There shall be weeping , fire in the streets, and forced early retirements

[Plane]

Supercommittee fails: What's next for feds?
?By Camille Tuutti?Nov 23, 2011
 

Federal employees might naturally worry about sequestration, the across-the-board discretionary spending cuts triggered when the special Congressional committee set up to find more deliberately-chosen cuts gave up hope of reaching agreement.

The failure muddles the picture for feds, who have already been the target of some budget-cutting measures, including a two-year pay freeze imposed earlier this year. 

The so-called supercommittee called it quits Nov. 21 after two months of trying to agree on a plan that would cut $1.2 trillion from the federal deficit. Disagreement on the size and makeup of tax increases and spending cuts have been blamed as the main reason that led to the panel’s defeat.

“After months of hard work and intense deliberations, we have come to the conclusion today that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee’s deadline,” the committee’s co-chairmen, Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wa.) and Rep. Jeb Hensarling R-Texas), said in a statement.

The failure to reach a deal will now trigger a process called sequestration -- automatic spending cuts across defense and domestic programs, including Medicare, with the start of January 2013.

Disappointment over the supercommittee’s failure reverberated throughout Washington, from the highest echelons of the executive branch to organizations that represent the interests of the federal workforce. President Barack Obama said the Republicans’ refusal to compromise was “the main stumbling block” that prevented Congress from reaching a deal to further slash the deficit. After the supercommittee announced it had failed, some lawmakers began immediately working on legislation to modify the sequestration process.

The president also vowed he would veto any effort to get rid of the automatic spending cuts, and urged both sides of Congress to find a middle ground.

“The only way these spending cuts will not take place is if Congress gets back to work and agrees on a balanced plan to reduce the deficit by at least $1.2 trillion,” he said. “That’s exactly what they need to do. That’s the job they promised to do. And they've still got a year to figure it out.”

The sweeping spending cuts to agency budgets will not only affect federal employees but all Americans, Patricia Niehaus, president of the Federal Managers Association National, said in a statement.
 
“There is no doubt that if the sequestration process moves forward as intended, not only will federal employees be facing the prospect of furloughs and layoffs, but the taxpayers who rely on needed government services will be left without anywhere to turn,” she said.

More.......

http://fcw.com/articles/2011/11/23/supercommittee-budget-deadline.aspx

[Plane]

Swag: Who has it, what is it?
?By Michael Hardy?Nov 16, 2011
The executive order placing limits on agencies’ ability to provide mobile devices and other technology to federal employees garnered a lot of media coverage, but most mainstream news outlets put the focus on just one aspect of the order: the use of the term "swag."

For those who don't know, swag refers to small items or gifts like the giveaways at trade shows branded with the company's logo. In the context of the executive order, it applies to items that agencies buy with taxpayer money and then give away.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is more at  http://fcw.com/Articles/2011/11/28/BUZZ-executive-order-swag-mobile.aspx?Page=1
.........








“The Peace Corps was one of the few organizations that had a whiff of swag,” Lee wrote. “Stephen Chapman, the public affairs specialist for the mid-Atlantic regional recruiting office, said they give out pens, highlighters and key chains at recruiting events, including career fairs on school campuses.”

"Obama Foodorama" — a blog about White House food initiatives — raised the question of cakes.

Specifically, Eddie Gehman Kohan wrote about a white cake decorated with the Agriculture Department’s logo and a large “150 years.”

“Swag is defined as ‘non-essential items used for promotional purposes, such as clothing, mugs and non-work-related gadgets,’" Kohan wrote. "In theory, cakes like the one above may now be off limits. It was created for Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack's recent visit to Springfield, Ill., to ‘soft launch’ the yearlong 2012 celebration of USDA's 150th anniversary. ... The cake's decoration is USDA's new commemorative logo, which will be on plenty of swag. Which raises the question: Is cake a swaggy ‘non-work-related gadget’?"

The Wall Street Journal highlighted some exceptions to the rule. “Federal Bureau of Investigation and Federal Emergency Management Agency jackets will stay because they are work-related garments,” Carol Lee and Jared Favole wrote. “Performance and recruitment tools for the military also won't be cut, including commemorative military coins that commanders and other top officials hand out.”

On the Washington Post's "In the Loop" blog, Emily Heil emphasized transportation. “President Obama is poised to put the kibosh on spending by agencies on travel, equipment and technology, which not only means we’ll likely see more officials hoofing it across town instead of cabbing, but that there won’t be any agency merch to spread around,” she wrote.

Her colleague Ed O’Keefe, in his "Federal Eye" blog, reported that after a recent Chief Human Capital Officers Council meeting, a reporter observed at least four government-owned vehicles idling outside the meeting location, waiting to drive attendees back to their offices. One official who got into a car was Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry, whose office was just two blocks away.

[Xavier_Onassis]

These imbeciles in Congress are failing miserably to do what they were elected to do.

I blame the Republicans, because they were the most intractable. They need to go over to Grover Norquist's place and drown the miserable creep in his bathtub.

No one elected Grover Effing Norquist.