What the next round of federal cuts should look like

Everyone knows its easy to get dragged in the mud by the day to day of Washington. Who won the media cycle, what do the polls say, etc. Certainly everyone has their specific disappointed and frustration with the President, but its difficult to argue he hasn't worked hard and gotten an immense amount of important things done.

This is a pretty cool video and breakdown of what President Obama has accomplished in just 2 years of his presidency.

A macro, birds eye view :

http://www.doubledutchpolitics.com/2010/12/president-barack-obama-two-years-of-progress/

Federal employees get to invest their Thrift and Savings money in a special treasury obligation called a G-bond which pays a 7-10 year interest rate on a 30 day basis with 100% liquidity and no risk.

Another B/S Fed employee giveaway that taxpayers don't have access to and it is costing this country billions to subsidize these thirty day interest rates.

So quit crying about the poor federal employee.

What do you get at a bank for 30 days or on the secondary market when buying a T-bill.?

The Federal government needs to stop bailing out broke state governments like California. They need to cut state pensions and state prison populations first. It costs $30,000 to take care of a prisoner for a year. We have the world's largest prison population.

We need big reform on lowering sentencing guidelines and legalizing marijuana. We've got to stop our foreign wars and drug wars. We can't afford them. We've got to cut defense spending.

To Davis Harris,

Federal workers no longer receive large pensions. They have a 401K system plus Social Security.

We saw their results at Walter Reed once already. I don't know why people were so stupid as to elect this crowd of double digit IQ's, but they did.

Because of the whites need not apply policy...
every new hire since 2006 when the dems took control needs to be looked at...

There are many flaws in the arguments by Paul Light and others who wish to downsize federal employment. Starting with Light’s argument that there are too many supervisors and not enough “front line” personnel, he overlooks that supervisors do more than supervise. Often supervisory personnel have far more subject matter expertise than career ladder staff that comes from years of experience. Decreasing their numbers will lower the quality of the workforce.

The entire premise of too many federal workers needs to be challenged. Given that the responsibilities of government have grown tremendously and that today’s workforce is the smallest in 50 years, federal agencies are not overstaffed at all. This is really a ploy by the Tea Party candidates to starve the government and keep it from being effective. This is the same as the NRA lobbyists have done to the ATF—a subject of recent Washington Post reports.

The issues about overpaying federal employees have also been led with distorted facts that want to compare the pay of federal bank regulators to McDonald’s employees. These are mean spirited attacks because these politicians are adverse to government. They believe in unfettered private enterprise even if it means consumers are cheated. They don’t want to pay taxes so they try to eliminate IRS agents.

Federal employees need the President to stand up for them. He is their commander in chief and CEO. And the government’s Board of Directors (i.e., the Congress) needs to come to its senses before it is too late to preserve the experts who help keep government working through every crisis.

Federal workers, like government workers in general, still have one thing that the rest of us have lost in this Republicanized America: a pension. No one but government workers can ever afford to retire, unless you want to live at a subsistance level on Social Security. As a result, most of us will work until we drop, saving for the unexpected illness or other catastrophe, so there are no job openings for young people. Every other civilized country has figured out that allowing people to retire will create jobs and stimulate the economy by letting people spend some of the money they've saved. But not us.

They need to look harder at the contractors they hire to fill the gaps where there isn't enough fed employees. These employees make twice the amount of money in just thier salaries plus a 140% + overhead rate is applied and given to the company they work for - this has long been a huge drain in salaries! So all you do when you eliminate and freeze fed positions is create an opening for a contractor to fill at more than 3 times the cost! Why aren't they looking into cutting/ eliminating contractor employees? I work for State Govt and that is the way our agencies started budget cuts. That was actually the first step before implementing pay freezes and furloughs!

Posted by: hebe1 | December 14, 2010 3:54 PM

Fine I wont contribute to your FED benefits either: Social Security or Defense or Medicare. Go self insure. We are all contributing no matter.
Ask Corporate america what they are doing with all the benefit money, vacation time etc they used to give. Good luck!

Slave USA - Hey Mr Light dig this and deal with it. I challenge the so called press to elaborate. The USA is one of the worst modern countries to work in. Its sick and sad.

At the Campaign for America's Future, Dave Johnson writes, Germany's Economy Shows Government 'Interference' Works:

In Germany, workers also get six weeks vacation - by law, federally mandated, a right. They get health care, university, child care and pensions and as a result they have higher productivity. In Germany, the government requires worker representatives to hold seats on the boards of directors of companies, depending on the number of workers. Government-funded research and vocational training, and policies to retain skilled workers bring another competitive advantage. Germany values manufacturing and the government has an industrial policy. The government is currently helping promote green manufacturing, for example.

The result of all this government interference is that Germany's export-oriented manufacturing economy recovered from the recession and is doing OK, and their workers are paid well and have great benefits.

Our government is supposed to be of, by and for the people. But today in the U.S. it is considered "socialistic" to talk about these things because it violates the dominant conservative "free market" ideology that is designed to enrich a few at the expense of the rest of us. If we try to talk about a national industrial/economic policy, it is derided with such slogans as "government interference" or "picking winners and losers." If the discussion is allowed it very quickly will move to the dominance of fossil fuels and the other industries that are holding us back but have a lock on influence over the government. If we talk about taking the burden of health care off of the people and businesses, the giant insurance companies beat it back, calling it "socialized medicine," to keep us from doing something about how their profits are draining the rest of the economy. And imagine the furor that would result if anyone even suggested mandating worker representatives on boards of directors so the companies take the interests of workers and communities into account!

Our adherence to conservative free-market ideology is clearly holding our country back. The ideology is designed to transfer wealth from the public to a very few, and hold the lead of the already-dominant. This is killing market innovation and it is destroying our competitiveness and standard of living. We should be looking at what works for the country instead of what keeps the few at the top at the top.

Hey Lightweight, you were wrong on reinventing government and you still don't know what the heck you're talking about. How does a moron like you stay employed?

Frankly speaking, I am sick of hearing that the federal workforce needs to tighten its belt. It is a cheap poltical ploy to demonize federal employees while ignoring the hard decisions that Congress consistently fails to make. They are lazy and stupid and count on the american people to be lazy and stupid too. What about addressing the real problems that are causing the bulk of the federal deficit - medicare, social security and the defense budget. No one has the cojones to forge a bipartisan solution and look at those issues. Its funny how all of the Republicans and Tea Partiers don't want government in their life, but seem to scream the loudest when anyone talks about touching medicare and social security - complete hypocracy. Secondly, it is a complete disgrace to continue to Bush era tax cuts which helped to decimate the budget surplus that we were left with in 2000 and then suggest that freezing federal employees salaries is going to do anything to solve this problem. I work anywhere from 55 to 70 hours a week. Many of my colleagues do the same. We are consistently under the gun to turn around major products for the heads of our agency and higher with half hour to same day deadlines. We are civilians who are put in harms way. It is offensive to hear people denigrate civil servants such as myself while assuming that the military walks on water when it comes to efficiency and performance. I am a republican who believes that demonizing the federal workforce has to stop. The federal government has to stop letting this happen (i.e. the President calling for a two year pay freeze) and get smarter about retaining and cultivating talented junior and mid level staff.

Starting on Capitol Hill with a 25% reduction on employees and a 25% reduction in congressional pay would be a start that indicated a serious intent. Then let the elected Congress people be paid only for the days they work in Washington. When they return home it is to curry favor, not work

Federal employees are in for a hit! The electorate is angry and someone's going to pay! But, does anyone really have a grasp? It's a lynch mob! I worked the private sector 25 years, and now with federal government nearly eight. In my experience...a sample of one...I don't see so much difference. There are unproductive people on both sides. Some get fired. Some don't.

In the private sector, the people at the top make a hell of a lot more than at the top of the government pyramid. In the private sector, the workers at the bottom make a lot less than at the bottom of the federal ladder. But, I will offer this observation. In the past, in my organization, the duties in GS- 3 to GS-7 range could easily be filled with less educated and talented individuals. Now, not so much. The policies and procedures are more complicated. To fill those slots, we look for the college educated, and, sadly, there are many takers. So, I believe, the salary comparisons are without merit.

But, maybe, at some levels, there are too many positions. We do have too many political appointees. We do have too many Administrators and Deputy Administrators. That's where the money hides. Take WDC out of the equation, and the comparison gets more balanced.

Problem for anyone working there is that they don't get to keep their "excessive" salaries. Instead, it goes into the pockets of of landlords, and others in the real estate game. Sure, freeze and/or cut federal salaries, but watch out for those unintended consequences! It's the private sector gonna take the hit!

As a Republican, I would like to see more cuts in government employees. Particularly at the Securities and Exchange Commission. We need a lot less government employees with oversight on Wall Street and the banking sector. We need a lot less government employees looking at Mine Safety, and Food Safety. A lot less government employees at FDIC, poking their noses into bank business.

The free market has shown it can solve all problems without government watchdogs looking over our shoulders. And the shoulders of those corporations who, through their generous spending, have helped us back into office.

Enough with all the strategizing. That should have been done years ago, ok? Its OVER. We're so in debt now the FED is panicking now that all their debt ("money") creation has amounted to less than zero, and interest rates are starting to rise, Ben Bernake! Haha!
Chu want a piece of me? You come and meet my little friend, Deflation. Its so sad because human nature says in the fall the mobs will pick out someone to blame for their own spendthrift stupidity.

"This is no way to achieve a more accountable, effective and productive government. It is also an affront to the faithful execution of the laws."

That's entirely true. I believe the best way to achieve a more accountable, effective and productive government is strict term limits for Congress. It's the behavior of members of Congress that give government a black eye. We all know that "Congressional Ethics" is an oxymoron.

A majority of people elected are eventually (if not quickly) "corrupted" by the process of providing favors via the legislative process in exchange for votes, contributions, election campaign support or direct payback via discounted home loans, etc. (See Countrywide mortgage "Friends of Angelo" program for examples.) Term limits reduce the ability of politicians to engage in these corrupt practices.

It's a measure of the hypocrisy of politicians that they-Obama and the Republicans alike-seek to unfairly penalize the federal workforce-people carrying out the laws passed by those same politicians in Congress.

The irony is that the GS-13 through 15s will get the highest pay raises while the little guys (11s and below) who are maxed in their steps will be the only one's to feel the impact. Senior management will always find a way to protect their own. Same thing will happen when they try to downsize and it will have the opposite effect because nothing will get done with overpaid managers.

What, just cut the Federal workforce? How about the billion$ funneled to contractors?? Flush Crystal City, for starters . . . Uncle could save some real money!!!

So we're going to balance the budget ONLY using federal employee salaries?

The Fed is pushing through BILLIONS in tax cuts for the richest 3% which - according to most people here - is all to be paid for by Federal salary cuts.

People who say "feds need to know what it's like to work a real job" have no idea what a lot of Feds do. Thousands of Feds put themselves in harms way alongside service women and men. Others deal with gun toting ideologues showing up at our office, or crashing their planes into the buildings because they didn't feel like paying taxes.

You drink clean water, thank a fed, eat food without getting food poisoning, thank a fed. When your kids chew on poison toys, that's because you didn't want to pay to have them inspected by Feds.

Here we go, let's blame the union's. I wonder how many people would like to go back to pre-union work standards. I know they are not perfect, nothing is. How big a percentage of the federal workforce is union????????? Why does the government hire private contractor's ?????????? When you hear what these contractor's are charging the government, it makes no sense. Keep the workers in government that do their jobs well. Get rid of the deadwood. Problem is not enough stones on managers to so. I know there is no easy solution. Our reps in the house and senate should be ashamed of themselves, they are taking all of us down by acting like a bunch of school kids. A bill should be introduced and considered on it's own merit, no amendments, no pork. That would probably solve the deficit problem. Of course it would cause an unemployment problem for the lobbyists. I'm crying for them.

It's surely easier said than done, but on way to trim the federal workforce way down would be to summarily fire all those who produce little. Every office has them. They show up for work every day and spend the day surfing the internet or talking on the phone with their friends. They do little real work. But, they're protected by the union and so they aren't fired.

And for those who think I'm exaggerating? I'm not. I've seen these people with my own eyes.

Mr Light how your editor even let this roll out again speaks to the quality of craftsmanship in your profession. I see you find it easier to poke sticks than fact check.

Minor cuts are necessary, not major cuts. We have to cut enough (or raise taxes enough) to balance the budget, and possibly pay down the national debt modestly. Over time, inflation will cause the debt to shrink as a percentage of GDP. The key is we have to balance the budget every year at a minimum. Having a national debt isn't bad. Having a massive national debt is. This plan won't bring down the $14 trillion debt much in dollars, but it will bring it down in % of GDP. GDP growth has averaged 3.3% per year over the last 60 years or so. Thus, if GDP increases 3.3% for the next 10 years, it will be around $20 trillion (up from $14 trillion). That means our debt as % of GDP (if it remains the same) will drop from 100% to 70%. In another 10 years GDP will rise to more like $28 trillion, bringing debt to GDP to 50%
Of course, the odds of us balancing the fed budget for 20 years is nil. But one can dream.

The author is a little "Light" on brains.

Most Agencies are too top heavy on management structure. Reduce the management structure to operate the Agencies on 9 percent of the total number of employees and budget.

A: Author never worked int he federal government and has no real clue of what goes on. Show me the definition of a "front line" worker. Also who defines "least important" jobs for the bigger attrition cuts? The political appointees, you rightly point out add inefficiency, congress, or perhaps the author is looking to become the czar important jobs. Please remember that "federal jobs" only account for about 2 out of the 13 million paychecks that are directly dependent on Uncle Sam. so a 50% cut in federal jobs would result in 7.8% fewer workers.

Oh by the way the the extension of the tax cuts for those with over $250,000 of income will 12 times as much as the total savings from cutting federal workers pay.

I have a comment for LeeH1: This is exactly the kind of thinking that is both short sighted and shallow. An old proverb applies to his comment....never try to teach a pig to sing; it annoys the pig and wastes your time.

So the new Republican majority coming to congress is planning on a federal pay cut, halving vacation time and forcing employees to pay more towards their health insurance. But God forbid millionaires paying a slightly higher tax rate on income over a million dollars. These folks are a piece of work. GOP "vodoo" supply side economics and unregulated markets took a budget surplus, and led us to the brink of another great depression. How much more damage do these folks want to do to the middle class?

Politicians lack the political will to do what is really needed, end giveaways to special interests like oil and pharmaceutical giants. Special interests hold too much sway over politicians and this has been made worse by the Supreme Court decision on Citizens United. All semblance of order and discipline are gone from our electoral process, and with it went the sanity of how to deal with issues of great importance. Politicians focus more on campaign dollars and donor relationships than on the serious work of solving our national problems. What a sad lot they have become.

Very Interesting! I just now printed Coupons of my Favorite Brands for free from "Printapons" you can find them online.

Naw. Just fire as many Feds as possible, cut their pay and retirement, and make 'em work with fewer vacation days.

I agree with the Tea Party that federal employees are all parasites. They are civil servants, and should be paid like servants.

If they don't like it, let them quit and get a real job.

Its time to stop creating positions from air, I have seen a rise in Federal Employment where I work, that makes no sense, our supervisor to employee ratio is 1.6 to one and they keep creating more supervisory jobs to get their buddys in.

We used to be fully manned at 11 and that was more than enough to do the Job, now we are at 16 and have created 11 supervisory positions. Its absurd our Fire Chief makes what a city Chief makes who runs a department of 2000.. If you wanna cut somewhere look at the pork in DOD Fire, its become waste fraud and abuse on a massive scale

I am a retired Federal employee with approx. 40 +- years & have lived through the 2 for 1 scenerio, Pay freeze for 2 years in the early 70's ect. It didn't change my mind about employement with the Federal Government. Over the years there has been down turns in the economy. As I recall we went through approximately 3-4 since I went to work for the Govt. This is the first one that I recall where the public is upset with the Federal employees income. This is possibly due to inflation & standard of living increases that didn't keep up with inflation. The other down turns created interest in Federal employment & the selection for job applicants went up significantly. I recall trying to hire during the so-called good times & it was extremely tough to find good qualified candidates. In my experience this is the normal scenario with the economy. The Author of this article is right on target when he says they need to cut out the obstacles and not where the work is being done. I agree 100%. A system needs to be put in place where policy makers, line managment, & on-the ground employees work in harmony for the common good for a job well done! We have good science out there, let's let them do there job!

A "2 for 3" system will give even marginally useful employees enormous leverage in their offices, as they can threaten to leave or transfer and it will cost the office the billet, rather than just the effort of hiring a new employee. A person who works at 40% capacity is still better than no work at all.

Since the most competent government employees tend to leave the quickest (having the most access to lucrative private sector jobs that almost always pay more and have perks), eventually we'll end up with all chaff and no wheat. Or likely, just replace those people with overpaid contractors - who may very well be the same people who just left federal employment and are enjoying their higher salaries.

As a competent government employee myself, I'm actually kind of looking forward to that system being implemented. Maybe then I'll finally get that raise. :)

I left a non-profit to work for the Federal government. I left the non-profit for a slight raise in pay (a few thousand, the same amount I would have gotten in my next raise anyway) but also a job I would enjoy doing more. But in exchange, I went from 20 days of vacation to 13, my insurance co-pay went from $83 every pay period to $130 for the same level of coverage, I went from a 7 hour workday to an 8 hour workday, and I lost a lot of perks like being able to automatically go to an out-of-state work-related conference every year and getting free coffee and bottled water in the break room.

I don't know why Federal employees are being demonized. But I do know that if they continue to be targeted for pay cuts and other measures mentioned above, then there will be a lot of Federal employees that will leave for private sector jobs. These people are doctors, nurses, scientists, specialists in fields from graphic design to printing to food safety.

I like working for the Federal government. I like the "mission focused" work ethic of Federal employment. That non-profit where I used to work is one of the biggest in DC.
The CEO makes millions of dollars a year, as do most of the executives. I don't have the space in this post to list the complete waste of money that I encountered every single day, mostly due to laziness and apathy. It was very frustrating for me to work in a place where people spent more time trying to get out of doing their job than in accomplishing anything. I felt like projects were nothing but hot potatoes, and getting them onto someone else' desk was the primary focus of most people's day. As a Federal employee I felt useful and like I was part of a team of people who cared for the first time in YEARS!

I figured I could build up to vacation time again, and could live with higher insurance premiums for a job that made me happy every day. I have a Master's degree and 20 years of experience. If my pay is cut more, then that non-profit may get my resume again though.

Federal government employees are some of the most hard-working and dedicated people in the country, Most professionals in the Federal government could leave and make more money and get better benefits, but there is a feeling of service in working for the Federal government that many workers embrace as a large part of their work ethic.

This demonizing is ridiculous and unfair. The Republicans are doing it to deflect public scrutiny of their intended handouts to the wealthy and corporate America. And most people are so easily manipulated by shiny objects that they take it hook, line, and sinker.

Losses are projected in the numbers of those in a long list of "front line" positions with lower grade levels. This need be the case if there are Reductions in Force (RIFs) focused on the higher grades and SESS ranks which otherwise are more likely to stay put.

I agree in part, until you bring up that there will be fewer auditors, inspectors, nurses, etc. Do not use fear to make your point. The child abuse hotline is not going to be unmanned and I take great offense to this type of tactic.

You are not saying that there should be no cuts, because any rational person knows that there is a huge amount of excess in fed and state gov't jobs. Your recommendation, however, is basically what is being done, or should be done. Excess needs to be cut. Also why does the tax payer have to pay for all the benefits fed and state employees get? Are they somehow better than me? Do I owe them something? I don't think so.

Well said, Mr. Light. Though I am a fed I stated pretty much the same thing in my personal blog - that all vacancies for retiring employees should be thoughtfully and nonpartisanly evaluated for further use. And political appointees should not be allowed to burrow in year after year. In my agency there are too many chiefs and not enough indians. And as you too noted, the sledgehammer approach to federal employees pay and benefits will only hurt the federal functionality in the long run. Hopefully our new GOP majority in the House will quit scapegoating all feds and concentrate on where the real savings are.