke how come we continue to pass tax cuts for the wealthy?
BECAUSE THE WEALTHY GIVE LOTS OF MONEY TO REPUBLICANS

3) If we are broke than why are we forcing the military to buy planes they say they can do without and an extra egine for a fighter?
BECAUSE THE COMPANIES THAT MAKE THIS STUFF GIVE LOTS OF MONEY TO REPUBLICANS

4) If we are brokes how can we continue to.........
BECAUSE LOTS OF MONEY GOES TO REPUBLICANS

The answers are simple: trickle up effect and pork spending and politics as usual.

Posted by: Realistic5

THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE: LOTS OF MONEY FOR REPUBLICANS.

If speaker Bonehead were serious about reducing federal jobs, how about starting with his position. Oops, that's right, he can't, he's the ringleader, his minions do his dirty work for him. Sounds a lot like osama bin laden, doesn't it?

Posted by: reader011 | February 15, 2011 7:19 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Boehner apparently has memory problems since G. W. Bush presided over the greatest increase in federal employees in years. It is not so much that 200,000 people were hired by the federal government since Obama was elected as what is the total increase in the number of federal employees since then. Mr. Boehner has mistated so much so often that he is not a reliable source of information today.

Posted by: kimmsr | February 15, 2011 7:24 PM | Report abuse

If I ever had the chance speak with John Boehner I would ask one simple question.

How in good conscience does he receive benefits from the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program while simultaneously doing everything in his power to deny others from some health insurance benefits?

I hope he sleeps well knowing he will rot in hell, and just think the far right Christians are confident Obama is the antichrist...... Boehner has them all fooled except the one that will slam the door in his face come judgement day....

Posted by: waxtraxs | February 15, 2011 7:26 PM | Report abuse

"while simultaneously doing everything in his power to deny others from some health insurance benefits? " -waxtraxs

Pray tell what benefits would Obumbler care give the people? Please list them for me - and I mean the actual ones not the bovine excreta that the Obumbler regime trots out since we know those are all lies as proven by many sources including his own CBO.

Besides the American people have rejected Obumbler care overwhelmingly. Do you lefties live in some kind of self induced hypnosis? Or are you really that slow on the uptake to understand why so many of you lost on Nov 2nd?

In case you are still looking for answers, here's one from the CBO - "CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf told the House Budget Committee on Thursday that the health care law will reduce employment by 0.5 percent by 2021 because some people will no longer have to work just to afford health insurance."

The GOP took this to mean job cuts but I take it to mean that 800,000 lazy bums are going to sit at home and get fat while we pay for their healthcare and welfare, oh what a great deal for the country!

Posted by: ForTheLulz | February 15, 2011 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Obumbler: Did you learn this listening to Rush Limbaugh?

These 800,000 jobs are not being killed, they are being abandoned voluntarily. Perhaps had you done a little research you could tell me exactly how many of these 800k will be of retirement age in 2021 and can now simply afford to retire. Based on my actually reading the report from the CBO on which this claim is made, it is clear that this is not taking jobs away from the workforce; rather it is removing the shackles of job lock from these retirement age workers.

Posted by: waxtraxs | February 15, 2011 8:20 PM | Report abuse

have2saysomething, you seem like a reasonable sort. I've worked in both sectors for long periods of time (though, in later life, mostly for the Federal Government). The Federal Government is an enormous employer. The work ethic, work culture, and management models differ dramatically among agencies and within an agency. One really can't extrapolate isolated experiences with a particular agency (or even agencies) to the whole. Most Government workers compare themselves to staff in large corporations, not small businesses, and that comparison is more appropriate.

Most Government jobs have a book rule about working a 5/40 hour week, but, in many Government jobs, the employees work plenty of uncompensated overtime. Some Government management structures are way too fat, others are way too lean. I've worked for both types of agencies. I've also worked for plenty of private sector employers who pay a lot more for less productive labor than the Federal Government gets(and others that ground you into a pulp for some lame suit with a nice haircut to take an undeserved bonus).

My father ran his own business. I'm slightly familiar with the turf (one step removed). From what I've seen, it has its advantages. It would be wrong to assume that most Federal workers lack private sector experience, and so, much of the lecturing from private sector workers that transpires on these types of boards just strike us as the worst form of condescension - uninformed, misinformed, and haughty.

The country's in love with small business, and I can understand why. They are productive, and they are a bulwark of our economy, but they are not the totality of our economy. While I appreciate small businesses, I won't be praying at the altar of small business soon. There are good ones and bad ones. The Chamber of Commerce doesn't always rush to publicize that small business, as a sector, has a profoundly bad record of tax evasion, for example. I would like to think that the bad ones go out of business quickly and that the good ones survive, but that's not always true. There are plenty of sleazy survivors and plenty of honest, ingenious, productive SB's with bad marketing or bad luck. There are also plenty of people getting filthy rich off service oriented small businesses that pay the workers starvation wages.

I sum, judgment of Federal workers is not the problem, however, the rush to judgment about them sure is a problem.

Posted by: finserra | February 15, 2011 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Memo to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee: Teachers and cops are a local and state responsibility. Scientists belong in the private sector. The Federal government is broke. Quit spending money we don't have on things we can't afford.

Posted by: Chippewa | February 15, 2011 8:49 PM | Report abuse

WHY IS EVERYONE SO AFRAID TO CONFRONT OBAMA ON THE TRUTH OF HIS PLACE OF BIRTH. IT IS "NOT" RACISM TO EXPECT THAT EVERY PRESIDENT PROVE HIS STATUS PER THE US CONSTITUTION.
------------------------------------------
He doesn't have to be confronted because he was born in Hawaii, one of the "United States." You have to be born in the United States to be President. Now turn off your CAPS key and stop the crazy talk.

Posted by: MNUSA | February 15, 2011 9:07 PM | Report abuse

First, the Republican party almost drove the economy over the cliff during the Bush years and into first 18 months of the Obama administration. As a result of lax enforcement of the financial industry, bloated defense spending, two unfunded and unnecessary wars,unfunded and unnecessary tax cuts for the wealthy and the unfunded prescription drug plan, thousands of people will lose their jobs on top of the millions lost already. Boehner and the other "conservative" congressmen have absolutely no ground to stand on in the debate. They are dedicated to cut the size of government no matter how harmful it will be to the struggling economy. They actually want unemployment to stay high in order to defeat Pres. Obama in 2012.

Posted by: jp1943 | February 15, 2011 9:28 PM | Report abuse

Spoken like a true republican boehner.
I got mine and if you and everyone else gets screwed, "so be it".
WHY DON'T YOU CREATE SOME JOBS INSTEAD OF DESTROYING THEM !!!

Posted by: sammsammus | February 15, 2011 9:35 PM | Report abuse

In paragraph 9, Palguta says the number of new feds is likely more than 200,000. In paragraph 12, he says it's about 107,000, not the 200,000 Boehner says. You're right when you say it can be difficult to get a grip on these numbers.

Posted by: patrican | February 15, 2011 9:40 PM | Report abuse

Look the Republicans began defunding the Government with Reagan then added unfunded programs and 2 wars until we are at this place in time. So return the tax rates to where they were pre Reagan. Then fund the Government thru the end of the year. Then spend the rest of the time repairing the damage done to our Government instead of trying to destroy it outright.

Posted by: notthatdum | February 15, 2011 9:43 PM | Report abuse

I cant believe noone is calling Boehner on making up these numbers. There are fewer federal workers per capita now than ever. There were 14 per 1000 capita under Nixon, 12 under Reagan, 9 under Bush and 8 under Obama. That's a fact. Why does not someone point this out to Boehner? He is fear mongering, just like his kind always do. That's how they got us into the so called war on terror.

Oh and speaking of the war on terror, what about its impact on our debt? What about the lowest income taxes on the rich in recent history? We wont have money until we stop the bleeding.

Posted by: ysatis830 | February 15, 2011 9:50 PM | Report abuse

John Boehner and his hypocritical Republicans are very bad at their so-called leadership. How does a so-called Speaker of the House (JB) want to cut so must entitlements that we the American people have worked and EARNED but JB has no problem raising the budget percentage for the Oil companies. JB will be trying to cut police, fireman, teachers, headstart and grants for college. People you need to email and/or call (202-225-6205) JOHN BOEHNER and inform him that he is a TERRIBLE LEADER. We have come to so far but now the hypocrits called Republicans have their machine gun out to cut middle class and low income programs that have augmented the heavy lifting president Obama and his administration have done alone. Republicans have NOT taken any time to develop a bill for JOBS. Remember the lie JB and his hypocrits told before November: WE WILL PROVIDE JOBS IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ELECTION - this is still a lie. JB is wasting time and our tax dollars and he is ready to let our goverment shut down unless the hypocrits' Republicans have their way. Remember they will hold us hostage, again. PLEASE VOTE THEM OUT IN 2012. You see the lies and we can stop JB or maybe the National Enquirer will prove JB's two alledged affairs and JB will then take his own advice and RESIGN.

Posted by: netstoy | February 15, 2011 9:56 PM | Report abuse

There's too many people here who do not know the pain and suffering of HUMAN HUNGER. There's too damn many people here who go to church and then don't give a damn about their fellow man. There's too many people here who do not know we've been spending a between and billion and a billion and a half a week on Iraq and Afghanistan for the past almost 8 or so years and have NOT paid for this by taxing the billionaires who so artfully sucker the chumps into believing taxes should only be for the middle class and the poor.

Too many people here who do not know hunger and homelessness. They might sing a different tune, otherwise.

Posted by: jato11 | February 15, 2011 10:15 PM | Report abuse

Let Representative Boner and his TEARS go back to his family saloon. The only HONEST JOB he ever had was to sweep the
floor in that booze house.

Posted by: jato11 | February 15, 2011 10:20 PM | Report abuse

So why doesn't the "Boner" take a pay cut like a real Republican business man in a tough economy, or is he the closet liberal RINO Republican that a lot of us suspect him to be, along with the cheap Federal socialist health care package, his automatic annual pay raise, lucrative pension plan and all the other Congressional socialist perks that he's done nothing to change. All hail Comrade Boner, our favorite Communist from Cincinnati, which is practically in the cracker South, you all!

Posted by: gigip300 | February 15, 2011 10:32 PM | Report abuse

That's exactly what I'm going to say in 2012 when Boehner loses his Speaker Job. So be it, he didn't do his job.

Posted by: acawthern3485 | February 16, 2011 1:57 AM | Report abuse

Thanks everyone for the really great comical hour I had reading all these posts. I would say it was about a 50/50 of right wing-nuts and the others. But I am concerned about a few of you and your thinking or reasoning. John Boehner isn't rational either. But let watch and see how this all plays out. Heck, let's have them stomp their feet and cry like little kindergarten children and shut the government down... let's watch the horrors unfold and watch who is tougher than who syndrome. I hope you right-wingnuts are praising your Congressional leadership then! Sorry if you, your family and friends have to suffer like the rest of us... I know, it really s uks!

Posted by: darbyohara | February 16, 2011 8:18 AM | Report abuse

Obviously, OH has too many representatives. Cutting federal jobs can start with Boehner -- then Mitch McConnell.

Posted by: alb2 | February 16, 2011 10:27 AM | Report abuse

I think the previous post, quoted below, hits the nail on the head. This is just politics as usual. It's all about politicians keeping their jobs. It's up to us to not let them fool and get the better of us with their manipulations. We cannot rely on politicians, no matter what party they represent, to paint an accurate picture -- they deliberately play into public perceptions. It's up to us to do our homework on the issues (Factchecker web sites are a big help) and not let them manipulate us into fighting each other. That's exactly what they want to generate - an inflamed public bitterly fighting each other and putting them back into office, not an informed public debate about the issues. We don't have to let them manipulate us with their tactics.

tokenwhitemale wrote:

"It would still happen if most Federal employees were Republicans and most Federal money were spent on programs that benefited Republicans directly. Because they'd want to fire the few Democrats and trim the few Democratic-oriented government programs. You see to them, only Republican employees and Republican-oriented government programs are good. Everything else is waste and fraud."

Posted by: jdVA | February 16, 2011 11:45 AM | Report abuse

In 2011, the salary for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $174,000. For Mr. Boehner, it's $223,500 (of note,this is probably a $30,000 pay increase for Mr. Boehner over last year). Mr. Cantor and Sen. McConnell will each earn $193,400. And unless they've voted it down, Congress can expect a COLA increase next year.

By contrast, a GS-15, step 15 employee in the DC area (the highest level on the General Schedule) makes $155,500. No pay increase this year, next year, or the year after.

The 112th Congress convened on January 5th. Next week will mark the 2nd or 3rd week-long recess for congressional members (depending on which house you're talking about). I'm not counting the 2-3 days each week when the House is not in session. Federal employees are coming up on their 2nd holiday.

I'll let people draw their own conclusions on this. But I'll tell you that it frosts my cookies to see John Boehner crying on TV about how he paid his way through college, yada, yada, yada. And then to read a "let them eat cake" response about cutting Federal jobs. But he's paid more than the average American and even the most highly paid Fed.

I just can't get over the hypocrisy.

Posted by: teejackson_93 | February 16, 2011 2:48 PM | Report abuse

My liberal friends, none other than Nancy Pelosi herself said that unemployment is good and that getting unemployment benefits is healthy.

Do you think she was wrong, all of a sudden, now?

Posted by: DRIVEAPROGRESSIVERAVINGMAD--BACKTHEJEWS | February 16, 2011 7:39 PM | Report abuse

Not ENOUGH federal jobs can be cut, so far as I'm concerned.

The government shouldn't even be a TENTH as big as it is, now.

Boehner is absolutely right...and on this issue is in absolute lockstep with the will of the American majority that sent him there.

Besides, wasn't it none other than Nancy Pelosi herself who rather recently chirped that 'unemployment is good, because unemployment benefits stimulate the economy?'

Posted by: DRIVEAPROGRESSIVERAVINGMAD--BACKTHEJEWS | February 16, 2011 7:43 PM | Report abuse

When you have seven or eight thousand feds retiring each month, it is easy to cut the workforce simply through attrition. So it is a non-issue to federal workers. Since no one likes the feds anyway, it is a non-issue to everyone else if federal employment decreases. People would actually cheer it.

Now when you freeze federal bureaucrats' pay for two years, you tick off ALL the feds on an extremely sensitive issue. Especially when the "savings" amounts to one week of money spent in Afghanistan. Where Karzai whines each week about not getting his fair share of the bribes.

And THEN proposing throwing $53 billion down the toilet for high speed rail, that will require subsidies from then on out.

So either everyone, EVERYONE, takes a hit, or all bets are off.

Posted by: oracle2world | February 16, 2011 9:20 PM | Report abuse

It is amazing what people post here. The denial that both sides show about facing reality. Whether it comes from a Repub or Demo - it is all still the same - cut anybody but do not touch mine. Everyone wants services but no one is willing to pay for them.

The reality is that the tax cuts need to expire so that we can pay for benefits we all use or will use. Corporations, the wealthy, everyone need to pay their fair share - then maybe the reduction in benefits that will still be needed in SS and medicare and medicaid would not be so drastic.

Finally - we need to leave the countries in the middle east alone and bring our soldiers home - that will save trillons alone. Leave them with one warning - you attack us and we will nuke your ass like we did to Japan.

Posted by: FedinTexas | February 18, 2011 3:14 PM | Report abuse

Bush had 8 years to cut government waste, but instead he turned a surplus left to him by Clinton into a deficit while the Republicans in Congress rubber stamped everything he wanted.
The Republicans don't seem to care about spending when the President is a Republican, but scream bloody murder as soon as a Democrat get's into office!!!!!

Posted by: uncle_guido2002 | February 20, 2011 1:11 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company