Paul Ryan’s budget plan hits federal workers - The Federal Eye - The Washington Post
This is EXACTLY why Obama is lying when he considers his deficit reduction plan "balanced". Liberals freak out when they hear the word "cut" to any kind of spending. Let me outline why exactly this article is meant to create fear and distort the truth.The spending plan proposed by Rep. Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, Mitt Romney’s pick as the Republican vice presidential candidate, has drawn strong opposition from federal employees.
Under the proposed House Republican budget, which Ryan sponsored as chairman of the Budget Committee, savings from the federal workforce would total $368 billion over 10 years. The two-year freeze on basic federal pay rates, scheduled to expire at the end of this year, would be extended through 2015 for a total of five years.
“The Path to Prosperity,” as the budget plan is named, also calls on federal workers to make an unspecified “more equitable contribution to their retirement plans,” which means higher costs to employees. Additionally, the federal workforce would be cut, through attrition over three years, by 10 percent, which equals more than 200,000 positions.
Because the Departments of Defense, Veterans Affairs, Justice and Homeland Security have so many employees, the majority of the eliminated positions would come from these agencies, all of which are related to national security.
The budget document says its plans “reﬂect the growing frustration of workers across the country at the privileged rules enjoyed by government employees.”
Ryan’s budget justifies the employee-related cuts, saying “it is no coincidence that private sector employment continues to grow only sluggishly while the government expands: To pay for the public sector’s growth, Washington must immediately tax the private sector or else borrow and impose taxes later to pay down the debt.”
1. Fed. Employee Contributions - It has been shown to us in Wisconsin and other states and cities that the days of promising gov. workers huge pensions is OVER. We cannot afford to hand someone 3 million dollars for serving 20 years, for no cost at all. I believe firefighters and police, or other gov. workers in a dangerous field are the exception, but an accountant for the GSA doesnt need a pension. I don't believe it is fair that taxpayers pay for your retirement when private sector workers have to contribute to their retirement plans as well. I think its only fair that we ask federal employees to contribute some of their earnings. This is nothing new folks, the private sector has been doing this forever.
2. Extended 5 year pay freeze - Most private sector companies, including all of the ones I have worked at since 2008, have been on pay freezes or hiring freezes. It is not too much to ask of government employees to accept the same type of hardship that the private sector is going through to save billions a year. Ryan wants to extend the freeze for 5 years. This means that many people will not get raises to their current position. Once again, this is standard operating procedure in the private sector but suddenly when you apply it to the magical federal worker, it is just downright inhumane according to liberals.
3. Worker cut. Ryan wants to cut the federal workforce by 10%. Thats awesome because it has been growing ever decade more and more. It is about time we stopped with all these useless agencies and downsized because we cant afford the non essentials. I am glad this author mentioned "attrition" when talking about cuts. Most liberal authors would just say Ryan wants to lay off 200,000 in the next 3 years. Not true. Under his attrition plan Ryan would not lay off or fire anyone! Attrition means that if an employee were to quit or retire most likely that position if it was not essential would not be filled back up. There is no sudden firing of federal employees folks, just a gradual reduction in the fed workforce. Once again, as before in the last 2 items, this is standard practice in the private sector. Actually, my hospital is doing this right now. It is responsible budget cutting, nothing alarming here.
4. Most of the cuts will come from the defense department, justice dept., homeland security, and the VA. And in case you didnt notice we are talking about federal employees, not state and local. So no teachers, firefighters, or the other people that Obama loves to reference when talking about public sector jobs. Just the scum like over at the GSA spending millions of dollars on hotel rooms and parties on the taxpayers tabs.
5. Finally, this line is great. It explains exactly why we need to implement these steps: Ryan’s budget justifies the employee-related cuts, saying “it is no coincidence that private sector employment continues to grow only sluggishly while the government expands: To pay for the public sector’s growth, Washington must immediately tax the private sector or else borrow and impose taxes later to pay down the debt.”
Thanks for reading. What do you think? Are these proposed cuts in the Ryan plan really as bad as some are making them seem? Why shouldn't we cut back on the federal workforce and save more money to shed off the deficit? And BTW, these cutbacks will save us more than the "taxing the rich" plan.