The American Spectator

Al Adab| 11.29.10 @ 12:46PM

The journey of a thousand miles begins with a first step. While more a gesture or symbolism than substance, this is still a good move. About time the feds got treated like normal people.

Interested Conservative| 11.29.10 @ 1:00PM

Your pie chart is defective, I can still see the savings.

nscob| 12.1.10 @ 3:16PM

So true.

Warrior| 11.29.10 @ 1:22PM

Put this in the real context it deserves. They bloat the salaries to where they are just about double what the private sector would pay and then offer two year freeze on the salaries. It is the equivalent of the Washington Redskins doubling their ticket prices and then guaranteeing they won't rise for the next two years which they then can claim is going to save the ticketholders a small amount of money. What a bargain.

DB| 11.29.10 @ 1:33PM

I wonder if Congress will include themselves and their staff in this freeze if they vote to approve?

blujkts| 11.29.10 @ 6:24PM

Congress froze their pay earlier this year. Look it up

Dropping By| 11.29.10 @ 2:04PM

I agree that the pay freeze is absurdly small, and I hope that federal pay will be slashed across-the-board very soon, including hundreds of thousands of layoffs.

But ... it is AT LEAST a move in the right direction. Credit due to Obama for joining in with ANY reduction in spending.

AK| 11.29.10 @ 7:37PM

Yes I have to agree, as a conservative it is driving me crazy to see the Right somehow turning this around to criticize Obama. People, please, learn to give credit where credits due, otherwise we turn into the Left.

MightyMonarch| 11.29.10 @ 9:04PM

You're damn right I'll criticize this. It's nothing more than a political ploy. Let's bloat the federal budget to $4 trillion but we'll freeze a fraction of percentage of that to its current levels. We are neck-deep in debt. You don't address this by maintaining current spending, you address it either by strategic default or paying back the debt. You can't tax your way out of it, not with a national debt equal to our GDP and on the hook for trillions more in future entitlements. True cuts must be made, which means a lot of pain and a crap-ton of austerity measures. But ultimately we would come out of it stronger. Obama, nor the leadership in either party, has the political will nor the desire to willfully dismantle the bloated, overreaching federal monster that has put us in this position.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 10:00PM

Yeah, more layoffs would help our economy. Really? Maybe firing of high level bureaucrats, starting with those in the White House and Congress. No, I will give no credit to Obama. He's just posturing. You really think that itsy-bitsy piece of the pie will be used to reduce the deficit and not spent on yet something else? Come on.

MightyMonarch| 11.30.10 @ 12:06AM

Except that it isn't a reduction in spending. It is a freeze in spending, and only then a very small fraction of total spending. Will the departments affected by those budget freezes also reduce their overall budgets? I doubt it.

No meaningful debt reduction can occur without addressing the two elephants in the room: Military and entitlements. Even if you eliminated every dollar of federal spending except for those two items, we would still not collect enough in revenue to pay for them, much less address the $14 trillion in visible, on-the-books debt as well as the tsunami of debt associate with future entitlements.

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:22AM

Correct. A freeze will accomplish very little.

When I worked at Delta, we took a 30 percent pay cut to save the company. We need to see similar uts in governemt, as well as work force reductions and perminantly closing some federal departments such as Education, EPA and Agriculture. A 30 percent pay cut for congress would also be a good idea.

Jojo| 11.29.10 @ 3:30PM

The reason that they pay freeze saves so little money is because the federal payroll only account for a small percentage of the overall budget. Counterintuitive, but true.

Really!!!| 11.29.10 @ 3:35PM

Hey! Good going Mr. Obama. Lets cut the pay of all dotors, nurses, firefighters, police officer, school teachers too.
You people really dont get it. This pay freeze well hurt the little guy. Do you really think the big wigs(congress and ect..) will get their pay frozen? There is more to federal workers than the fat cats that wear suits.
There are workers just like you, that have jobs just like you but just get paid check signed by the government. So like you they can have problems making ends meet, paying for their kids education cost, puting food on the table. Get real and get a clue of where the deficit is coming from.

Marshall_Will| 11.29.10 @ 7:12PM

Ah... the "hero trades"! Can't afford you guys any way. If you happen to see me getting mugged or on fire just yell Stop, Drop & ROLL! as you pass by!

( I'm infinitely more likely to die cold, broke and taxed to death than I am to be in need of your 'services' ) Thanks for your concern though.

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:26AM

Actually, you don't get it either. The little guys you are defending make (on average) 50 percent more than their private counterparts and their benefits are outragous.
You are correct in stating that the "big wigs" should also see a freeze (actually a cut is better)

JoyR| 12.1.10 @ 8:48AM

As a mid-level federal employee, I have no problem with the pay freeze. What I have a problem with is the willingness to freeze my pay but the unwillingness to tax the rich. And the proposal has shown the misperceptions about civil servants. Only 3.9% of federal employees make over $150,000 and the majority of them are political appointees and doctors. I do not make 50% more than my private counterparts, I make significantly less. This has not been a concern of mine because I am not in it for the money but to serve my country. I do pay taxes, pay for my health care, pay for my own pension fund. I do not get a housing allowance. I am the sole support for my children and my elderly parents. And as a civilian, I work overtime for which I have never requested compensation and I have deployed into war zones. Have you?

MacDaddy| 11.29.10 @ 3:35PM

We all know, don't we?... That this is just a cynical move by Obama to try and head off Conservative efforts at an actual government employee headcount reduction? Toward that end, it is not only a cynical, symbolic move, it is actually a farce.....

FederalEmployee| 11.29.10 @ 3:36PM

I am just starting out as a Federal employee. Having just moved to DC, the cost of living is a lot greater than i expected. I am bearly making it from check to check, with 95% of my pay going to the cost of living in DC i have no room to save, let alone pay to keep groceries. I am not the only Federal employee who is living like this. The majority of us are not in the 100,000 salary. Most people like me, are making less than 45,000. I'm a recent Electrical Engineering graduate and i make more as a federal employee than a DC teacher. I think Obama should have put a freeze on those who can afford to cut back. Not those federal emplyees who are just making it..they guy who picks up my trash(federal employee) killed himself last week because he couldnt make it on a 20,000 salary...there is middle and lower class among federal employees also.

TexKen| 11.29.10 @ 6:18PM

Get another job.

Gina| 11.29.10 @ 8:03PM

No, YOU get a fed job. Stop crying and placing blame on others. Take a little initiative yourself.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 8:18PM

That's not her/his point.

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:28AM

Not to be rude, but that was your decision. If you didn't research the cost of living there, shame on you.

$45,000 a year to start is pretty good. Learn to live within your means.

FederalEmployee| 11.29.10 @ 3:37PM

Correction: I make LESS than a DC teacher

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 3:38PM

I am a 20+ year federal employee, making $62+K a year. I started working for the Gov in 1987 at $10K and, as a single mother, have advanced over the 20+ years. To get the initial Gov job, I took a $8K decrease in pay from my previous private sector job. (I had to quit the private sector job due to my then-husband's military transfer to another state.) So, I don't believe the biased statistical reports that say we get paid more than the private sector. I don't know if a pay freeze is right or wrong at this time, but I don't think some of the characertizations of federal employees and our pay/benefits are fair or informed. This deficit problem is much, much bigger and I think federal employee pay is irrelevant. The problem(s) start at the top and expand to many more significant areas. The little bit of money that is saved from this freeze does not necessarily mean less gov spending, just that it will probably be spent somewhere else (probably to an already fat and/or unnecessary program), not reduce the deficit. Don't let them make us the scapegoats. We are hard-working, paycheck-to-paycheck taxpayers too.

Marshall_Will| 11.29.10 @ 7:17PM

FEW,

With all due respect that's the same logic a mistress would use when bleeding her married ( and soon to be bankrupt ) boyfriend completely dry.

I mean, you're going to wind up getting divorced 'anyway', right? So why deny me this one little eensie-weensie thing.., love snoogums?

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 8:04PM

M_W,
Wha' the ??? Go take another drink and call your mistress, and then maybe you'll make sense. I'm not divorced, idiot. My husband is dead.

Marshall_Will| 11.30.10 @ 10:12AM

Sorry to hear of your husband's passing.

Ahem.., ( it's called an 'analogy' )? Here we are ( as a N-a-t-i-o-n, we 'are' in this 'together' are we 'not'? ) and all we're getting from the Fed Emp's is; "No one's HOME! ( look 'elsewhere'! )

Again, it's not going to cut it. You are 'aware' the only reason your paychecks aren't bouncing is b/c Bernanke has the printing presses running night & day ( aren't... you? ) It's all a facade and high time we dealt w/ the ugly reality. Sorry.

FEW| 11.30.10 @ 10:57PM

Ahem...ahem, it's called ignorance. You are aware you just say anything that you think sounds clever, with no facts to back it up, don't you?

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:32AM

OK FEW, how many people in the private sector make 62K a year? And have the outragous benefits you have? 75% of the private sector employees make less than you.

FEW| 11.30.10 @ 10:50PM

Your argument is so dumb. How many people have worked for over 30 years just to reach 62K a year?

Jack Langley| 11.29.10 @ 3:55PM

I dont believe the average govt worker is overpaid. Only a select group. The best approach would be to cut all elected officials and this administrations cabinet by at least 50%. Then reduce the size of govt. by at least 30%. The States should have more control than the federal govt.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 4:12PM

JL, I agree and you said it much more succinctly than I did.

SeanNY| 11.29.10 @ 4:03PM

" I mean, Senator McCain has been talking tough about earmarks, and that's good, but earmarks account for about $18 billion of our budget."

- Obama in the Second Presidential Debate

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:34AM

Only 18 billion? Remnds me of Barry Goldwaters statement a few years ago.

"A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon your talking about real money!"

Obama is a disgrace.

DougV| 11.29.10 @ 4:15PM

As mentioned at Hotair.com (http://hotair.com/archives/2010/11/29/obama-to-freeze-federal-worker-pay-save-5-billion-over-two-years/), the freeze “will not impact step increases or bonuses for federal workers.” It applies to cost-of-living increases, mainly. If an agency wants to give a worker an increase, they just need to increase their pay grade or boost their bonuses to make it happen.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 4:26PM

Re: " If an agency wants to give a worker an increase, they just need to increase their pay grade or boost their bonuses to make it happen."

Both of which are very difficult, near impossible, to do, especially the increase in pay grade.

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:35AM

Why do Federal Employees get a bonus? Outragous.

FEW| 11.30.10 @ 10:53PM

What is your problem? Some employees who stand out, who may save the government $$$$, may get an award? What, are we supposed to work for free, live substandard lives, our whole career? You are so bitter, but don't take it out on people just trying to make a living too.

Brubaker| 11.29.10 @ 4:39PM

Freezing federal pay is pure political theater. The resultant savings are inconsequential to the federal budget, but they will of course be of consequence to the men and women trying to support their families.

Some of those posting here seem to believe that federal employees are living in the lap of luxury. Here's a thought: If you actually believe that, apply for a federal job. Then, you too can be living high (assuming you have what it takes to be hired).

A final note: No, I'm not a federal employee.

Marshall_Will| 11.29.10 @ 7:07PM

"(assuming you have what it takes to be hired)"

A 'pulse'? More a numbers game than anything, fill out enough embellished job app's and (1) is bound to slip thru the cracks. It's about persistence more than credentials, but whatever!

"No, I'm not a federal employee"

But your SPOUSE is! Only FE's and their spouses talk like that. Let's not be disingenuous here?

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 8:14PM

You are too weird. Are you sure on the correct subject? Shake it off; you'll be okay.

Shelly| 11.29.10 @ 5:35PM

I think the entire Congress and administration should take a 30% paycut- they've earned it.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 9:06PM

Ditto. I know Congress froze their pay last year, a measly loss (to them) of $1600 per year. But much more needs to be done. The pay freeze is a joke and frankly an insult to all Americans. Just think of that pie chart above and eat from the part that's the pay freeze; you'd still starve.

Yojimbo| 11.29.10 @ 5:38PM

Of course, now that we are past the elections, Obama is free to p*ss all over one of his constituencies: that is fed workers (and their unions).

And you can bet that this freeze will end prior to election day 2012!

Another Federal Employee| 11.29.10 @ 5:46PM

I have to weigh in on the misconception that all federal employees are overpaid, overcompensated fatcats. I am a 14 year employee with a federal law enforcement agency. I have a college degree that qualified me for the position I have. Our agency deals with the dregs of society on a daily basis and we are proud to say that we help keep our fellow Americans safe and secure. Those of us who are front-line staff are not among those who would come to your mind when you think of a cushy government job. This pay freeze may look good on paper & in the media, but it will have real consequences to real people who are just trying to make a living and support our families. If President Obama wants to cut real money out of the budget, he needs to look at defunding some of those special interest programs and agencies that serve no tangible purpose, but eat up massive amounts of tax-payer money.

Yet Another Federal Employee| 11.29.10 @ 6:04PM

Pretty depressing how the right wing ideologues are so easily able to pit one set of middle class Americans (non-Federal employees) at the throats of another set of middle class Americans (Federal employees). As has been pointed out, the "average salary" study everyone points to is flawed - there are many types of federal work which don't have a comparable private side. Also, you have many highly skilled federal workers who could make MORE in the private sector, but stick with government for the satisfaction of public service and the quality of life that comes from regular employment with decent hours. In my DC office, we have two Harvard Law and one Yale Law graduate who have worked as Federal prosecutors for many years. They are making probably 25 percent of what they could make as defense lawyers or corporate attorneys. It's their choice and they happily made it. But they are basically getting nowhere near what the private sector pays.

This is also true in many technical fields - you have a lot of Federal cyber security professionals who, for example, could make more working for the private sector here or abroad.

What a sad joke all this Federal-bashing is, especially in the wake of the Wall Street bailouts which showed where the real culprits are.

Marshall_Will| 11.29.10 @ 7:24PM

"Wall Street bailouts"

What brought 'that' up? May have worked great in '08 but completely ineffective in the Present. Bottom line? We's BROKE! It's fun debating apples & cheeseburgers with y'all but we's broke.

Let's get something 'clear' here? WHAT middle class? Other than gov. emps. there isn't one. You guys took it all. Nice try though?

Frank Drebin| 11.29.10 @ 7:50PM

Welcome to the party pal. Many people in the private sector (including my wife & myself) have been putting up with wage freezes, wage cuts or losing their job altogether for the last two years or more. Why does working for the government make you exempt from what everyone is going through? Start dealing with a little reality.

Marshall_Will| 11.30.10 @ 10:05AM

Lt. Drebin,

Good to see you're doing better! ( Sorry to hear of Leslie's passing )

Right, or like my wife whose tech. co. has been working "mandatory overtime" since April! 10 hr. days M-F and 6-8 hours on Sat.

Of course come year's end ( the gov't will want 'their' money all back? ) As others have noted, all "The Freeze" really accomplishes is cementing the most -recent- hires are "here to STAY!"

Meanwhile, those of us that are self-employed have the 'joy' of -rebuilding- what's left of our careers/practices ( as if we had the 'vigor' of our youth!? ) See how 50+ feels when you're basically starting 'over' and get back to us guys?

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:41AM

Hey, if you can make more in the private sector but chose not to, then quit whining about your pay, turkey. You guys remind me of the unon goons that expect special treatment because they belong to a union. Hell, you probaby belong to a union, too.

JoyR| 12.1.10 @ 8:58AM

I work for less money as a federal employee because I believe in giving back to my country rather than fattening my purse. I accept the pay freeze, but I do not accept your comments about my service.

rk| 11.29.10 @ 6:18PM

As usual, we have far too little information from the press reports on Federal compensation. The General Service table is only one compensation system. Grades and steps and COLAs. This goes to a GS15. Step 10 (highest) is 155K.

There's also the Executive Schedule, the Senior Executive Schedule, the Senor Level/Professional/Scientific Schedule. These do not have automatic step increases so far as I can tell. They may be more like the private sector in giving people raises.

There's much much more for Judges, Law Enforcement etc. that I haven't looked into.

Freezing is a good idea. Remember for you GS folks that this is only COLAs (in a zero inflation environment).

Paring back some of the high paid people will be necessary to bring down the average wage of 120K (or whatever) . No doubt, this are exactly who Obama hired in the first place.

rk| 11.29.10 @ 6:23PM

oh, the 155K was from the WDC pay scale.
everything can be found here:
http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/index.asp

And, btw....when did government bureaucrats start getting bonuses?????

Do they get bonuses for saving money??? HA, HA....Not

DocJ| 11.29.10 @ 6:25PM

How can a report on federal pay be "biased?" It's math, the equivalent job in the private sector either pays less or it doesn't, there's no opinion involved. No gov't job should EVER pay more than a private sector equivalent, I don't care if it's a janitor or the director of the FBI. It defeats the whole purpose of a gov't job to begin with, public service.

tshack| 11.29.10 @ 6:31PM

To all of you "Middle Class" Federal employees: Get over it! We have been suffering horribly in the private sector and we are the ones paying the salaries! As for cost of living in the D.C. Metro, I think I just threw up in my mouth a little. Wah. Wake up to the real World, its time for big Fatty Fat Federal Government to go on a diet. That means YOU!

Another Federal Employee| 11.29.10 @ 7:13PM

Y0u place the words middle class in quotations as if to insinuate that we are not true members of the middle class. Yes, your tax dollars pay my salary, but I and others like me, work hard to keep the criminals that prey on your children locked away where they won't reach you & yours. We wade though, smell, wipe off, wear and all around deal with things that any normal human being would run from.

We also pay taxes and we too have suffered due to this economy. My husband lost his job of over 18 years and has yet to find any work with anything close to equivalent pay. Our bills didn't go away and we had to give up our home. Is that enough suffering for you?

I will agree that there are many agencies in the federal government that do need to go on "diets." They are bloated and far from cost efficient. However, you cannot tar all agencies or all federal employees with the same brush.

Marshall_Will| 11.29.10 @ 7:30PM

Another,

But don't you see just how conflicted your OWN appraisal of the private sector IS!? Not that we're completely 'without' compassion, but there are many couples that BOTH lost their jobs!

We've no way of knowing if you couldn't ( or wouldn't ) make your house payments, so I'll reserve judgement there, but seriously, you'll still get YOUR retirement benefits and that's a helluva' lot more than most of us in the pvt. sector can say?

Another Federal Employee| 11.29.10 @ 8:11PM

Of course I know that there are many others who have it much worse than we do. Yes, I still have my job & I am grateful for that. Should I feel eternally guilty? My job isn't a cakewalk. I work hard & I earn my pay. Can I say that for all federal employees? No. But neither can I say that for many who work in the private sector. There are lazy, useless job holders in the workforce throughout the nation. However, I don't hear you (or those who are calling all federal employees parasites), railing against those in the private sector who still have their jobs and retirements. What about them? Are you wishing that they will have their pay or their benefits frozen or cut?

Is the answer going to be found in penalizing those who still have their jobs, wherever they may be? I don't think so.

As I have previously stated, I agree that there are lots of places that the federal government can cut the fat. However, the fact that there are some federal jobs that are vital cannot be dismissed. It is a fact. Someone has to do my job. I am not ashamed to say that I am glad it is me. I will presume to say that if you were in the same position, you would feel the same.

And BTW, we couldn't make the payments & chose to let it go. A hard decision, but a necessary one.

Marshall_Will| 11.30.10 @ 9:56AM

"those in the private sector who still have their jobs and retirements"

Wow, talk about out of touch? Ahem, Defined Benefit Plans went out w/ the BetaMax so what little we have remaining in our 201K's provides NO assurance we'll have -your- steady stream of income in old age. Again leaning precariously on the assumption we 'will' be able to afford to retire? Were you referring to the private sector circa 1970?

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 8:29PM

I'll quote someone (from the anti-Fed employee side) in this blog: "Get another job," maybe a Fed job, if you think it's so so great. It's not that there shouldn't be a pay freeze, but that it's false symbolism of what is really wrong with government.

FUBAR| 11.29.10 @ 6:50PM

Sorry, all you federal workers, but that's what you get for being a parasite and getting paid with other peoples' tax money.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 8:30PM

Oy! You don't know me.

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:45AM

I don't know you either, and based on your previous comments I have read, I don't really WANT to know you. Crybaby.

FEW| 11.30.10 @ 10:59PM

Sounds like you're the one with tiny violin, and I do mean tiny, Punk. Don't hate me because I have a job, and you're just a bum. RASPBERRY!!!

Pot meet kettle| 11.29.10 @ 6:51PM

All of you Fed employees---- welcome to Obamaville! Poor little Fed rug rats who retire with fat pensions at 51 years old. Waahhhhh! What about Hope and Change? Where's the Hope? It's all been change and we had some MAJOR change in 2010.

Do you belong to a "public" sector union (lol)?
Well we are tired of paying you with our confiscated money and then watch tens of millions of dollars of our money being used to trash us each and every day. Poor little U who wants to do "public service". If you enjoyed "pubic service" so much you wouldn't be on here moaning about how little it pays. Which we know is a farce. Now get back behind the counter and give me my new license plates!

JayVee| 11.29.10 @ 7:56PM

We Federal Employees always have, still do, and probably always will make less money than our private sector counterparts. I don't begrudge their making more, just don't believe the "studies" that show the "average" fed making more than the private sector. They're skewed by the fact that there are very few "blue collar" jobs in the government sector. Compare the pay in equal jobs, and you'll find we make far less, job for job.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 8:33PM

Double Oy! You don't know me at all. And we're just little piss ants like the rest of you. I didn't vote for him. I've already worked for more than 40 yrs of my life and have to work at least 8 more years to retire.

Gina Becker| 11.29.10 @ 7:34PM

Correction: That should read, "It would be the equivalent of a person who expects to rack up $10,000 of of credit card debt over the next five years touting the fact that he's found a way to NOT INCREASE HIS EXPENSES by $60 over that time period.

G-Man| 11.29.10 @ 7:57PM

Can't help but respond to this misinformation campaign and directly to some of you people who denigrate federal workers. I am a federal worker and have devoted over 27 years. I am highly educated with specialized training that cost me a bunch in time and money and have no illusion about serving. That's baloney. I do my job and am proud of the contribution that is made to the America I Love. The nation gains and I get paid. For many years I heard about the big bucks paid to the private sector equivalents who worked for industry and knew many people getting paid those bucks that were in school with me. I knew all along that I was getting paid way less than my buddies but I was doing something completely different and enjoyed the personal satisfaction that went with the work I do. Now to hear you people talk I am an over-paid federal glutton. But I know I still make less than my buddies who are still working in industry. And NO, neither I nor anybody I know gets to retire at 51 years of age. Your insults to those of us who are working every day to ensure your safety is more than I can tolerate. If I was passing out license plates and caught wind of you standing in line it would be my pleasure to imprint your number across your forehead.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 8:36PM

Right on, G-Man!

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:48AM

So you are a federal employee and are threatening violence against someone that disagrees with you?

Jack booted thug is what you are.

FEW| 11.30.10 @ 11:02PM

Waa waa waa, Cry Baby JohnD. "So you are a federal employee and are threatening violence against someone that disagrees with you?" Boo-hoo! Boo!!

G-Man| 12.14.10 @ 9:47PM

Been away from this thread for a while but I will return to add this one comment.

"Jack-Booted Thug"?

Wasn't responding to someone who disagreed with me.

"Now get back behind the counter and give me my new license plates!"

I was responding to an AZZ and the rest of the people out there who are expressing rude comments and descriptions of Federal workers.

This person has taken the position that all people who work for the government are lacking in contribution and not performing any valuable service. This person is absolutely clueless and rude.

Would you let someone speak of you in such a manner without expressing a little rage?

I live by the creed that I am a man, not a mouse. If you tread on me should I respond? Keep an even discourse and this will never be a question.

Too Scared| 12.1.10 @ 12:18AM

You are correct - the Minimum Retirement Age for Feds is between 55 and 57, still less than when us Plebian Civilians are even allowed to withdraw from our 401(k) plans.

While you're collecting your full inflation-adjusted salaries with health care.

John S| 11.29.10 @ 7:57PM

I'm a Federal employee. An willing to forgo the whining and griping about the freeze in pay (unlike the Federal Union Ldr Rep Gage in Wash DC) assuming its the first of many steps the Federal Govt will be taking to roll back its profligate spending

jim| 11.29.10 @ 8:10PM

this is a preemptive strike to protect the wages of the govt worker. They got a raise last yr when retirees didnt that they need to give back. Obama figures a freeze keep their ill gotten gains for ever.

jim| 11.29.10 @ 8:12PM

how about we start with a 10 percent cut across the board for all govt employees that make more than 60k ave we make.

Self-Loathing Fed| 11.29.10 @ 8:29PM

I wholeheartedly applaud this small first step by President Obama. I hope he and the Republicans engage in Clinton/Gingerich-style one-upsmanship and try to outdo each other in fiscal responsibility. Let the games begin!

To the Feds who are protesting this proposed pay freeze: Get over it. This is only the beginning. We (I'm also a Fed) have job security, defined benefit pensions, generous health insurance plans, matched retirement contributions, and we are nearly impossible to fire. Many in the private sector do not enjoy these privileges, and quite a few have lost their jobs. Their employers couldn't afford to provide all these benefits, and now our employer, the taxpayer, cannot afford to give us pay increases for TWO YEARS. Oh, noes! Your whining demonstrates that you still don't understand shared sacrifice. You don't get that all Americans will be affected as we begin to get serious about the debt and deficits. We Feds are not anointed; we are not exempt.

If the Republicans and Democrats get really serious and start to actually cut the Federal workforce, I will be delighted. And if I lose my job as a result, I will be sad but relieved that America's political leaders are finally getting serious about putting our fiscal house in order so future generations don't curse our overspending, overpromising, short-sighted, self-indulgent generation.

Another Federal Employee| 11.29.10 @ 8:54PM

What caused me to first comment in this thread wasn't the fact that a 2-year freeze was announced today & I was angry about it. It was actually the way that federal employees were being denigrated as a whole, to the point of being called parasites! I just wanted to try to put a face on the description "federal employee."

I actually agree with you that we can take this and more to help with the deficit and to cut federal spending. Yes, I still have my job, my benefits and my retirement. I am grateful and do not take it for granted.

Do I think that this is a huge step in the battle against overspending and self-indulgence? No. I'm afraid we will have to dig into the pocketbooks of those with a much higher pay grade than me for that.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 9:00PM

Baaa baaa, Self-Loathing. And that's a BIG F'ing "If" you have there. Don't hold your breath on that one. I just find it hysterically insulting that that's what he finally starts with.

Self-Loathing Fed| 11.29.10 @ 9:19PM

Sure, it's a big "if," but it's a start. Clinton didn't really want welfare reform when he vaguely promised to "end welfare as we know it," but the '94 Republicans took it and ran with it. And he eventually signed a sort of decent bill.

President Obama probably proposed this two year pay freeze to get in front of (and nix) Republican efforts to cut Federal pay or the Federal workforce, but maybe the '10 Republicans will take it and run with it.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 9:51PM

A start to what? Surely, you don't think this is the way to cut the deficit and increasing debt? How about getting all the money back from the stimulus plan and all the wasted days, weeks, months, and $$$$ on the HC plan. You don't think he has more ways from Sunday to Monday to spend that measly piece of the pie plus more? I used to be that naive.

Self-Loathing Fed| 11.29.10 @ 10:25PM

Look, the major budget issues are Medicare and Social Security. But the average citizen - even the average Tea Partier - isn't ready for real cuts to these programs. And elected politicians cannot force cuts the American public doesn't want, or they will be thrown out of office. Voters must first be convinced that Social Security and Medicare need to be overhauled, and I think they will be much more willing to accept cuts to their favorite entitlement programs when they see cuts to other programs. Once they've gotten their symbolic pound of flesh from the public sector, maybe they'll move on to something more substantial. It is certainly worth a try.

Yes, these are baby steps, but the alternative is to rant and be absolutely ignored. Governor Chris Christie is doing it right by talking about shared sacrifice and slowly convincing the people of New Jersey that the spending party is over. He is treating them like adults, they are listening, and they are starting to "get it." Now we need that on the national level.

Another Federal Employee| 11.29.10 @ 10:47PM

Okay. We are taking these "baby steps", starting with federal employees. I can get with that. We all need to do our part.

What really grates is the ways that our tax dollars are being thrown around as if there was no bottom to the barrel. Perfect example is the new display at the Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery. Why are we paying for this!?! I am all for freedom of expression, but why should I pay for it? I have just been told that my pay will be frozen for 2 years while my bills won't be and now I am supporting "art" that mocks my Lord and Savior.

It is this kind of inconsistency in our federal government that ticks me off.

JohnD| 11.30.10 @ 9:51AM

Self, thank you for your honesty. It's a breath of fresh air on this forum. I wish you well.

FEW| 11.30.10 @ 11:03PM

Unlike the stench of your bitter breath, JohnD.

Txdoc| 11.29.10 @ 8:30PM

Miniscule and ridiculous as it exempts bonuses and raises already scheduled.

William| 11.29.10 @ 8:41PM

The pay freeze is a good start, but it will be gamed with promotions and changes in job descriptions in order to get around it. Audits of each and every state and federal department needs to take place with staff reductions being the goal -- only by cutting redundant positions and overstaffing can the states and feds make any significant cost reductions. In parallel, the fed and state pensions can be scaled back to (at least) mid-1990 levels so that most of those retirees don't end up making more in retirement than they ever did while employed.

The private sectors' workers are judged by their contribution to the bottom line of the business -- most establishments are not in the charity business -- those who positively affect the bottom line stay employed, those who don't get let go. When a private sector business sees an increase in operating costs and taxes, they look to cut payroll first since it usually has the largest effect on net revenue. Wages are frozen or slashed, benefits are withdrawn, workers' hours are cut or eliminated ... yet, state and federal workers usually have little to fear in those regards, though there are examples here and there.

The pay freeze mentioned in the article is symbolic and only meant as a stepping stone for some long-play scheme that the feds have in mind later on. The private-versus-federal wage and benefit statistics are fact -- so are the unbalanced hiring numbers between state/fed and private sector workers over the past two and a half years. It's about time that state and federal workers share in the Hope and Change that the rest of the country currents suffers under.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 9:02PM

Well, the thing is I never bought into the Hope and Change line.

William| 11.29.10 @ 9:11PM

That's one thing in your favor. That said, you must understand that the unsustainable trajectories of the federal deficit and federal debt requires a revamp of state and federal jobs and their salaries/benefits. Federal and state workers (as well as those in federally-protected unions) have been, to this point, insulated from the private sector death spiral. From the private sector side of the fence, it's well past the time that state and federal workers begin to experience the pain and balancing act that the rest of America has been forced to undertake as a matter of survival.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 9:19PM

Once again, that's a lot of wrong assumptions made and then proposed extreme solutions. It's not salary/benefits that are the problems. It's politics, politics, politicians, politicians, programs, programs, programs ..... and leadership. You eliminate unnecessary programs that were created and developed under political agendas. You solve the PP&L, then you'll see savings.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 9:30PM

You all are directing your angst in the wrong place. Once again, this President has managed to polarize the American people. If this Administration and Congress would eliminate unnecessary programs; excessive (cabinet and other) members, directors; their RHIP-attitudes, their "we will save and control everyone" programs/policies; and, like I said before, start fr0m the top, then you would automatically see savings salary/benefit-wise.

William| 11.29.10 @ 9:43PM

I agree with much of what you're saying, but was only addressing the pay/benefits portion of the argument because it corresponds to the content of the article. State and federal salaries/benefits do need to be reined in -- especially the benefits since they are so costly to tax-payers over the long term -- but those are not the end game for greatest savings in the federal government. Raising tax receipts will only cause governments to spend more, so the logical place to begin cutting are at the program and department levels while stabilizing IRS rules to get investments started again. A federal balanced budget amendment must be brought to bear and an austerity program undertaken in order to really realize the cuts necessary to get the long-term debt under control in our lifetime.

FEW| 11.29.10 @ 9:55PM

Okay, I agree with most of what you said. I guess I just think this pay freeze is a farce, especially since he could have started with those much, much bigger issues you mentioned, and guess what that would ultimately reflect in reduced gov manpower, hence less spent on salaries/benefits.

G-Man| 11.29.10 @ 9:01PM

I'm not crying about not getting a raise. Being a responsible person I've applied myself throughout my life and haven't lived above my means and have always been guided by the rule of appreciating enough now. So no debt unlike much of the general public and our government. But as clearly shown Obama will not be able to balance the budget on the backs of the federal employees. As a further correction federal employees did not get a huge raise last year and it is costing more to live this year as it did last so I don't get where this non-inflationary argument comes from. As anybody who works and pays for their living can attest it is costing more to live every day and if you're paying attention you realize that pretty much everything that comes out of this administration is theater targeted at guiding the public perception to put blame somewhere else so the average man can focus his rage at the difficulties he faces just feeding his family. So my beef is that we work for the country and do valuable services. We deserve every bit as much appreciation as the guy on the garbage truck and it appears that much of what is being said about our work ethic especially in reference to this BS about the federal employee pay theme should be deposited in that truck.

G-Man| 11.29.10 @ 9:10PM

And I'd like to meet that federal employee that retires and makes more NOT working than when he was. I guess the stories about NY State employees and CA municipal retirements have infected the entire discourse. Even still, if you got back the money from those isolated exceptions where the cops and city hall fat cats hauled in the big buck retirements you still would not balance the budget. Let's talk about the real budget items that matter: Earmarks, bloated agencies/depts, and stimulus money used for all sorts of nonsense.

William| 11.29.10 @ 9:32PM

NY and CA are great examples. Let me give you a couple more.

My first example is a guy that I've known for nearly 18 years who just retired (at 54) from the state government here in AZ. He worked in municipal planning, worked his way up to a management position, and in his last two years, put in a lot of overtime and cashed in his vacation and sick-leave time in order to boost his compensation in that last year of employment. He was a member of a state workers' union all the way through -- in fact, it was required to join it and pay dues as a condition of his employment. He now lives upstate in a brand new house on 25 acres of land, still owns his old 3700 sq. ft. home in Tempe, bought the house boat that he always wanted, and laughs about the fact that his state retirement pay is equal to his highest-year wages. That guy isn't unique at all -- I used to play basketball with him and several of his co-workers and they all talked about this retirement arrangement as a matter of fact. When these guys get to begin collecting SS, they'll really be rolling in cash.

The second example is my own mother. She taught for over 40 years in the state of Wisconsin and was a member of the teachers' union. When she retired several years ago, she was surprised to learn that between her SS and her pension, she was taking in over $23K more per year than she did in her highest-paid year of teaching. Since both her SS and union pension are tied directly to tax-based income at the fed and state level, she receives generous monthly deposits (mostly) courtesy of the tax-paying public. She watches the interest rate indexes closely because as interest rates rise, she receives even more money from her union pension -- you can imagine how happy she'll be when Hope and Change inflation finally hits next year. I don't begrudge my mom's arrangement, but she's certainly doing much better now than she ever did while working for a living.

Self-Loathing Fed| 11.29.10 @ 9:33PM

The real budget items that matter are Medicare and Social Security.

We're all in for a whole lotta shared sacrifice. Just think of this pay freeze as being the timid first salvo in the first battle of a long war. We're on the front lines, G-Man!

William| 11.29.10 @ 9:51PM

G-Man, I agree with you on the larger picture. State and federal salaries aren't that big of a deal to me, but the retirement benefits are -- they add up quickly, paying out good money for non-production.

Earmarks, bloated agencies/depts, stimulus money, ObamaCare, et. al. are the real culprits at the federal level. Rolling back many of these will go a long, long way toward fiscal solvency. Unfortunately, the difficult choices are going to be very difficult to implement due to the entitlement mentality of much of the electorate and the powerful lobbies associated with any of those federal programs/agencies you'd care to mention. It can be done, but people need to understand the severity of the fiscal situation that this country currently finds itself in -- the vast majority of people just don't get it yet.

Prosecutorial Indiscretion| 11.30.10 @ 9:34AM

State and federal salaries aren't that big of a deal to me, but the retirement benefits are -- they add up quickly, paying out good money for non-production.

I think you might have some misconceptions about federal retirement - most of it is driven by our 401(k) equivalent, the TSP plan, though a smaller portion is a defined benefit. But it is nothing like the civil service retirement of the old days. When I retire, even if I put in 40 years, I will significantly less money than when I was working (unless the stock market does something crazy). That said, the retirement age is a bit low and ought to be increased.

DTR| 11.30.10 @ 11:28AM

It's true that for federal workers, FERS is less generous than the old CSRS system in terms of defined benefits, but the debate is between public vs. private. Most private sector workers don't have any defined benefit plan at all, just a 401(k). FERS still looks pretty good to someone with no pension.

DevilDawgUSMC| 11.30.10 @ 8:20AM

This was originally introduced by the Republicans as one of a number of steps toward balancing the budget. Of course, this was presented before Hussein began his National Lying campaign stating the Republicans had nothing to offer toward balancing the budget. Hussein could not put aside his disdain for the GOP long enough to give credit where credit is due. Anyone believing a renewed era of bi-partisanship as begun still has their Hopey Changey bumper stickers on their hybrid.

ann| 11.30.10 @ 12:42PM

Considering the fact that public sector employees and union workers make about 30% more than the average private sector employee, I would take one of the public or union salaries over what I make and Odingo could freeze it for 10 years.

Anonymouse| 12.1.10 @ 12:08AM

Officer Another Federal Employee -- no need to whine, this cut only affects civilians. Cops will still get your big raises next year.

Mimi| 12.1.10 @ 12:39AM

Honest to God....after 2004...I never thought I could be more disappointed in voters and the officials American elected. I really hope EVERYONE is ready to deal with the real consequences of all of this...

wtf| 12.1.10 @ 9:54AM

According to the most recent (Nov. 18th) data collected on Payscale.com, I earn $19k less a year then National median for a person with my degree and years experience - masters of computer science, 10 years experience.

As a skilled federal employee, I make $19,000 less per year than my private sector counterparts.

If someone can direct me to the jobs that earn 30% more and have magic retirement plans where you make even MORE after you retire, I'd greatly appreciate it. Because I sure as hell don't have one.