Several observers termed the shutdown that separated 800,000
federal workers from their jobs on Tuesday a “mess.” A few called it a
“debacle.” I think stronger language might be in order to describe what a small
group of Tea Party demagogues in Congress has foisted on our country.
In addition to ruining the lives of a lot of innocent
people, many already suffering financially from the effects of a funding
sequester, what the ultra-right wingers have done will waste vast amounts of our
tax money and could be downright dangerous for many of us.
The government shut down briefly several times during my
quarter century of employment with the U.S. Forest Service. In addition, a
major unit merger advertised as a cost-saving measure seriously affected my
work and the work of those around me. It ought to be obvious that when
employees are engaged in making contingency plans for big changes in their
organization, or carrying them out, they have little time to do the normal work
they are paid to do. That work has to be done some time. Often, catching up
after order is restored involves hiring additional employees or paying
contractors. Each day the current shutdown continues will cost us billions of
scarce tax dollars to be paid in the future.
Others have thoroughly discussed the huge negative impact on
our still-fragile economy of abruptly canceling the wages of 800,000 people and
suspending contract work that pumps mega dollars into private firms. Tying up
federal funds also has a ripple-down effect that damages important state and local
government activities
YOU are nonessential. (well, maybe) |
Far scarier than economic consequences are risks to public health
and safety inherent in the shutdown. Despite congressional exemptions to keep
military and some other categories of employees on the job, there are risks in
the present situation. Some result from the complexities of deciding precisely
which employees are essential. Even when that exercise seems straightforward,
it often is not.
For example, the Forest Service contingency plan for the
shutdown, issued on September 20, said, “This plan assumes some Agency
activities will continue that are essential to protect life and property. . ."
The first activity listed is “Fire Suppression including
fire fighters and all necessary equipment costs . . .”
Sounds like an easy plan to carry out. But what seems a no
brainer is not--a whole lot of difficult judgments are involved. They have to
do with the nature of the fire suppression organization.
The firefighting organization is a combination of a small
number of full-time professionals, a larger number of Forest Service people who
have other full-time jobs and who work on fire problems only as needed, and an
even larger number of contractors and part-time employees. Exactly who is
essential can be a bit mysterious.
Consider this possibility. A relatively new full-time
employee, let’s call her Josephine, works at a low-level purchasing job in a small
unit. Prioritizing the unit’s work
indicates the best course of action is to furlough Josephine as “nonessential.”
Remaining employees with more experience could carry out the most important
unit activities.
However, Josephine has completed some special procurement
training and done satisfactory work when called to help handle logistics on a major
forest fire. As a qualified fire support person, she could be called away from
her normal job for fire duty, but it is impossible to predict when that might
happen, or if it might happen over a period of weeks or months, or possibly even
years.
Is Josephine “nonessential” because of her primary job, or
“essential” because of fire assignments that may, or may not, materialize? How
that seemingly small decision is made could be a factor in putting lives or
property at risk.
In another agency, reports of shutdown effects say “routine food inspections have been suspended.” Sounds somewhat innocent, but
think about it. Do you want chances taken with the quality of the food you eat?
What god-like person decides which food inspections are routine, and which are
“essential"?
And yesterday, James Clapper, Director of National
Intelligence, told a Senate committee that he could not guarantee our national
safety because 70 percent of our intelligence community has been furloughed.
Clapper pointed out that spies who are poorly paid, or paid not at all, tend to
switch sides in the world of espionage. Imagine that. Apparently the Tea Party
crowd in Congress could not.
The federal government shutdown is shaping up to be much
more than a mess or a debacle. It’s looking a lot like a full-blown disaster.
4 comments:
Thanks for your excellent analysis of this insanity. Every damned member who supported this should be booted from office!
I'm in full agreement, Dick. The idea that we can separate people's work into "essential" and "nonessential" categories is another one of those aberrations introduced by politicians desperately trying to justify their positions.
As you point out, to "not fund" something because you've failed to agree on a fiscal plan will ALWAYS mean that something isn't getting done; that backlogs will result; and that the process of catching up is going to mean things have been missed, and other things will be done in a halfway manner.
Throw the rascals out!
As the terms essential and nonessential are discarded these days, perhaps what we should ask is why would you ever hire a nonessential person? You would not of course. Federal workers are not the problem. Wacko birds are. Good analysis.
I really respect our Democratic representative, Tulsi Gabbard who says she'll send her paycheck back to the Treasury for the duration of the shut down.
I need to check and see if our Tripler Army hospital is open because we do have an appointment coming up. A lot of food at the commissary is going to waste. It's pathetic!
Post a Comment