It’s getting closer. And, I don’t think it’s going to go away. Because a whole bunch of folks think that, in a recession, it’s more important to reduce spending than to keep the economy growing. You’d think that seeing the terrible results of the similar program in Europe would give them pause. But, that also requires one to assume they either care- or understand.
I mean, if someone really cared about balancing the budget, they would start by disallowing all the ridiculous salaries contractors have been accruing at the taxpayers’ expense. You know, those contractors that have lobbied to fire government employees and let them do those jobs cheaper. Oh, wait. That system actually costs more. Oh, well. The Congressional folks who are making these decisions still think the government is the enemy- until they get flooded, hit by tornadoes, or sick. Then, they still curse the government, but demand largesse.
But, back to these rapacious salaries. Believe it or not, there IS a cap on contractors for the Department of Defense. And, it’s set at $ 763,000. By the way, that is more than any government employee is entitled to make- even the President of the US. But, wait, it gets better. Most of these companies are on cost-plus contracts- which means we pay overhead for these salaries. Instead of paying the government employee-manager $ 150K or so!
You know how much money we could save if we limited these contractor salaries to $ 213,000? (I chose that number because it’s the salary for the Speaker of the House, among the highest salaries paid by the government.) More than $ 3 billion. (And, do you know how much we’d save if we stopped farming out all these jobs and used salaried government employees? About $ 10 to $20 billion more!)
Of course, the Professional Services Council (the lobbying group that ‘represents’ the contractors) feel I’m nuts. Because there is no way they can hire “top executive talent” without such egregious salaries. After all, we don’t way to “deny…the government access to the talent it needs.” No, I don’t. I think a regular government employee could do the jobs the government needs to get done- there’s no need to farm these things out and spend mroe money.
But, Congress disagrees. They refused to lower the salary cap to a reasonable level this past December. After all, that would just reduce contractor compensation.
Wait a minute! Aren’t these the same guys who want to slash government spending? I guess, that only is true if the folks feeling the heat are not their campaign contributors. After all, they just decided to freeze the wages for government workers for the third year in a row. (210 Republicans, 41 Democrats voted for this ban; only 10 Republicans and 135 Democrats thought it was wrong.) After all, this salary cap would save $ 11 billion (about as much as cutting out private contractors would save).
By the way, you should know that the “runaway inflation in the total number of federal employees” is another exaggeration. The total number of government employees is about 2.1 million- about the same number it has been since 1965 or so.
Why would the government want to promote from within when they are already so damn inefficient? It would be so counterintuitive.
It is not clear to me that the federal government is as inefficient as we think. Oh, I could point to the IRS, where one office doesn’t communicate with another- but that communication is a project headed by private industry, at overbudget prices and delayed implementation.
And, while we, on the outside, consider Medicare an inefficient system, when compared to private insurers, the delivery of health care is cheaper and more efficient.
Now, if I were to include certain state employees (or DC), then it may start tipping the scales. But, part of that may also be the work rules that are imposed. Maybe it’s time to develop a whole new set of standards…
Hi Roy,
We hear this a lot here in the UK too – that unless you match what someone can get outside government, you’ll never get good enough talent in the government.
While there is a logic to the argument, the Prime Minister earns a tiny wage in comparison to big business, in fact he’s nowhere near even the highest paid public servant.
It’s a balancing act for sure, but in age where costs are being looked at, this issue will always be in the frame!
Cheers, Gordon
The Great Gordino recently posted..Self Improvement – Do You Agree That Words Make A Difference?
Gordon..
I believe your current PM is one that actually wants to expand this practice.
I understood when private industry was claiming it could do a better job. And, here, most Americans thought it could do no worse. But, then, they found out- they could. And, for more costs. Just like the way NATO/US prosecutes the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan- they use private contractors at 100K or more a year instead of troops…
Yes, that saves us money…NOT!
I think they have Paused long enough. Contractors can each put big chunks of change into the election campaigns instead of the small amounts from common folks, therefore social security is a much better target for cuts in spending.We don’t need a company like Monsanto when there is so much BullSh.. piled up in Washington.
Chef William recently posted..Fenugreek
Et voila, Chef William!
The problem is that elected officials owe their jobs to private campaign funders. Most people are under the impression that an election is a democratic way to choose our overlords. But they are wrong. Most people are simply unqualified to be the nation’s human resources managers, and they select their executive base don superficial things that can be manipulated with money.
Basically, as long as any Congress or parliament is concerned with re-election, it will not be democratic (oxymoron at work!)
Much better would to have representatives chosen by straw poll, like juries are (in theory). When it is your turn to serve, it is your turn. Period. No re-election to worry about, just your patriotic duty. And people chosen at random would actually be much, much, much, much (did I mention “much”) more representative (and therefore democratic) than a contest between one moneyed interest and another flinging insults back and forth that do nothing except prove themselves unworthy of managing the affairs of the nation.
The very notion of wanting power should disqualify someone from being handed power.
If there was real democracy, no contractor would earn more than the President or the Speaker (or Prime Minister or any other top national official anywhere).
I would edit those comments, David. The elected officials FEEL they owe their jobs to these lobbyists. (Which is why I am against lobbyists.) It’s also why Continuum is less sci fi and more a warning about our lives and where they are going…
But, I certainly agree with your last sentence!!!
Roy,
All this makes me want to grind my teeth! Argggggh! (There. I did it, but I don’t feel any better.) Also, a nameless public figure the other day, whom I heard saying something to the effect that benefits to the disabled and to the poor would have to be cut . . . EVERYBODY knows how much waste and corruption there is in government. And I’ve not heard one word about making attempts to cut that stuff. Argh! Maybe, Roy, you should go to Wash D.C. and tell them a thing or two. (Have you seen the movie “Dave”?)
Amy recently posted..A Green Smoothie is the answer!
Amy-
You need to have something IN your mouth when you grind them- like some report saying this is not a big deal :-).
I do go to DC, Amy, and I make my points- the problem is that I can’t make my points to those that think the TP is not toilet paper- but some miraculously smart coalition. (This is when I also say, “They vote? How do they make informed decisions?”