Bush: Fedl Pay Raises Over 2% Would Jeopardize Terror War

Giving civilian federal workers a pay raise of more than 2% next year would jeopardize the war on terrorism, President George W. Bush said Wednesday.

In a letter to congressional leaders, Bush reiterated his support for giving the nation's 1.8 million federal workers the 2% raise he outlined in his 2004 budget proposal.

But a House appropriations subcommittee has included a 4.1% raise in its version of the legislation. Military pay is not affected.

"Such cost increases would threaten our efforts against terrorism or force deep cuts in discretionary spending or federal employment to stay within budget, " Bush wrote.

http://news.nasdaq.com/news/newsStory.aspx?&cpath=20030827\ACQDJON200308271947DOWJONESDJONLINE000926.htm

Those kids might learn something-- like how to dodge the Upcoming DRAFT (My it getting windy in here)

Because all those poor grandmothers collecting dividends deserve every penny of their millions.

don't pay the workers or the warriors a penny
more to buy their bread, but do give really
big tax breaks for the very rich.

What a jerk of an imitation of a real pResident
smirkboy is.

I recently read that the rethugs want to make
over the postal service. They want it to more
closely match the private sector in pay, they
want to double and triple (and more) the pay
of the managers and shrink the pay of regular
workers. I wonder how many postal workers are
going to vote republican next time?

"postal" when they find out.

And yes, I do believe that the US needs to rebuild Iraq...afterall, the US bombed it to pieces and the damage was done by the US, not Saddam. The Iraqis had free health care, free education (among the best in the ME), water and electricity until we started bombing them in 1991. After 12 years of bombing, what does anyone expect? However, why should the taxpayers pay for building Iraq at the expense of our own infrastructure and social services? This is the personal bill of Bush Sr. and Bush II with a hefty dose of Bill Clinton thrown in.

The incompetence of this administration is amazing. We will not overcome this until we take the ring out our noses by which Israel is leading our government.

now that you mention it there is something
wrong with a pResident that does sooo
much for foreigners and so little for his
own people.

How long ago was that the all the political appointees got these huge bonus's-even the ones doing a poor job?? Not long...I hope these fed workers remember the pay cuts when they vote in 04.

"Jeopardize Terror War" is wealthyfare...

And none of those pesky, troublesome unions to consider this time. :eyes:

Got that, civil servants?

...from gas station owners I worked for while in college.

"It would jeopardize the War on Terror."

Lame.

Yep, I think that's the not-so-subtle message really being sent by the WH. As long as George has his "war on terror" (more like "war on terra") we shouldn't complain about a lack of funding for schools or health care, workers' rights to benefits or pay increases (which, naturally, paints unions as the enemy in Georgie's war on terror), or even opening public lands and Arctic wildlife refuges to oil and gas drilling. Any opposition to PNAC's plans will be painted as "unpatriotic".

When will the American people WAKE THE HELL UP!!

Congress is great about linking military and civilian cost-of-living increases (as they should be). Bush is, once again, trying to fund his good ol' boys' club with middle class money....

Civil service works eight hour days and gets overtime pay. In the military they can work you all day long with zero overtime pay. In the military they can send you to a war zone and KEEP you there. In the military they can send you overseas without your family for a year or more on a remote tour(e.g., Korea). You can leave the civil service any time you want, not so the military. Military is subject to the UCMJ, civil service is not. Those are just some examples of why I see no problem with the military getting a larger pay raise than the civila service this year. Make the civil service live by the same rules as the military, THEM you can link their pay raiseto the military's pay raise.

When you join the military, you know the conditions. It's a CHOICE. I don't feel that the choice merits special conditions.

Many civilian government workers are paid less than their private-sector counterparts. Again, they made that choice. They don't deserve special priviledges either.

I believe that a cost of living increase (which is what we're talking about) should be the same for all government employees, military or civilian.

to the same increase.

When you join the military, you know the conditions. It's a CHOICE. I don't feel that the choice merits special conditions.

Many civilian government workers are paid less than their private-sector counterparts. Again, they made that choice. They don't deserve special priviledges either.

I believe that a cost of living increase (which is what we're talking about) should be the same for all government employees, military or civilian.

.

I hear they pay very well.

You have to destabilize governments, get shot at, get your house blown up etc.

and wait it out in Kuwait if it gets a little dicey.

What an ass!!!

It's playing really thin.

"Such cost increases would threaten our efforts against terrorism or force deep cuts in discretionary spending or federal
employment to stay within budget, " Bush wrote.


What a steaming pile of Horsecheney. If Junior was so concerned about "staying in budget" (Laughing uproariously at that one since just today the IMF branded us a delinquent banana republic thanks to Junior's record deficits ) to fund the "war on terruh" then he would find the estimated 1.1 trillion dollars that the Pentagon cannot account for. Hell this bunch of delinquent corporate thieves can't even tell accurately how much they are spending weekly in Iraq, so their professed concern for the budget is as ludicrous as Willie Sutton worrying about the efficacy of bank security.

STAY WITHIN BUDGET??????????????????

Since when does that FI give a fat rat's ass about staying with the budget???????

:dem:

Landslide! :D

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/industry.asp?txt=P04&cycle=2004

Apparently, it's just another Repuke effort to stick it to their political enemies.

plan. Bankrupt the United States. Take over the Middle East oil. The rich get richer -- the poor get poorer. Ive heard that phrase all of my life. You'd think Americans would "get it" by now.

everybody sacrifices except for the rich.
30 Billion more needed to rebuild Iraq.
A year to go before the election and so many more toes to step on.

That's all the Mad Chimp ever thinks about. Gee, and who's reaping billions from the WoT? Why, Haliburton, of course.

These neocons make me ill.

Any federal workers on the board care to comment? This seems like a bad move for someone trying to win votes.

Obviously, I wasn't going to vote for him before, but now...two percent? Two percent? That's borderline insulting, not to mention barely keeping up with cost of living increases. He just keeps revising downward--last year, as I recall, he chopped it down to something like 3.1 percent.

I hope this is what finally wakes up the rabid right-winger across the hall with the picture of Bush and Cheney in her office, but I'm not holding my breath...

get NOTHING. If it's so insulting, quit and fine a job that offers a bigger pay raise.

I feel for them. I do. Up until about a year ago, I was one of them. But try to stay focused on the topic--which part of "Bush is about to slash your yearly cost-of-living increase in order to pay for his bullshit war" should federal workers not find insulting?

I appreciate having a job in this economy. I don't appreciate having a monkey-faced alcoholic who can barely string two coherent words together telling me that he needs even more of my money to continue fighting a war that shouldn't have been fought in the first place.

I really don't. I hate to even think, but I am beginning to believe that Mr. * is being somewhat disingenuous. There was money for tax cuts, there was money for wars that that large focus group - the American public said they didn't want and there is money for any other right wing-ish ideal. Why not just print a little more of that funny money and give these Fed workers a raise that'll come a tad closer to meeting cost of living. It seems it should be a standard tenant that you shouldn't have a pay reduction as you advance in seniority.

And all this in the days before Labor Day - geez, if I didn't know better I would think that * is making a pointed stick at those largely Dem voters in the Fed.

The republicans INSIST that not implementing the promised tax cuts is raising taxes. Using the republican's own logic, bush* is SLASHING WAGES for MILLIONS of MIDDLE CLASS WORKERS!!!

:puke::puke::puke::puke::puke::puke:

do for the war on terror? I feel like I'm missing something here...

President Bush said granting them the full raises would cost about $11 billion more than he had proposed in his budget.

. . .

President Bush's decision to limit raises - his second - is another blow to the civilian federal work force, which is the target of sweeping changes the administration is making to the government bureaucracy.

. . .

While limiting raises for federal workers, the White House two years ago restored cash bonuses for some 2,100 political appointees at federal agencies. The Clinton administration had stopped the practice after concluding the first Bush administration used the system to reward political cronies with nearly $400,000 before leaving office.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/08/28/politics/main570505.shtml

The federal government will spend more than $2.4 trillion next year and $11 billion is going to jeopardize the War on Terra?

No wait, that's already in process.


Fair & Balanced Buttons — The Cronus Connection