The Government Shutdown Countdown Lowdown MEGATHREAD

[derspiess]

Oh, so they'll use the default as an excuse to fire everybody and start arming China instead.  Bummer.

  They're not Bill Clinton.

[Queequeg]

Also the righties I follow are quite excited about a primary challenge to Thad Cochran. Anyone know what he's done to offend the right?

Are we talking twitter feeds and writers you follow?

[Sheilbh]

Also the righties I follow are quite excited about a primary challenge to Thad Cochran. Anyone know what he's done to offend the right?

Are we talking twitter feeds and writers you follow?

Yep.

[fhdz]

Cal had a supply of Ammo but he left his in a bucket of water.

MAH SHOOTY THINGYS

Wrong.  It's in my nightstand.  Hundreds and hundreds of rounds of it.

MAH LUBRICANT

[Queequeg]

Also the righties I follow are quite excited about a primary challenge to Thad Cochran. Anyone know what he's done to offend the right?

Are we talking twitter feeds and writers you follow?

Yep.

This seems like such a passionate interest of yours that I didn't write off the possibility that you had personal relationships with actual Conservative honchos just to satiate intellectual passion on subject.

[Sheilbh]

No.

I've ended up getting into Twitter conversations with a few though

[Syt]

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/10/republicans-say-they-want-to-cut-staffers-pay-heres-how-little-those-staffers-make-today/280588/

Republicans Say They Want to Cut Staffers' Pay: Here's How Little Those Staffers Make, Today

As a condition for reopening the government and possibly averting a debt default, House Republicans want to hand Congressional staff a massive pay cut by eliminating their health insurance subsidies. So this seems like a good time to ask: Could Hill workers afford a massive pay cut?

Hardly. MSNBC's Ned Resnikoff points out that inflation adjusted pay has been mostly stagnant in Hill offices for years, with most staffers earning somewhere in the range of $30,00o to $60,000. According to a 2010 report by the Sunlight Foundation, which produced the chart below, only chiefs of staff, legislative directors, and schedulers have seen their salary go up notably since 1990.



There are two big concerns here: class and competency. As Resnikoff noted on Twitter, the less Congress pays it staff, the harder it will be to work there for anybody who isn't independently wealthy. It's bad enough that getting a job on the Hill unofficially requires a stint as an unpaid intern. Just imagine if toiling there meant paying for your own health plan out of pocket.

Which brings us to the second issue: brain drain. Congress already has a revolving door problem, and without some kind of drastic change in the law, always will. But making pay and benefits even stingier is only going to encourage more staffers to find cushy jobs at trade associations and lobby shops. And by cushy, I really mean jobs that pay them something close to what they're worth. 

[MadImmortalMan]

If you're a congressman, one of 535, why the fuck do you need a legislative director or a chief of staff? Wouldn't a secretary and an IT dude in each office be enough?



***Seriously, I don't know.

[Admiral Yi]

The LD is the guy who tells you how to vote.

[grumbler]

Oh, so they'll use the default as an excuse to fire everybody and start arming China instead.  Bummer.

  They're not Bill Clinton.

Worse.  They're Ollie North. 

[grumbler]

If you're a congressman, one of 535, why the fuck do you need a legislative director or a chief of staff? Wouldn't a secretary and an IT dude in each office be enough?

That woudl probably be enough for the secondary job, but the primary job of a congressman is to run for re-election.  You need lots of staff people telling constituents what a great guy you are in order to get re-elected, because otherwise voters look at the shitty job you are doing and fire you.

[Caliga]

I'm ok with them not making a lot.  Anybody who would choose a career in politics is seriously disturbed, and crazy people with money are dangerous.

[CountDeMoney]

Of course you're OK with anybody not making a lot.  You're HR.

[KRonn]

Proposal is that the legislative staff members would have to pay under the ACA the same as everyone else. I don't think that's such a bad thing to ask. Another one rejected by the Dems was that the government, under the originally passed ACA law, confirms income levels before individuals can score Obamacare subsidies. These don't seem so onerous. I can see them fighting over the legislative health care perks but even that is bad policy. Many taxpayers are taking a cut with the ACA.

[Viking]

The LD is the guy who tells you how to vote.

In which case the LD should be paying you, not the other way round.