DOGE

[Mike Krailo]

The problem with the MSPB is it was instituted during the Carter years by guess what?..... Executive order. Funny how that works. Seems if it can be EO'd into existence, it can be EO'd out. They probably won't do that, but I wouldn't mind seeing that happen. Get ready to be Maro Rubio'd.

There are complaints that the MSPB has gone beyond protecting civil servants from unjustified disciplinary action. Rather, critics allege, the MSPB now makes it difficult to fire poor performers or problematic employees, even when they have committed violations that would result in termination in the private sector. According to the CEO of the Partnership for Public Service, "There is no question that taxpayers are losing hundreds of millions of dollars, in a conservative estimate. They are losing more than that because they are losing the ability to get the very best out of government.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Yeah - if private companies can fire an employee at will for cause, the government definitely should be able to do that I would think

Oh, but the government CAN fire an employee at will for cause. You just need documentation for the employee's failings - and there has to be an explicit regulation that was violated as the cause of termination. Otherwise, if the problem was merely that the employee is as dumb as a stump, you end up with the employment merry-go-round. That's when you WANT to dump a total "doink" of an employee but have no explicit violation documentation, so instead you shuffle that person to a new and different slot somewhere else not in your chain of command. Then s/he becomes someone else's problem. In 28 1/2 years as a Navy contractor, I cannot tell you exactly how many stumps got uprooted in our office - but it was a lot, and not only at a low-level clerk position. At least a couple of "project managers" kept getting involved in useless projects and got sent away. What you HOPE - but it rarely happens - is that the stump gets the message and tries private sector employment. What you sometimes get is that the stump KNOWS s/he is a stump and just puts up with a new position every few years. Meanwhile, we breathe a sigh of relief that another stump has been cleared from the swamp.

 

[Mike Krailo]

It will be hard to view gov employee any other way now Doc. Hopefully, there are tree's in there somewhere.

 

[moke123]

Seems if it can be EO'd into existence, it can be EO'd out.

The Board was established by Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1978, which was codified by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA), Public Law No. 95-454. The CSRA, which became effective January 11, 1979, replaced the Civil Service Commission with three new independent agencies: Office of Personnel Management (OPM), which manages the Federal work force; Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA), which oversees Federal labor-management relations; and, the Board.

 

[Mike Krailo]

So if a contract is made, it cannot be dissolved for any reason? If the president cancels the contract for reasons of foreign policy conflicts, then individual employees really don't have a leg to stand on. It's not individuals being singled out, it's the whole program being potentially canceled. So not sure how any individual worker can do a damn thing about it. No more foreign aid means no more foreign aid. Foreign affairs is the sole domain of the president. I'm sure the congress would be with him on this. We voted for it.

I seem to remember money being appropriated and signed off to give to Ukraine, and Joe decided not to give the money over unless their prosecutor was fired and replaced with someone more acceptable to Biden. Just because it was approved by congress doesn't mean the the president doesn't have the ability to simply pull it back if deems it to be a bad deal. Joe codified that when no democrat blinked twice about that. Shoe's on the other foot now, and the president has domain over the foreign policy field. The judicial branch or lower courts have no business in foreign policy whatsoever. So all of this is moot under new policy of America First and No More Foreign Aid at least until we can hash out what is good for the country and what is harmful.

 

[Isaac]

That seems strange to think that government employees get due process for firing. Due process has nothing to do as a concept with being fired from your job. And none of the rest of us get it

 

[Pat Hartman]

I know this concept is foreign to you; we own most of the debt. It's so sad how little Republicans get on how this really works.

And I guess you are not aware that there is nothing "Federal" about the Federal Reserve System. This is the creature from Jekyll Island.

Yeah - if private companies can fire an employee at will for cause, the government definitely should be able to do that I would think

Except for those pesky unions which are there to keep the political appointees and even the President from firing anyone. So, Trump can't just "fire" people but he can RIF them or reassign them as he shuts down departments.

 

[Isaac]

Historically, the EPA doled out roughly $40 million in grants over five years.

Biden shattered that pattern, pushing a staggering $46 BILLION through the door in his final 30 days

 

[Pat Hartman]

Biden shattered that pattern, pushing a staggering $46 BILLION through the door in his final 30 days

Throwing gold bars off the Titantic

 

[Thales750]

And I guess you are not aware that there is nothing "Federal" about the Federal Reserve System. This is the creature from Jekyll Island.

The Fed saved the world in 2008.

 

[AccessBlaster]

The Fed saved the world in 2008.

You mean saved us from the mess they helped create? Government policies, along with Wall Street greed and regulatory failures, are the reason for the 2008 meltdown.

 

[moke123]

along with Wall Street greed and regulatory failures,

Good reason for musk to get rid of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, right?

 

[Thales750]

Good reason for musk to get rid of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, right?

All money leads to the top.

The people (other than the wacked out ones) thought they were voting in a rooster, it turns out, it was a fox in disguise.

We have put the fox in with the chickens, it's gonna be a long dark night.

 

[Isaac]

Good reason for musk to get rid of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, right?

That bureau had been mostly responsible for implementing random things that were very popular among the people but totally illegal and they had no jurisdiction to do. Like suddenly declaring that there must be a 1.1 click cancellation feature for every website. They don't have the authority to make rules like that and I hope that that's made clearer and clearer by the supreme Court as time goes on

 

[AccessBlaster]

As you earlier said, the Fed is not part of the government.

Nope, but nice try.

 

[moke123]

Like suddenly declaring that there must be a 1.1 click cancellation feature for every website.

Oh, the audacity. I'd much rather have to spend 45 minutes on hold waiting for the next available agent. Only to be told they will transfer me to that dept.

 

[Isaac]

Oh, the audacity. I'd much rather have to spend 45 minutes on hold waiting for the next available agent. Only to be told they will transfer me to that dept.

Sure why not keep going? Why not mandate that every subscription be $9 instead of $20. There are tons of things that I would like them to just declare as if they have executive authority. But that's not how it works. You can't just come up with random requirements that become law when you're an unelected bureaucrat or at least you shouldn't be able to and that's what our supreme court is slowly reshaping

I'm not just concerned about my own personal benefit, I'm concerned with what's legal and constitutional and best for the country

 

[AccessBlaster]

Good reason for musk to get rid of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, right?

From what I can gather:

"The CFPB is funded through the Federal Reserve System, rather than through the congressional appropriations process. However, this funding mechanism has been challenged in court, with critics arguing that it violates the Constitution’s Appropriations Clause, which grants Congress the power to control federal spending."

It appears that only 3-4 government agencies use this unusual funding source.

 

[AccessBlaster]

Oh, the audacity. I'd much rather have to spend 45 minutes on hold waiting for the next available agent. Only to be told they will transfer me to that dept.

Usually I am asked "press #1 for English" only to be transferred to someone from India

 

[Isaac]

From what I can gather:

"The CFPB is funded through the Federal Reserve System, rather than through the congressional appropriations process. However, this funding mechanism has been challenged in court, with critics arguing that it violates the Constitution’s Appropriations Clause, which grants Congress the power to control federal spending."

It appears that only 3-4 government agencies use this unusual funding source.

I heard it was Elizabeth Warren's brainchild so it makes sense that it would be illegal