Posted on 02/23/2013 5:52:08 AM PST by BarnacleCenturion
Not only is Senator Rand Paul (R., Ky.) calling out the Obama administration’s “dishonest” doom-mongering on the sequester, he also put forward his own plan, released today, to replace the impending cuts with alternative savings, and to do so “without layoffs,” according to a release from the senator’s office.
Paul’s bill would reduce federal spending by more than $85 billion annually by directing the government to:
Stop Hiring New Federal Employees ($6.5 billion per year)
More than 60,000 people left the federal workforce in 2011. This provision would end the practice of hiring new employees to replace them.
Bring Federal-Employee Pay in Line with Private Jobs ($32 billion per year)
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that federal-employee compensation is 16 percent higher compared with the private sector. This provision would reduce federal salaries to a more commensurate level.
Reduce Federal-Employee Travel by 25 Percent ($2.25 billion per year)
The federal government spends about $9 billion on travel, according to the General Services Administration, which ironically was the center of a recent scandal for its exorbitant spending on travel and conference costs. Paul bill’s would rein in such expenses.
Focus Military Research on Military Needs ($6 billion per year)
Paul’s office cites research from Senator Tom Coburn (R., Okla.), which found that the Defense Department spent $6 billion on research that had little or nothing to do with military needs.
Require Competitive Bidding for Government Contracts ($19 billion per year)
This provision would repeal prevailing-wage requirements under which employees are often paid higher wages to work on federal projects, and end the practice of awarding federal contracts without a competitive bidding process to ensure the government is contracting work at the lowest price possible.
Cut 50 Percent of Foreign Aid ($20 billion per year)
It is consistently one of the only portions of the budget Americans actually want to cut.
Most of the media forgot to mention Rand returning $600,000 to the treasury this year, like they missed him returning $500,000 last year. If he keeps this up both parties will Palinize him very soon.
We have a winner here, Sir I commend you.
Are you kidding me? 85 billion reduction in the increase in spending is something to cheer about? Young Americans have been doomed by their parents and grandparents and someday they will come to understand that. However, it will be too late.
This also caught my eye:
. . . the Defense Department spent $6 billion on research that had little or nothing to do with military needs.
I'm willing to be a lot of that research has to do with queering the military, putting women into combat positions and other politically correct clap-trap.
How about we put a limit on medical expenses which the military can pay for lifestyle choices? Beginning with STDs contacted by those who declared they are gay?
Kudos to him, though it’ll never see the light of day; if his own ‘leaders’ don’t undermine and stab him in the back.
He should have taken it further....How much would 0-based accounting have saved? Where’s the cuts in entitlements? Too little.
I am fully aware of the problems this administration has caused the folks in the private sector. I have also not been immune from it even though I have been able to keep my job.
You're assumptions of who I am are what is breathtaking. I didn't say anything about you and those who paint "gubmint employees" with a broad brush lumping military in with the evil civilian workforce - you managed to put that into my post all by yourself. I merely mentioned that many of us were prior/retired military who had something to offer in helping to train and free up military for their missions. I am far from a "gubmint bureaucrat" as you so conveniently call me - I have many posts on FR that tell folks that I am fine with taking some of the hits if the "leadership" actually follows through on policy that will put us on the right path - something I still haven';t seen you volunteer for in your screeds against all the evil "gubmint bureaucrats". You say I don't know the difference while you do and I find it a little sad that there are so many "experts" that are so damn ignorant and so damn proud of their superior knowledge. Perhaps you should read some of the wisdom of others and apply it to your own life. I'm particularly fond of a quote from Herbert Spencer: "'There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.'"
I am also painfully aware of where all the money for my wages comes from. I was merely pointing out that some of us "gubmint bureaucrats" actually work hard for our wages and give the People a good return when compared to the costs and inefficiencies of having to tie up military warriors in training slots and have them constantly rotating out of positions that require some stability for continuity. I also fully believe that the government has grown to such a size that it is sucking the life out of the Nation. I only started by stating that those who call for shoving it up the civilian DOD workforce's collective a$$e$ are not as knowledgeable as they seem to think about how the DOD workforce is broken down and they automatically lump us all in with the fiasco that is the root Federal government. It's almost like the "low-information" voters that comprise the Democratic Party - they hear something from someone who is "passionate" and they adopt it as fact and then work themselves into a frenzy against the "enemy".
Tell me what you "know" about me from this: I'm 60 years old and retired from the Air Force after 24 years of service. I Work in training for the Air Force and supervise 11 civilian and military personnel and am responsible for development/maintenance of/administration of 21 different technical courses dealing with military communications systems and network security. I often put in 8-12 uncompensated hours of "overtime" to keep a handle on my areas of responsibility. How much do I make? What "perks" do I get as far as benefits for being a "gubmint bureaucrat"? How much would it cost to have a military person in my position (hint - would need to be a senior NCO)?
I'm not the enemy - I want sequestration even though it will hurt me personally - I just hate all the "experts" acting as if it's a well-deserved comeuppance because they can't see far enough to understand that the civil service folks at many levels are no different than the private sector folks - they just applied for jobs that were going to be filled by someone and they do the daily deal of earning their checks.
You should join the Democratic Party - your ignorance and the ability to thrash about at an imagined "enemy" make you a perfect candidate for it. You know nothing about me or about the many DOD Civilians who work in the trenches with the military warriors to make things happen. Your own work ethic probably falls short of most of ours and you really have no idea of who you are lashing out at. Describe my "cushy government office" and describe my pay/benefits/perks while you're at it. You have no idea but you have been conditioned like Pavlov's dogs (and the Democrats) to paint with a broad stoke and have lost the ability to to discern between reality and perception. Most of the folks I work with have spent honorable military careers and they continue to serve their country in an honorable fashion because they love America, the Military Warriors they support, and most of all they love Freedom. You better hope they have your disillusioned back if the SHTF.
You should get a clue.
You said, “You are assuming that all Federal employees make measurably more for their jobs that those in the private sector. Many do and many don’t.”
You made my point for me: you admitted that many Federal workers are paid far more than they would be in the private sector for the same work. The perception, and statistics bear it out, is that Federal employees are overpaid. Those of us who are business owners are being taxed out of existence by this Administration just to support these overpaid Federal workers.
I am not denigrating vets, but I sure as hell am denigrating the folks in the first of your two categories—the overpaid category.
Tell us, which category are YOU in?
Oh, and I just read your post where you said, “I often put in 8-12 uncompensated hours of ‘overtime’ to keep a handle on my areas of responsibility.”
What do you want, a cookie? A gold star on your report card to show Mommy how hard you work? It may come as a shock to you, but salaried employees in the private sector generally work more than 40 hours, and no, they don’t get overtime. For business owners, it’s even more than that—I work at all hours and I often work every single day of the week.
Your comment proves that you are out of touch with the real (non-governmental) world.
Oh, and I just read your post where you said, “I often put in 8-12 uncompensated hours of ‘overtime’ to keep a handle on my areas of responsibility.”
What do you want, a cookie? A gold star on your report card to show Mommy how hard you work? It may come as a shock to you, but salaried employees in the private sector generally work more than 40 hours, and no, they don’t get overtime. For business owners, it’s even more than that—I work at all hours and I often work every single day of the week.
Your comment proves that you are out of touch with the real (non-governmental) world.
You obviously rubbed several people the same way - came off exactly as I said you did. And you also were the first one to make assumptions about others, and then real real real touchy when a little of your own medicine was dished out at you. And to top it off, you took criticism not aimed at you and internalized it and got up on your high horse. And frankly, I remain convinced you have no idea what those in the private sector have been through, and I’m not sure you have a graps of economic reality either.
Of course. But that doesn't mean that this effort is pointless.
Every time a Republican steps to the mike, he should say, "Why does Obama want to jeopardize air travel, by cutting air traffic controllers, when he could freeze hiring in other non-essential areas?"
Then, after a few more sentences, step away from the mike, and refuse questions from the marxist media.
Post the same points on Twitter and Facebook.
It's so easy, even a caveman could do it.
But most won't. Which tells us that most of them are playing for the other team.
hehe.....read my post....you and I were saying the same thing at the same moment. He clearly has no understanding of existence outside of the govt mentality.
“DOA in the Senate.”
It’s up to the citizensry to change their Senator’s opinions IMO.
Let’s give them multiple choice answers:
A: I have no idea
B: I surf internet porn all day
C: I screw up the lives of the people who pay me
D: I avoid work at all cost
E: All of the above
Besides, every bold idea is “dead in the Senate” or “dead in the boardroom” or “dead in legal” the first few times it is suggested - but bold ideas are very necessary nonetheless. Not only that, but Paul’s idea is a great addition to the arena of ideas.
Besides, every bold idea is “dead in the Senate” or “dead in the boardroom” or “dead in legal” the first few times it is suggested - but bold ideas are very necessary nonetheless. Not only that, but Paul’s idea is a great addition to the arena of ideas.
Yeah, and it's not like Bobo's Great Recession has 'accurately' laid off people, some permanently; so let them experience the same thing the same way.
I know! These people are so disconnected from economic realities it’s ridiculous.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.