IN WASHINGTON, IT'S ALWAYS THE YEAR OF THE RAT(ANN COULTER)

anncoulter.com ^ | Ann Coulter

[kellynla]

Democrats have leapt on reports of mold, rats and bureaucratic hurdles at Walter Reed Army Medical Center as further proof of President George Bush's failed war policies.

To the contrary, the problems at Walter Reed are further proof of the Democrats' failed domestic policies — to wit, the civil service rules that prevent government employees from ever being fired. (A policy that also may account for Robert Byrd's longevity as a U.S. senator.)

Thanks to the Democrats, government employees have the world's most complicated set of job protection rules outside of the old East Germany. Oddly enough, this has not led to a dynamic workforce in the nation's capital.

Noticeably, the problems at Walter Reed are not with the doctors or medical care. The problems are with basic maintenance at the facility. Unless U.S. Army generals are supposed to be spraying fungicide on the walls and crawling under beds to set rattraps, the slovenly conditions at Walter Reed are not their fault. The military is nominally in charge of Walter Reed, but — because of civil service rules put into place by Democrats — the maintenance crew can't be fired.

[Dominnae]

You know, I was wondering if there were
these kinds of problems at the Naval
Hospital in Bethesda.

Any insight?

[Wormwood]

So how about STOP creating yet more of them ala the Department of Homeland Harassment and the Department of Reeducation. Both abortions created and approved by republican presidents.

*applause*

The last few years on FR have taught me that a sickening number of folks believe the State is only troublesome when the other team is in charge.

[JB in Whitefish]

....yeah, but are they FAGS...???

[USNBandit]

From what I could tell of visiting Bethesda the facility seemed to be in good shape, but I've never been in the older end of the campus.

My understanding of the Walter Reed issue was that the problems were with the living quarters for patients receiving extended outpatient treatment.

[Radix]

How many Teamsters does it take to change a lightbulb?

Twelve!

Do you have a problem with that?

[MisouriMule]

http://www.dazbert.co.uk/sites/rudefood/index.php?page=food/faggots.htm

Is this what you mean?

[RonDog]

Thank you for posting the FULL TEXT of Ann's column!

[RonDog]

What a GREAT picture of Ann!

Here is another:

[GOP_Raider]

Wait, I thought the Dept. of (Re)Education was created during the Carter Administration?

[Shamrock-DW]

Right you may be....but who is in charge of the contractors? My bet it is some 250 pound civiliangovernmentunionshemaleemployee who shrugs and takes another bite out of their doughnut during their everythirtyminutecoffeebreak........

[Loyal Buckeye]

Maintenance was contracted out last year.

Are you talking about janitorial, building maintenance (i.e., repairs) or both?

[ABG(anybody but Gore)]

She kicks liberal arse. Which is why they hate her so much. If a liberal had struck up that comment about Mitt Romney, would we have even heard about it???

[RonDog]

"...Democrats have leapt on reports of mold, rats and bureaucratic hurdles at Walter Reed Army Medical Center as further proof of President George Bush's failed war policies.

To the contrary, the problems at Walter Reed are further proof of the Democrats' failed domestic policies – to wit, the civil service rules that prevent government employees from ever being fired (a policy that also may account for Robert Byrd's longevity as a U.S. senator)." - Ann Coulter

Also from pookie18's Today's Toons 3/13/07:

[Mpatl]

As always, Miss Coulter is precise, biting, and right on target.

What a great ability it is to see so clearly through all of the liberal nonsense.

She is an American treasure.

[Sam Hill]

"By inferring that civil service protected government workers are to blame for the dirt and mold at Walter Reed, Ann is somewhat off the mark here. A quick check reveals that housekeeping services at Walter Reed have been handled by a private contractor since 2003."

I think you mean "implying" rather than inferring. But to your point...

When Bush came in the Army began looking at contracting out some services at places like Walter Reed. After a review process that took FIVE YEARS and 7 MILLION DOLLARS, the first "independent contractors" just started coming in at the end of 2006.

But the Democrats put all sorts of limitations on them, such as only 200 government workers could be replaced at Walter Reed and the government workers had to offered the job first.

But I believe Coulter's basic point is NO ONE in DC works -- the entire workforce is a joke -- because of the civil service protections for 80% of the workforce.

[rebel_yell2]

I read elsewhere on FR that maintenance was contracted out last year, but it was only effective this year, and that half of the old maintenance staff quit during the interim, leaving the remaining government staff sorely understaffed, thus the deterioration. If this is true, then Ann is correct.

[Sam Hill]

Unions Hope Democrats Will Counter GOP Policy Changes

By Zachary A. Goldfarb
Special to The Washington Post
Monday, December 18, 2006; A23

As a member of the Democratic minority, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.) fought a Bush administration policy that increasingly opened up federal jobs to private contracting.

Although he and colleagues had some success, Van Hollen said that when the 110th Congress takes over next month and the Democrats are in the majority, he will have greater ability to combat the administration's policies on federal employees. "It's had a demoralizing effect on the federal workforce," he said. "I do think now we're in a better position to fix things."

For the past six years, unions that represent most federal employees have argued that the Bush administration has been hostile to the needs of workers -- keeping pay raises low, trying to prevent employees from organizing in the departments of Defense and Homeland Security, and outsourcing government jobs to the private sector.

Now, the change in control of Congress gives unions much more powerful allies in the legislative branch. Democratic lawmakers pledge to work on issues of central concern to the unions, but the administration outlines other priorities for the workforce and disputes any notion it has not pursued a course beneficial to workers.

The election of Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) as majority leader is seen as a boon for federal workers. Hoyer, who will be the House's second most powerful figure, represents Southern Maryland's 5th Congressional District, home to thousands of government employees.

Hoyer said he will work to create a "more cooperative relationship with the White House" to ensure pay raises and to contain rising health premiums. While he praised several Republican colleagues, such as Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (Va.), outgoing chairman of the Government Reform Committee, Hoyer said: "Republicans made it much harder to ensure federal employees received fair and competitive annual pay adjustments. . . . They also did virtually nothing to help resist the White House effort to outsource federal jobs to private contractors."

John Gage, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, said that as soon as the Bush administration came to power in 2001, it wiped out "our partnerships with agencies, and since that time our ability to sit down with the agencies and work out problems and differences has really declined." AFGE is the largest union of government employees, representing 700,000 federal and D.C. government workers.

With the new Congress, Gage said, "we're hoping not only we'll have more access to committees and Congress, but that word will get down to the political appointees in the departments."

Labor unions were a major source of support to Democrats in the midterm elections. The AFL-CIO spent roughly $40 million on a get-out-the-vote operation, and union members contributed substantial sums to Democratic candidates. Hoyer was not in a competitive race but received more than $300,000 in money from labor-affiliated political action committees.

Clay Johnson III, deputy director for management at the Office of Management and Budget, called labor's criticisms of the administration "rhetoric."

"The idea that management would be hostile to employees is just foreign to me," Johnson said. "Everybody's focused on what we can do that's smart and professional and effective, to make sure we have the best and most effective workforce possible."

Johnson said the administration's goal in its final two years is to strengthen a management system that rewards employees who perform exceptionally. "I believe that employees want to be respected. They want to be challenged. They want to be held accountable. They want to grow professionally," he said.

According to the unions, federal workers have more pressing needs.

"We expect the Democratic Congress to support the federal employees with regard to wages, health insurance and retirement," said Beth Moten, AFGE's legislative and political director. "We expect them to support federal bargaining rights, and we expect them to work for reforms so that federal workers don't lose their jobs because of procedures or political influence,"

No issue has been more divisive than "contracting out," the phrase critics use to describe the outsourcing of government jobs to private contractors. Unions have fought efforts to transfer jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, the Internal Revenue Service and elsewhere. Colleen M. Kelley, national president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said one worrisome trend is the IRS's interest in using private debt-collection agencies. "There are going to be problems with taxpayer privacy," she said.

In 2003, the administration revised Circular A-76, which lays out the rules for job competitions, to direct agencies to evaluate whether more jobs could be privatized. The effort has faced stiff resistance on Capitol Hill. Democrats have argued that agencies are under pressure to privatize jobs that should be confined to government workers.

"I am not opposed to privatization, but if it occurs with federal jobs, then it must be legal and fair," said Sen. Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), incoming chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee on commerce, justice and science, which will have authority over many of these issues. She also has many government employees as constituents.

The debate over privatization, among other disputes, is occurring against a backdrop of profound demographic change in the civil service. In the next 10 years, as much as 60 percent of the government's 1.8 million workers will become eligible to retire. "The long-term challenge for the federal government is to continue to attract the best and the brightest people. We've got to make sure we can replenish the federal workforce," Van Hollen said.

Unions Hope Democrats Will Counter GOP Policy Changes - washingtonpost.com
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/17/AR2006121700918.html?nav=rss_business/economy

[Sam Hill]

Walter Reed to cut 200 jobs, outsource support work

Washington Business Journal - November 10, 2006
by Vandana Sinha

Walter Reed Army Medical Center plans to cut at least 200 jobs early next year in its drawn-out, bitterly contested effort to outsource more work to a private contractor.

The army hospital expects to turn over hundreds of jobs to Florida-based IAP Worldwide Services, whose representatives arrived on the hospital's D.C. campus for the first time this week to start the transition.

The move is part of a larger federal initiative to determine whether government agencies or private companies can do a better job at a lower price.

After five years of protests, employee appeals and congressional counterattacks, a $120 million five-year contract was awarded this January to IAP. Walter Reed is slated to be shut down by 2011 as part of the Defense Department's massive closing and realignment project.

While federal outsourcing isn't new, "the Bush administration has been more aggressive in outsourcing all nonessential services," says Ray Bjorklund, chief knowledge officer for FedSources, a McLean market research firm. "The concept is to go ahead and outsource that stuff so you can concentrate on the core mission."

The Army started a basewide review of Walter Reed in June 2000. The sweeping evaluation of more than 1,100 jobs finally narrowed its focus to an estimated 350 mostly blue-collar maintenance jobs.

IAP will assume much of the base's support work, including postal services, military police support, administration and budget support, network support, housing management, transportation functions, grounds maintenance, utility systems, heating and cooling services, hospital housekeeping, laundry service and warehouse operations.

IAP started the transition this week by surveying and inventorying base property, setting up its technology networks and interviewing for jobs.

Since the contract was awarded, some staffers have already left for new jobs. Army officials expect the exodus to continue, lowering the estimated layoff total to 200, according to a filing with the D.C. Department of Employment Services.

"As soon as this happens, everybody looks for another job," says Mark Jones, assistant to Joseph Whitaker, the Army deputy assistant for installations and housing. "Most people either take the move or find another job or are placed in priority placement."

IAP is required by federal law to first offer unfilled contract jobs to qualified government employees facing a pink slip, though it is not required to guarantee anyone a final slot.

"We will interview all existing personnel who apply for employment consideration," says Arlene Mellinger, a spokeswoman for IAP, whose majority owner and investor recently anointed former Treasury Secretary John Snow as its chairman.

Walter Reed is just a drop in the bucket for IAP. Last month, the company announced its bid to compete for a $50 billion Army contract to provide food and shelter for soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan -- a contract long held by KBR, a Halliburton subsidiary that used to employ IAP's top two officers.

IAP has also won grounds and maintenance outsourcing contracts for other Army installations, including Fort Meade in Maryland, but the Walter Reed deal received the most flak.

Union groups and congressional members charged that the six-year process ignored crucial federal deadlines and spawned several versions of the solicitation.

In August, the White House Office of Management and Budget, which says that the contract was awarded fairly, projected cost savings of about $6 million a year for the next five years.

Walter Reed to cut 200 jobs, outsource support work - Washington Business Journal:
http://washington.bizjournals.com/washington/stories/2006/11/13/story3.html

 

So only 200 OUT OF MORE THAN 1,000 jobs have only just started to be turned over to "private contractors." And only after they offer them to the current government employees first.

AND THE DEMS ARE FIGHTING THAT!

[Sam Hill]

"You are right. Maintenance was contracted out last year. I disagree with Coulter on this."

Please read my last three previous posts above.

[fkabuckeyesrule]

Ilove what she said at the end about Cleland and Chambliss. It was a pleasure to boot Cleland out of office....he's been burning bridges and showing his true colors ever since.