Fun with Government Acronyms!

Sep 24, 2023 10:20 PM

cruelchaarms

Views

91993

Likes

1908

Dislikes

33

#government #shutdown

They need to give the staffer who came up with this a raise. #mccarthy #handleyourshitdown

Woo Minnesota!

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Agreed! Pass it!

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Those cunts shouldn’t get healthcare either during a shutdown. Yeah, lives are the line when you pull this shit, yours should be too

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Asked to work without a paycheck? I'd quit and find a new job the first time they tried that shit. Do nothing for anyone for free. Unless it's friends and family and has nothing to do with your self employment.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Bills that attack lawmakers' paychecks FEEL like justice, but think about what it would actually do. It just means that the richest lawmakers can do what they want, and the poorest lawmakers have to agree.

2 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

Unfortunately, the only people this will affect are those members who are probably fighting to stop the shutdown. The rich don't care. The salary is just extra fluff. They probably don't even know how much it is.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I would vote for that based on the impressive acronym.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

You think they care about their paychecks when they make millions on other things?

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It is sign of the times that nobody believes that this will pass into law.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Another furlough? Can someone just conquer us already? We know we suck. Just get this garbage over with.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm so glad I keep voting her back into office.

2 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Can the TSA strike? Like, if they were asked to work without pay, could they all just say "nope." And when air travel is shot to shit for a week, they get what they want?

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They should be able to but IIRC are forbidden from doing so because national security or whatever. What they can do and have done is stage work-to-rule actions. Every person in line gets asked *every* single question in the book, etc.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This is a bad idea. Wealthy representatives who are voting to shut down will be fine, non-wealthy representatives who are voting responsibly will suffer.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

How about freezing access to all financial instruments, institutions, and assistance.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Defeating this bill was not the intention of the 27th Amendment, but it probably has that effect.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Oh honey... they don't make their money from their congressional salary...

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Wouldn't do anything, as most members of Congress are independently wealthy. You would only be harming people like AOC with this. This is why we provide salaries for government employees, so they don't feel compelled to be bribed elsewhere.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Speaking of which, last year or before AOC did attempt to target the "sponsorship" funds and independent wealth gains and speak very openly about the system and how fked up it was. People tried to say it was more nuanced than that but after all the "nuance" it came down to the same thing but with extra steps.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As long as it only affects the pay of those in the majority at the time of shutdown. This could easily be weaponized against those representatives from more proletariat backgrounds who do not have independent wealth to fall back on.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's a great idea, but Republican's make their money off of bribes -oh, sorry, "lobbying." So withholding their paychecks isn't gonna matter

2 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 8

I wish people understood that converting lobbying money into the politician's pocket is 1) not particularly easy to do 2) hugely unpopular with voters if they get caught and 3) totally criminal. Pretending lobby money goes right into their pocket is what normalizes it and lets them get away with it when it does happen.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Withhold medical insurance. Let them explain the gap in coverage.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Though they have infinite greed. They'd kill their mothers barehanded for $0.25. Any pay lost would enrage them.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

would be more effective to require that, if a new budget isn't passed, the old one continues each month. THEN you can start thinking about how to fine members of congress that are blocking it.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

...because it's not all of them. it's not even all republicans, at this point.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

well they only need 5 to pass something. so if they can't get 5 votes then yeah, it is all republicans. or they are all willing to allow it.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Right, the Republicans in the house could pass a clean CR tomorrow with as many Democratic votes as they need. They refuse because they'd rather burn it all down than stand up to the so-called crazy caucus.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

you can't vote on something that's not put up for a vote. further, this assumes that "something" is all that's needed.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

okay and why is it not put up for a vote? b/c the person they chose won't do it. so replace him. pretty sure one person had 100% (or very nearly) of the dem votes for each and every vote last year. they could have done something at any time and didn't. b/c party is more important to them than country. has been for a long time, and doesn't seem to be changing any time soon. this shutdown bullshit happening AGAIN is more proof of that.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not only withhold pay - there is no back pay.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This is funny but it's really just a dumb symbolic gesture, there are only a few members of congress who actually need the paycheck and they're not the wingnuts causing this.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

As a TSA Officer of 21 years, I approve of this.

2 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Damn, been with it ever since a few years after the thing, huh?

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah, I had just gotten out of the Air Force and moved back home. Got hired in Sep '02.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just hit my 25 years of federal service last Friday.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If we could pass this, we could pass a CR and avoid a shutdown

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Put your money where your fat mouth is to test your principles.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Nothing a few dozen molotov cocktails can't solve when the session is in full swing.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I hope this goes as far as a vote. It will never pass, but each and every member of congress needs to have their "nay" on the record, saying "fuck you and your families, I've got mine"

2 years ago | Likes 750 Dislikes 6

Why waist time when they already have an (R) next to their name?

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 6

To show they have the guts to stomach a vote. The intestinal fortitude, as it were.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

When you have a job with the gov, you have a contract; I don't understand how they can stop paying you and you just go 'kay instead of (at best) suing for breacj of contract... If they tried that in France there would be stacks of heads by the next day.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Someone puts up a bill like this every time there's shutdown. It has so much impact, no-one on imgur remembers and the top comment is always "I hope this goes up for a vote so we can see who votes nay" Here's who does: everyone. Besides, it's actually constitutionally prohibited for them to work and not get paid - Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution states: The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Treasury. That and the 27th amendment profits them from changing their pay until the next session starts so it wouldn't go into effect during this shutdown even if it passed

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Not sure why people are downvoting this. This is the way the constitution is interpreted

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Tbh I could see plenty of them voting for it.. their congressional salary is only a fraction of what they get in bribes

2 years ago | Likes 38 Dislikes 0

But see the problem is as follows: To them anything less than what they think they can get their hands on is unacceptable.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

It only hurts the honest, so their opponents are more susceptible.

2 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Yup, the people it would actually affect are those who actually aren't corrupt

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

It will pass. If the government workers refuse to work while they are not being paid. Not one labor hour.

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Big whoop they do it all the time.. have for years.. will continue to do it in the future.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Fun part, even with a government shut down, all the trials will proceed. The shut down makes no difference for him.

2 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

It does. The executive branch / DoJ will have to pick which workers involved are essential, for lack of a better word. Everyone else has to stay home.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I'm talking about the trial #45 is in...Any of them. There will be no defunding of any of the investigating committees because once the House votes, it still needs to be signed off on by the senate and signed by Biden. The shut down won't stop the the investigations due to Permanent Indefinite Appropriations which funds the prosecutions. So the whole Put America First is only about Putting Trump First and he is willing to push shutdown that will cost the country hundreds of millions a day.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

this is a terrible idea because all it will do is allow the independently wealth (read: corrupt, funded by bribes) members of congress to punish those who aren't in on the grift.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

It won't matter to the hardcore dipshits. Republicans routinely vote against things that would help all Americans, and they still get votes.

2 years ago | Likes 146 Dislikes 3

Not a bug, yet another feature.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

More and more elections are coming down to a handful of votes, every individual who can be made a more informed voter helps. Campaigns are are not about the voters who say "they have my favorite letter so I vote for them"

2 years ago | Likes 47 Dislikes 1

We were never going to reach those people anyway. But stuff like this matters, because it helps defend the fabled "swing voter" who is somehow disconnected from politics by removing an avenue of misinformation. By putting names on votes like this, it makes it easier to counter people trying to push blame onto the Democrats. There are still lots of people for whom politics is not a matter of life and death and, absent Trump's BS, have gone back to ignoring it. Those are who can be reached.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Republicans routinely vote against things that would help THEMSELVES. Heard a story from someone about their local library needing a bigger building (the old one was from the 50s when the town was about 1/4 the size). One guy admitted to voting against a new building because he didn't want, quote, "Mexicans using the Wi-Fi." He voted against something that he would have directly benefited from, purely because that would hurt people he hates.

2 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 0

This is exactly why we don't have socialize medicine yet. Sure, I'm going broke with my bills, but if it helped one single person who I view as a lesser, that is 10000% worse.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Liberals will happily help 1,000 people if only one of them needs it. Conservatives will refuse help to 1,000 people if only one of them DOESN'T need it.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

They should get paid minimum wage too.

2 years ago | Likes 63 Dislikes 4

I say start em out at GS1. If they get re-elected twice, bump them up to GS2. So forth and so on.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Or the average lowest pay of people in their district/state.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

I used to think this, but that would open our governing officials up to even more likely corruption.

2 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 2

Also consider that then the only people who could afford to do that work for that wage would be people with inherited or other pre-existing wealth

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

So, just more of the same then?

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No, worse. Hard to imagine, isn't it?

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Not really. The majority of them are taking bribes. Even the supreme court is, but let's pay them more. Maybe that will stop them.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Clarence fucking Thomas has enter the chat.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

No one's saying wealthy folks can't be corrupt, but if you can barely skate by, you are forced to make decisions that put the honesty of your representation at stake. It also means that only independently wealthy people can feasibly run for office. It enforces a wage barrier. There's a lot of shit we could do to reduce corruption and lowering their salary isn't one of them. But enforcing consequences is a big one.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Exactly. Very well put.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

If you think for one second ANY sitting congress person is depending on their paycheck from government, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I can sell you real cheap.

2 years ago | Likes 255 Dislikes 10

Ok boomer, I have an NFT of that bridge for sale.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Yeah, they don't need it. But they will still vote against this, which is really amazing.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

There are some, generally first term democratic members of the house of representatives. But the salary while not exorbitant is enough that after a few years nobody's relying on every paycheck being on time to get by.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

It isn't about "depending" on it but that many of the people sending us into a shutdown are greedy souls which can never have enough so any loss is anathema to them.

2 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

yup, just cash some of the stonks that they lobby regulations for.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They depend on the job to get them the connections to the people who *really* pay them, the Lobbyists

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Do you have the Washington bridge?

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It is absolutely symbolic, but it is a first step in holding the pond scum responsible.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There's actually plenty of junior represtatives that either just started their political careers or weren't rich to begin with. like Maxwell Frost from Florida team was couch surfing his first few months until his first paycheck came in so he could get an apartment in DC.

2 years ago | Likes 76 Dislikes 0

"From Florida team was couch surfing" should say "from Florida who was couch surfing"

2 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

My first thought when I read the article was that this sadly has the least impact on the most corrupt politicians.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Which is what makes it even more infuriating that they don't make the token gesture of saying "we're totally in this together *giggles* so WE will forgo our pay, too"

2 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 1

Of course they aren’t- in which case they should make 30,000 a year and the rest goes to social welfare programs/boosting minimum wage.

2 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 2

Trouble with that is then only the independently wealthy will hold office.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Or- we could make it possible to live off of that annual salary.

2 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They already are by buying politicians. (SCJ Clarence and his wife, all of the MAGAts, and most of everyone else, including some Dems)

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I think they need to make much more. We want the best and brightest people running our government. For low pay it's only a hobby for wealthy people.

2 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Until you end the legal bribing and enforce laws against member who break the law. That will not make rich people who trying to get into politics.

2 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Yes, but if you lower the pay to minimum wage, ONLY rich people will be able to get into politics. (As opposed to just the huge advantage they have right now)

2 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Texas has this exact problem. their state legislature is made up of only richer people b/c a two year term pays around $45k.

2 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0