Had there been a real and unresolved impasse that caused a government shutdown, we are told that the shutdown would have been a partial one and that "essential government operations" would have continued.
In the absence of the enactment of appropriation legislation, how would the "essential operations" have been funded?
Also, given the government's dire financial situation, why is it not cutting back and funding only "essential operations" anyway?
Our so-called new media have reported that some 800,000 federal employees would have been furloughed had the shutdown occurred. Since the government has about 2,000,000 civilian employees, this means that roughly 60 % of the government's operations would have continued, unaffected by the so-called shutdown while a hardly noticeable 40 % would have been curtailed or halted. Doesn't seem all that scary or such a big deal.
The political deal that avoided a governmental shutdown was reached late Thursday night in the same way that most governmental decisions are made -- in secret and under the cover of darkness. Is the political horse trading that takes place really so ugly that they cannot stand the light of day or exposure to the nation's citizens? I guess that to ask the question is to answer it.
No comments:
Post a Comment