|
|
 |
|
The
views expressed
on this page are soley those of the author and do not
necessarily
represent the views of County News Online
|
 |
Federal News Radio
Feds face STD
threat
By Mike Causey
August 30, 2016
In the federal government, nearly everything is referred to by
initials. It is not only easier and quicker to use initials, but it
also helps to confuse people outside the agency or government, which
can be useful to people in the know. For example:
In government you don’t fire or layoff people, you RIF them. RIF, of
course, standing for reduction-in-force, which also sounds better.
A LEO isn’t a sign of the zodiac. LEOs are people who are under the law
enforcement officers retirement program.
Get the latest commentaries from Tom Temin! Sign up for the Tom Temin
email alerts!
Paying somebody $25,000 to leave or retire from the government isn’t a
buyout. It’s a VSIP, which those-in-the-know know means voluntary
separation incentive payment. Why say it with one word when you can use
four? Ditto for VERA, which is the shorthand way of letting people
retire sooner than normal. Voluntary Early Retirement Authority. VERA,
get it?
A WIG in government isn’t something you wear. In Uncle Sam lingo, a WIG
is a within-grade (longevity) pay raise. And the beat goes on.
So, with that background., let’s consider your latest STD threat.
STD, in govtalk, stands for Sequestration Threat Detected.
Sequestration is a legislative time-bomb that imposes automatic
spending cuts in so-called “discretionary spending caps” if the House
version of next year’s spending bill win out over the Senate’s. Those
cuts could come when/if Congress passes all the spending bills
individually (highly doubtful) or in some kind of omnibus bill and the
House levels stay in place. The Senate’s version of the bills are below
the discretionary spending caps outlined in the 2015 Bipartisan Budget
Act. What’s more likely to happen is some sort of compromise and an
increase of the discretionary caps.
Although both Republicans and Democrats have used, and also denounced
sequestration, Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward (of Watergate
fame) tracked it back to the White House. In a Feb. 22, 2013 story in
the Washington Post, headlined “Obama’s Sequester Deal-Changer,” which,
the story said, set the legislative stage for “the ugly and largely
irrational federal spending cuts set by law” to begin that week.
Since 2013, Congress and the White House have avoided doing anything
that would trigger sequestration. But it could be a problem — forcing
everything from program cuts, hiring freezes and even shutdowns — in
the fast-approaching 2017 fiscal year.
There is very little feds can do about the potential sequestration
train wreck. An official of a federal management group said, “The hope
is that with the election right around the corner, Congress will do
whatever it takes to avoid anything that would trigger a government
shutdown.” He said he expected yet another CR (continuing resolution)
that would allow agencies to keep spending (and operating) at current
levels.
He noted that CRs “have become the norm in recent years,” as Congress
routinely fails to do one of its basic jobs which is to keep the
government running.
Read this and other articles at Federal News Radio
|
|
|
|
