Candidates want to be President so they Can Have Your Job?

The 2008 presidential candidates are beginning to call for "government reform" and "cleaning up Washington." That means federal employees and government contractors will likely get caught in the crossfire.

Candidate’s favorite targets are to “downsize government”, “end waste and fraud”, “get tough on procurement” and the general tightening of programs to help tax dollars go farther.

Many of the 2008 candidate’s promises lack specifics at this early point of the campaign, so there is no way of yet knowing which agencies would bear the brunt of cutbacks. The winner will, however, no doubt try to shake up the government.

Al Gore, when vice president was in charge of “reinventing government” during the Clinton administration which offered cash buyouts to encourage feral employees to leave the payroll. President Bush stated early and often he wanted to cut 50% of all federal jobs. His “presidential management agenda” has also directed federal agencies to run “competitive sourcing” competitions to contract out federal employee jobs.

Given the large number of federal employees who are retiring soon, it is easier to suggest now is a good time to downsize.

Republican Rudy Giuliani would cut about 20 percent of the federal workforce thru attrition. "How about we try something new? How about we not replace half of those positions?" Giuliani, the former New York mayor, said recently in Tuscaloosa, Ala. He projects that 42 percent of federal employees will retire over the next 10 years. Not filling half of those jobs would save about $20 billion a year, Giuliani says.

Former Massachusetts governor, Republican Mitt Romney said at a debate earlier this month, “Washington is broken”. “The government's retirement wave means we can reduce the employment there, but more importantly, go through all the agencies, all the departments, all the programs and cut out the unnecessary and the wasteful," he said.

Arizona Senator, Republican John McCain said, federal retirements represent "an opportunity to reorganize the entire federal workforce." That means streamlining to make government smaller, less expensive and adjusting salary scales "to attract the finest public servants," he said.

Earlier this month in Oklahoma, McCain said, "The civil service has strayed from its reformist roots and has mutated into a no-accountability zone, where employment is treated as an entitlement, good performance as an option and accountability as someone else's problem." McCain said it’s time to "demand high standards of behavior" and "not let good workers be crippled by the fine print of the latest union contract."

Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton would cut 500,000 government contracting jobs.
Clinton would target federal contract jobs for cuts that she claims would save $10 billion to $18 billion a year. "Some contract employees cost twice as much as comparable federal workers. They're often less accountable and less competent," she said in a speech last month.

Clinton proposes a U.S. Public Service Academy, an undergraduate college modeled after the military service academies to attract a new generation to the government. The academy could help the government find replacements for retirees, she said.

"Many young people are ready, willing and able to answer the call to serve," Clinton said. "But they often graduate from college with so much debt that they can't imagine going into a public-service career." The academy which would provide a free education in exchange for five years of federal service "will open the doors much more widely for young people who want to serve their country," she said.

Former senator John Edwards, a Democratic candidate, pledges to rebuild the military and root out waste and cronyism in the Pentagon, according to his Web site.

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) says he hopes to empower citizens to crack down on government waste by putting information about federal grants, contracts, loans and earmarks online.

Feisty GOP Primary Debate

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani won the strongest applause at Tuesday night's Republican primary debate when he lashed out at Texas Rep. Ron Paul for suggesting that the United States' policy invited the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

"They attack us because we've been over there. We've been bombing Iraq for 10 years. ... We've been in the Middle East," Paul said in explaining his opposition to going to war in Iraq.

"Right now, we're building an embassy in Iraq that is bigger than the Vatican. We're building 14 permanent bases. What would we say here if China was doing this in our country or in the Gulf of Mexico? We would be objecting.

Finally, Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo managed to get in his two cents when he responded to a question saying that reducing U.S. dependence on petroleum would not only help with global warming, but is a national security issue.

Low Blows and High Fives
The debate, held at the University of South Carolina's Koger Center for the Arts in Columbia, S.C., had some feisty moments as the Republican primary candidates sought to distinguish themselves in a crowded field. Tancredo took another shot at fellow GOP candidates when he said he is surprised at the number of conversions toward his tough position on illegal immigration as well as abortion and gun control.

"I trust those conversions when they happen on the road to Damascus and not on the road to Des Moines," he said.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee also was able to slip in a criticism of the congressional members at the debate, saying Congress has "spent money like John Edwards at a beauty shop," a slam on the Democratic presidential candidate who earned unwanted scrutiny for spending $400 of campaign money on a haircut.

It was a one-up to Arizona Sen. John McCain who had quipped earlier that he has spoken with sailors who take offense at being accused of ever being so drunk as to spend as much as Congress.

"We didn't lose the 2006 election because of the war in Iraq. We lost it because we in the Republican Party came to Washington to change government, and government changed us," McCain said. "We let spending go out of control. We spent money like a drunken sailor. Although I never knew a sailor — drunk or sober — with the imagination of my colleagues."

Former Virginia Gov. Jim Gilmore tried to attract some attention by calling out so-called conservatives for taking non-conservative positions. Prodded to name names, Gilmore referred to "Rudy McRomney," combining the names of McCain, Giuliani and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Gilmore cited Giuliani's position on abortion rights, Huckabee's decision to raise taxes in Arkansas and Romney's mandate requiring universal health care while he served as the governor of Massachusetts.

"Did I get left out?" McCain asked to laughter. "I'll come back," Gilmore retorted. Giuliani, however, took the accusation in stride.

"First of all, I think 'Rudy McRomney' wouldn't make a bad ticket, and I like the order," he said before scolding Gimore. "Republicans should be uniting to make certain that what the liberal media is talking about — our inevitable defeat — doesn't happen."

"It's a form of flattery to be attacked but I wish my name would get in the moniker. ... I could use the bump," Huckabee said, adding that he doesn't apologize for getting 94 tax decreases while being a Republican governor in a Democratic state, even though he raised gasoline taxes in his state.

"We raised gasoline taxes in my state to build a road program that we desperately needed. But 80 percent of the people of my state voted for it," he said. "Do I apologize for going along with what 80 percent of the people of my state supported? No."

Serious Issues, Serious Answers
All the candidates at Tuesday night's debate shared one common agenda: They wanted to get out of the question-and-answer session unscathed and hopefully in a better position than when they started.

Much of the attacks were on McCain. The Arizona senator was hit for his positions on immigration, campaign finance and government spending, among other items.

McCain got his opportunity to counterattack later with a cutting barb at Romney. "I have not changed my position on even-numbered years or changed because of the different offices that I may be running for." McCain sought to solidify his position as the frontrunner in the South Carolina polls by saying he is willing to be the last man standing in favor of war.

Taking a tough stance on Iraq, former Wisconsin Gov. and former Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson said he wants to hold the government accountable by letting the Iraq parliament vote on whether U.S. troops should remain.

But Kansas Sen. Sen. Sam Brownback said the way the war is being conducted is not sustainable. In an appeal to bipartisanship, Brownback said that the parties in the United States need to pull together at home to win in Iraq.

"We will win if we can pull together — and we can win the war," he said. "It's difficult for a democracy, particularly in the United States, for us to win with one party for the war and one party against the war."

• Did You Miss the Live Broadcast? Click Here to Watch the Entire Debate on FOXNews.com.

Republican Debate Tonight

Watch live coverage of the First-in-the-South Republican Party Presidential Candidate debate on FOX News Channel and FOXNews.com on Tuesday, May 15, at 9 p.m. EDT.

Click here to learn how to send your debate questions to the GOP 2008 presidential candidates.

Giuliani's Plan to Cut Federal Employees

Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani in a speech to the Heritage Foundation on May 7th, said he would use attrition to cut more than 20 percent of federal civilian employees and wants an outright cut in non-defense spending.

"The United States government right now needs an across-the-board spending decrease," the former New York mayor told the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank in Washington, DC.

Mr. Giuliani has went even further than former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who has proposed limiting non-defense discretionary spending increases to 1 percent less than inflation. Giuliani also vowed to continue the Bush tax cuts and to veto spending bills that include pork-barrel projects without listing their sponsor or purpose. Mr. Giuliani said he wouldn’t “exclude anything” in his across-the-board cuts, except for defense spending, which he said must be increased because the nation is at war.

The former New York City mayor said part of the problem with spending in Washington is people use the wrong words to try to confuse the decisions. He said politicians should stop using phrases such as "nondiscretionary spending," to describe spending on entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare, which are set by funding formulas and have proved difficult for Congress to trim.

"If I can convince you that 60 percent of the budget is nondiscretionary, then I don't have to do anything about it. The reality is that the entire budget is discretionary."

He coupled his economic message with his push for staying "on offense" in the war against terrorists and said "Democrats want to step back" on many of the key tools, including the USA Patriot Act, electronic surveillance and tough interrogation techniques.

“You step back on all of that, and you're back where we were in the 1990s -- in denial about the threat," he said.

As for military spending, he lamented the fact that it has fallen to 4.1 percent of the nation's gross domestic product, compared with 6.2 percent under President Reagan.

His pledge to trim the federal work force relies on attrition. He said 42 percent of the federal civilian work force is due to retire during the next two presidential terms, which would run from 2009 through 2017. Mr. Giuliani proposes filling only half of those jobs.
He claims his plan to reduce the federal workforce will cut costs by $70 billion a year.

"The challenge will be, of course, to convince the Democrats that there's such a thing as a nonessential government employee," he said.

America is not purple...

If anyone thinks there is little difference between Republicans and Democrats, last Thursday’s Republican debate was a reminder of the stark differences that still divide our country. The GOP candidates were so much more conservative in tone and content than last week’s Democratic contenders that we should expect another divisive general election.

For the most part, the contenders in the first GOP showdown of the 2008 presidential campaign played it safe and stuck to their well-rehearsed scripts. They jockeyed for Reagan’s mantle—without engaging in much meaningful discussion of what parts of that legacy they liked, and what parts they didn’t. They slammed President Bush for his conduct of the Iraq War—but were careful not to otherwise distance themselves too much from the leader of their party. And they barely criticized each other, thus honoring Reagan’s fabled 11th commandment that Republicans should not to speak ill of one another. But in a debate featuring 10 candidates—seven of whom are barely known to the American public—the lack of combat didn’t do much to help clarify voters’ choices.

Republicans were much more hawkish on matters of war and peace. A week ago, Hillary Clinton got praised from pundits for promising “retaliation” against any power that attacks two American cities. Last Thursday, Romney tried to reclaim ground he lost in recent comments on Osama bin Laden, when he insisted that it wasn’t worth moving “heaven and earth” to search for just one man. “He’s going to pay, and he will die,” Romney declared in the debate.

McCain tried to top that, in perhaps one of the night’s stranger moments. “We’ll capture him[ bin Laden]. We will bring him to justice,” McCain vowed, gesticulating forcefully and growing more intense by the second. “I will follow him to the gates of hell.” Evidently proud of his answer, he then undercut the power of the moment with a staged and awkward grin.

Those proclamations are a far cry from Obama’s promise to confront terrorist attacks by focusing on first responders and studying the lessons of Hurricane relief to take care of the displaced and injured.

Republicans also struck a tougher tone against illegal immigrants and abortion. The Democratic field all defended the practice of partial birth abortion, while Republicans were overwhelmingly pro-life. That may be why Rudy Giuliani’s worst moment for Republican voters was when he said overturning Roe v. Wade would be “okay.” And not overturning it would be “okay.” Okay? Good grief, he needs to get a pithy comeback on abortion and repeat it several hundred times.

Last Thursday’s debate also showed huge differences between the reporters who cover such events and Republican voters who follow campaigns. It’s not a shock to anyone that most journalists covering D.C. politics relate to Democratic views much more than those held by Republicans. Most reporters do a good job of putting their biases in check, but many are tone deaf when figuring out why Republican primary voters would embrace a guy like Mitt Romney who is now pro-life, pro-family and pro-everything-that-evangelical-voters-could-want-him-to-be.

Mitt Romney carried the mantle of Reagan off the stage last week. Like Romney, the 40th president was derided as a right-wing nut. The greatest Reagan moment for the former Massachusetts governor came when he was asked what he hated most about America.

“Clueless.” “After all these years and all those Republican victories, the press still doesn’t get it.”

But Romney does, and he delivered an answer that would have made most reporters (and Democratic candidates) wince. It was an unapologetically delivered sermon on American Exceptionalism. The same sort of speech that made media elites roll their eyes at Ronald Reagan while American voters were electing him in landslide margins.

Most media analysts seemed to downplay Romney’s victory, and also overlooked John McCain’s stumbles. Reporters gave his uneven performance a little notice. GOP voters may not be so forgiving. I’m not saying that Romney is Reagan and I’m not predicting the collapse of John McCain’s campaign. But there were clear winners and losers in last Thursday’s contest. Among those Red State Republicans (who will elect their party’s next nominee), Romney won while McCain and Giuliani failed to meet expectations.

America is not purple. It is very red and it is very blue.

The debate was broadcast nationally by MSNBC. If you missed the debate, you can view it here.After you have watched the debate or reviewed the highlights, you can also rate the candidates and see how others have rated them.

Let the Games, er... Debates begin...

The 2008 Campaign for the President is well under way. Candidates from both parties have raised HUGE sums of money much earlier than in the past, and the process is quickly accelerating.

The first Democratic Presidential debate was held last Thursday (April 26th) At South Carolina State University in Orangeburg, South Carolina. The debate featured Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Chris Dodd, John Edwards, Mike Gravel, Dennis Kucinich, Barack Obama, and Bill Richardson. It was moderated by “NBC Nightly News” Anchor and Managing Editor Brian Williams. The debate was broadcast throughout South Carolina, and nationally by MSNBC. If you missed the debate, you can view it here.

After you have watched the debate or reviewed the highlights, you can also rate the candidates and see how others have rated them.

MSNBC Election Anchor Chris Matthews will moderate the Reagan Library’s GOP debate on May 3rd, in partnership with politico.com.

The Ronald Reagan Library announced that Sam Brownback, Jim Gilmore, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, John McCain, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo and Tommy Thompson are all confirmed to attend the Library’s debate on May 3rd. The debate will take place at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, and will air live on MSNBC from 8:00 to 9:30 pm (ET) and stream live on MSNBC.com and politico.com and will include audience questions gathered on politico.com.

Who do you think is the best candidate for federal employees? Leave your comment, and let’s start our own debate. A debate on who would be the best ‘next President of the United States’ for federal employees.

Introducing..... FEPN

Federal Employee Political News (FEPN) is a companion to the web log Federal Employee Legislative News (FELN). Just like its name implies, FELN will focus on legislative news in Congress effecting federal employees while this blog will focus on the political side of what's happening in Washington and around the country. Here we will be able to discuss politics as it affects federal employees more freely than we can in the workplace.

Please use this site as a reference source and as a portal to other sites using the links at the right of this post. You will find links to political parties, candidates, and other political organizations. You will also find links to videos related to Presidential candidates, both positive and negative and even comical videos.

I am sure you can find this site useful and ask you to return frequently and participate with your comments, suggestions and contributions.