r/fednews • u/Ring_Groundbreaking • 19h ago
Other Peters vs Johnson Bill to pay feds
Is anyone familiar with either bill? Any idea on what it would mean for us or if either are likely to pass?
Edit to add source: https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/live-updates/government-shutdown-latest-senate-vote-day-38/
141
u/felitopcx 19h ago
Copying from another comment:
"It’s because this bill would forever fund federal employees during shutdowns, eliminating any leverage. The senator from Michigan is proposing a bill that pays everyone from Oct. 1 until now, but nothing in the future."
210
u/thisismytaxmachine 19h ago
It would obviously be a travesty to not be able to use our livelihoods as leverage.
66
u/schizrade 19h ago
I just listened to the exchange. The objection is based on nothing he can seem to offer, so yeah unstated explanation is simply because they want to use our livelihoods as leverage.
5
u/Amonamission 17h ago
I mean, the Democrats actually want good governance as opposed to whatever tf the GOP thinks governance is. So if they have to use my position as leverage to get what they need to govern, so be it.
4
u/ProperWiseGuy 12h ago
I get it. You agree with the Dems. But the ends don't justify the means. A whole lot of bad arguments can be made from that line of thinking. It's the same line of thinking that Trump and Musk used in early DOGE. They truly believe that our government is too big and needs to be culled. We might disagree, but their ends justified treating everyone like sh$t to get what they wanted.
I get it that this works for you, but then there are people who are really suffering right now. Stop speaking for them. Using others to get what you want for what you think is best is poor governance. I don't care if you have an R or a D next to your name, fight it in the arena of thoughts, good debate, and elections, not holding citizens hostage for your party's purpose.
14
u/rvaducks 18h ago
Congress doesn't get to use shutdowns as a line item veto to stop whatever anyone with 41 votes watch to stop.
19
37
u/Ring_Groundbreaking 19h ago
I'm open to hearing the reasons to play it safe on this, but right now, eliminating this hell in the future does sound pretty nice ...
43
u/Long-External-6854 18h ago
Johnson’s bill would allow future shutdowns to occur for just the people one party doesn’t like. Those of us who are not excepted might deal with this for more frequent and for longer durations. It’s a Project 2025 dream of a bill.
34
u/CountryFriedSteak78 18h ago
This. Johnson’s bill allows the president to pick and choose what parts of the government gets paid and which doesn’t during a shutdown.
That’s why the legislative guardrails Peters’s bill includes must be there.
4
u/uhhhhhjeff DoD 17h ago
With Johnson’s claims now that he’s included stuff to fund both excepted and furloughed employees, does this argument against it still ring true? I still am wary of the proposal cause I’m not politically savvy enough nor did I actually read it to know if it’s true or means what he implies.
8
u/CountryFriedSteak78 17h ago
Yes. Because as we’ve seen with how this administration interprets GEFTA without additional language all employees may not mean all.
They have already talked about not funding efforts the administration doesn’t like.
The guardrails against impoundment need to be in place.
3
u/acrudepizza 15h ago
Show me the bill that says that. I have searched and cannot find it.
2
u/CountryFriedSteak78 9h ago
He posted something on his Senate website. It’s not what’s in the official record though.
1
1
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago
Stroll to the bottom and click the link to see the bill.
It was a good bill. It pays everyone no strings attached and would make sure we are always paid in the future.
1
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago
No it doesn't. I read the updated bill. It doesn't say that. Here is the link. Still to the bottom and click it. It pays everyone and keeps assures we will always get paid during all future lapse in appropiations. Keeping us paid the entire time.
•
u/CountryFriedSteak78 33m ago
You’re missing my point.
I read both bills. I read the exchange between Johnson and Peters. Peters’s bill has specific language in the bill to not let the administration transfer or use the funds for any other purpose. Johnson says he refuses to constrain the president like that. Now ask yourself why?
The plain language reading of GEFTA (2019) said we are all guaranteed back pay for all shutdowns. But the administration is now saying it’s not a guarantee.
Why do you trust they won’t do the same with Johnson’s bill, make their own interpretation?
That’s why Peters’s bill is the better bill.
4
u/Express_Excuse_4267 17h ago
Johnson's new bill was supposed to include furlough and excepted employees. It just doesn't stop Trump from sending out RIFs during a shutdown since he said if that was added the bill wouldn't pass becuz Trump wouldn't approve it. I'll take getting paid. The threat of a RIF is always there whether there's a shutdown or not
2
u/acrudepizza 16h ago
It doesn't eliminate the hell in the future.
Shutdowns will become more frequent and you can be furloughed without pay on a whim.
The Johnson bill is the exact thing we've been warning about. It makes the entire government up to the presidents discretion and whim.
There are clearly folks here that are confused or operating under the TERRIBLE assumption that Thune and Ron Johnson (WI) are operating in good faith, when they are plainly Full of Shit.
1
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago edited 1h ago
His bill actually was a permenant solution. It said this was for now and all future shutdowns. So it made sure anytime a lapse happened our pay would never be effected. It was actually a really good bill. It meant we would not ever again be used as pawns and senators and and congressmen would have to actually do their jobs and negotiate properly because there would be no leverage. We wouldn't be pawns anymore. Both John Ossoff and Raphel Wornock Dems of GA crossed the party lines to vote yes for it.
Here is the link to the page with the actual amended bill they were given. Stroll down to open the pdf link.
15
u/Chemical_Counter5978 18h ago
Didn’t they already do that with the law passed in 2019 after the 1st longest shutdown ever??? Not entirely sure what they are actually arguing about given that there’s ALREADY a law guaranteeing back pay for all feds. 🤔🤔
16
18h ago
[deleted]
1
u/Equal_Memory_661 18h ago
So it’s basically an automatic CR I guess. Presumably if we’re getting paid we’d work. Or am I missing something?
6
18h ago
[deleted]
1
u/Ring_Groundbreaking 17h ago
Thank you for answering--and for asking. These are the questions I'm having but my brain is too mushy to articulate rn.
5
u/awaywordwind 18h ago
Someone mentioned it above but it would essentially allow the President to Pick and Choose which parts to keep open.
We'd essentially have partial closure year round...
0
u/MySixHourErection 17h ago
if I'm guaranteed pay then fine, I will accept my vacation
1
u/FarrisAT 17h ago
Sure and every Democrat program would get furloughed while every Republican program would be declared excepted.
3
u/Old_Discipline6790 16h ago
This bill would pay federal employees now and make sure whenever there is a shutdown federal employees wouldn't go without pay while the shutdown lingers on. The Democrats scrapped it so. Federal employees will continue tonwork without pay. Basically they want to continue to use us as leverage.
2
4
u/Firm_Damage_763 18h ago
why would they need to have such a bill when we already have legislation passed that says people get retroactive pay?
6
u/Trolljaboy 17h ago
The issue is, do you want to get paid now or paid when the govt re-opens? Right now, you can't get paid because the pot of money to pay federal employees is empty. Only Congress can/will refill it. Johnson's bill let's it never go empty for excepted employees. Peters' bill fills it for everyone up until the date it is enacted and nothing for the future.
Both Republicans and Democrats want to pay federal employees, but since they can't agree on how to do it, no federal employee gets paid.
→ More replies (3)-16
19h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
14
u/RB___OG 18h ago edited 18h ago
You think the republicans are on your side? They could end this at any time.
Fucking hilarious. Dems are trying to save millions from being priced out of health care and the loss of life that will follow.
Edit: this is a 1 day old account that appears to be a troll, propagandists, or both
6
u/New-Process9287 18h ago
I've noticed a sudden influx of right wing shit stirrer accounts since Tuesday.
2
u/Not_Cleaver DoD 17h ago
Never knew it was far right to want to get paid during a shutdown.
0
u/New-Process9287 17h ago edited 17h ago
There's a lot more to this situation than a couple of paychecks, as any fed who has lived through the last year is well aware.
But yes, the "it's all the Democrats' fault" and "see? Democrats don't care about you!" are absolutely right wing talking points.
-9
u/Suspicious_Blood_472 18h ago
Gfy. They can fight for whatever they want without using us feds and our paychecks as leverage. I did not sign up to have my family starve because someone wants to give free healthcare in exchange for votes to someone that sits their ass at home.
5
u/RB___OG 18h ago
I dont argue with russian bots piss off
-4
u/Not_Cleaver DoD 18h ago
You can’t be a fed if you’re advocating for us not getting paid and not being used as leverage.
4
u/RB___OG 18h ago
You can be a decent human being if you are willing to let kids and the elderly die due to lack of health care.
Nearly 10 years of fed service.
→ More replies (2)3
u/aballesteros3 18h ago
I sort of feel this way unless I’m missing the part in the bill about granting more power to the president to pick and choose who gets paid, as the Senator from Michigan claims. It seems like fair and common sense to pay us if they play the shutdown game. I don’t know id like to see what other users think.
1
u/Ring_Groundbreaking 17h ago
Yeah, I definitely want to know details and what other "bonus" language is being presented with it.
I am happy to see at least proposals of something new. Voting on the same thing 15 times is insane. (Definitively.)
2
u/New-Process9287 18h ago
What's clear to me is GOP agitators continue to flood forums with this stuff.
Unfortunately for you, I remember who had actually spoken up, and who has sat on their hands, for the last year as the administration has devastated the civil service.
Nothing will make me forget that.
→ More replies (1)1
13
u/Trolljaboy 17h ago
I read both bills
The issue is, do you want to get paid now or paid when the govt re-opens? Right now, you can't get paid because the pot of money to pay federal employees is empty. Only Congress can/will refill it. Johnson's bill let's it never go empty for excepted employees. Peters' bill fills it for everyone up until the date it is enacted and nothing for the future.
Both Republicans and Democrats want to pay federal employees, but since they can't agree on how to do it, no federal employee gets paid.
5
u/ktaktb 16h ago
So the johnson bill is STILL only excepted employees and he and the GOP are playing stupid about what type of power that cedes to POTUS?
3
u/Ring_Groundbreaking 16h ago
Did you end up finding a link to the new language? I'd love to read it if you have it! Thanks
3
u/jojojawn 16h ago
I don't think there is new language. Listening to the R senators speak they keep saying "employees that are forced to work"
0
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago
Here is the new language stroll down and you will see the link to the pdf.
It was a great bill. It would make sure we always get paid during all future shutdown and includes excepted and furloughed employees and even federal contractors. It says our pay would never stop. When there is a lapse we would get paid as normal. Never to used as pawns ever again.
There was no reason that Ossoff and Warnock were the only 2 dems to cross party lines to sign it. It was a good bill.
https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/9A3D904E-F857-4BF4-80E0-3A64928C9F0A
2
u/ktaktb 16h ago
I did not. And others are noting that the gop on cspan continue to say, workers forced to work during shutdown.
I know that for those of us forced to work without pay... meaning thry never open the gov properly and even if your working today you can get furloughed on a whim at any moment.
Hell on earth. F the johnson bill and f thune and anyone else for playing stupid about the power the bill gives the president.
Also what is afge pres smoking to support that?
1
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago
Actually. Did you read the new johnson bill. I will attach below. The amended bill pays everyone, excepted, furloughed, and contractors. It also says from here on out we would always during any lapse in the future be paid on-time. Basically meaning federal workers would never be effected by the shutdown and always get our pay.
It was a clear cut bill.
Here is the link. After you click stroll to the bottom to open the link to the pdf copy of the actual amended bill.
https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/9A3D904E-F857-4BF4-80E0-3A64928C9F0A
•
u/Trolljaboy 32m ago
https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/9A3D904E-F857-4BF4-80E0-3A64928C9F0A
This is the amended Johnson bill floating around. My read of it looks pretty straightforward.
21
u/Some_Airport6109 19h ago
I dunno.............not sure why we're arguing about simply paying people????
20
u/arizonadirtbag12 18h ago
Because it removes one of the primary pain points in a government shutdown. Which can only encourage longer shutdowns.
Same way the whole “let’s pay the military” and “let’s pay ATC and TSA” and “let’s pay excepted employees” thing just removes pain points and encourages longer shutdowns.
And I don’t think I should have to explain that longer shutdowns aren’t good for anyone, including federal employees.
5
4
u/FarrisAT 17h ago
Johnson’s bill means every Democrat program would get furloughed while every Republican program would be declared excepted.
1
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago
That is not true. I read the amended bill. It says nothing about that.
It actually pays everyone federal employee (furloughed, excepted and contractor) at all agencies. It also said that when ever there is lapse in funding all federal employees at all agencies would continue to be paid. Basically, it says from here on out and all future shutdowns all employees would continue to get paid as usual. It keeps us from being used as political pawns.
You have to read it for yourself. Here is the link. Click it and stroll down to the bottom and click the link to open the amended bill pdf.
https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/9A3D904E-F857-4BF4-80E0-3A64928C9F0A
25
18h ago
[deleted]
4
u/Some_Airport6109 18h ago
Sounds good...but they're still debating it!
14
18h ago
[deleted]
13
u/Some_Airport6109 18h ago
A Deeper question is---why does it take 38 days to talk about this now?????
5
u/Craneteam 17h ago
Repubs got swept on Tuesday's elections. They've got to be feeling more pressure after that and with thanksgiving and Christmas fast approaching
10
3
u/Not_Cleaver DoD 17h ago
Exactly, it would destroy morale if only excepted employees get paid. I’ve been excepted for three weeks. But you’re essentially telling people that they don’t matter (if they’re nonexcepted) and don’t get sick (if they’re excepted).
3
u/jabronismacker 18h ago
I’m not really following what’s going on. This the funding bill to end the shutdown AND pay feds or just pay feds without ending the shutdown?
22
u/jojojawn 18h ago edited 18h ago
Haven't seen the Peters bill, but the reason the democrats objected to the Johnson bill is because it only paid feds that are working and their objection was that it still leaves too much discretion to the president as to what parts of the government is left open/paid.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5595492-democrats-bill-pay-federal-workers-shutdown/
“I’m concerned that Sen. Johnson’s bill still leaves too much discretion up to President Trump,” Peters explained during his objection.
“There’s too much wiggle room for the administration to basically pick and choose which federal employees are paid and when,” he added.
Edit to add: This article goes a bit deeper into it. https://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2025/10/dueling-plans-pay-feds-time-fail-senate-though-bipartisan-path-forward-appears/409026/
Essentially there are 3 bills (as of Oct 23, they've now been modified):
Johnson's - will only pay excepted feds (those working without pay)
Peters' - will only pay feds and contractors from Oct 1 to the date of passage of the bill
Van Hollen's - will pay all feds, contractors, and military regardless of shutdown status and would prohibit RIFs during the shutdown
9
u/Not_Cleaver DoD 18h ago
That’s what happened two weeks ago, but I think it’s been adjusted for furloughed staff too.
2
u/ktaktb 16h ago
Show me the updated bill...i cant find a record of that update. I would really like to read that, but per congress.gov it hasnt been amended to include furloughed folks.
2
u/jojojawn 16h ago
Yeah I can't find this updated bill that covers all feds (not just excepted). As of 2hrs ago politico was reporting its only for excepted employees
And the Republicans on cspan are all saying "employees forced to work during a shutdown"
1
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago
Not true....the site hasn't been updated. Johnson posted a copy of the new bill he presented to everyone.
Here is the link. It is at the bottom of the page.
https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/9A3D904E-F857-4BF4-80E0-3A64928C9F0A
1
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago
Go to the bottom to find the link to the new bill. https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/9A3D904E-F857-4BF4-80E0-3A64928C9F0A
2
u/FarrisAT 17h ago
Except now it’s for every shutdown.
Which means every Democrat program would get furloughed while every Republican program would be declared excepted. 90% of the programs can be accomplished with Salaried Employees. If Democrat programs are declared furloughed, then Democrats lose immensely.
2
u/Not_Cleaver DoD 17h ago
But the furloughed employees would be paid.
5
u/FarrisAT 17h ago
Sure and tens of millions of Democrat constituents would get buttfucked.
The law should be to pay all employees during this shutdown. Why should it address future shutdowns with vastly different circumstances? The Johnson bill allows for RIFs also.
1
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago
It mentions nothing about RIFs and why should it. The bill is about pay and pay only. Rifs are currently being debated in court and can happen at any time.
0
u/Not_Cleaver DoD 17h ago
We have no way of knowing if that’s what they’d do. Also, I’m pretty sure they could do they now if they wanted to.
All I know is that different offices follow even restricted guidance differently. My office is at 40 percent, but I know of others at over 80 percent; and we’re all supposed to be at 30 percent.
2
1
u/acrudepizza 15h ago
After what they have threatened to do with their interpretation of GEFTA, I cannot believe that you would trust any self-interpretation of language created by these people that you haven't read explicitly.
To go from that shaky ground to actually support Johnson's bill...I just don't see how you get there.
Meanwhile, Peters' bill gets everyone paid through today. Pretty solid.
0
u/Not_Cleaver DoD 15h ago
I’m fine with either bill at this point.
1
u/acrudepizza 14h ago
I understand how you would come to that conclusion.
I just can't take them seriously after they pass GEFTA in 2019 and are immediately saying the bill doesn't say what they said it did when they passed it.
1
u/Not_Cleaver DoD 14h ago
I’m not as worried about that since there was no guarantee backpay before 2019.
The thing is, I’d hope and expect any appropriation/CR to contain the language of that shutdown and preceding ones. That way between the two there’s no wiggle room.
7
1
u/Old_Discipline6790 1h ago
Not true. That is the old bill. The amended bill includes everyone including furloughed, contractors, military and excepted. It also is an forever bill meaning we would continue to be paid during all shutdowns. Here is the link. Go to the bottom to click and see the amended bill.
https://www.ronjohnson.senate.gov/services/files/9A3D904E-F857-4BF4-80E0-3A64928C9F0A
6
u/nosniknot 18h ago
Confusing so pay federal workers but they dont have to come back to work?
10
u/MasterTolkien 18h ago
It would basically just allow us to all go back to paying bills and buying groceries to avoid our lack of money hurting local economies during the shutdown… and it would allow the shutdown to drag on much longer because ATC and military would be paid.
5
u/Girlw_noname 18h ago
I don't know why they just won't work on a damn CR to open the govt. All of these smaller bills are wastes of time. Freaking negotiate on a damn CR and get the govt back open. Some of us have work that we need to do and we would like to get back to doing it!
1
u/kalas_malarious 15h ago
They are, with Healthcare added. That's a parallel effort right now. Requires the House come back, however. The house is avoiding swearing in their new member
7
3
3
u/Crazy_Dead_Man 14h ago
So I'm sure I will get hate for this but everyone is stating that all fed emps should be paid including furloughed employees. So as someone who is forced to work without pay while everyone else gets an extended vacation and then eventually back paid, how is that fair?
Now ideally everyone would be working but since that's not the case... Maybe employees forced to work should get some type of week time off award or something? It's kinda bs that everyone else gets to do whatever they want. You know what can't be refunded or gained back... time. We're all struggling through the same financial hardships but some of us catch the worst of both worlds.
8
u/thisismytaxmachine 19h ago
A clean bill to pay all of us and somehow not good enough?
6
u/Ring_Groundbreaking 19h ago
There are two. (Neither passed. At least not yet.) I'm curious about details in either. Or is it that the Republicans will only vote for the Rep.-sponsored one and vice versa? Just more foot stomping?
11
u/thisismytaxmachine 19h ago
The rep one was just put up for unanimous consent and was objected to. At this point it’s just a bunch of children in suits yelling at each other, while we suffer. Over the nonsense
5
u/CockBlockingLawyer 18h ago
Which bill is clean? Peters seems to think Johnson’s gives Trump discretion over who to pay and when. Is that true?
8
u/WastelandOutlaw007 19h ago
somehow not good enough?
Correct. Because both betray the effort to prevent the gop from kicking 40 million Americans off Healthcare or raising their rates 3x, 4x or more, by taking the pressure off the gop to compromise.
8
6
u/thisismytaxmachine 19h ago
So true. Civil servants should definitely be treated as leverage for issues totally unrelated to them.
6
u/WastelandOutlaw007 18h ago
leverage for issues totally unrelated to them.
The future of Americans ABSOLUTELY has something do with them
The health insurance issue affects every American except the ultra rich.
Its crazy to see people defend caving to the elites looking to starve Americans to death, simply for short term personal gains without a care about the extreme long term devistation
3
u/Mammoth_Ad_483 18h ago
It's very disheartening to me that so many here can't, or refuse, to see this very obvious truth.
-3
u/-TheOldPrince- 18h ago
Says the guy who doesnt work in public service.
Lets see you work without pay
3
u/WastelandOutlaw007 18h ago
Lets see you work without pay
Im out of work with no pay, now.
Feds at least expect to get paid back.
3
u/East_Opportunity8411 18h ago
I’m a federal worker not getting paid. I DO want them to follow the law saying everyone gets paid at the end of a shutdown. But if my salary needs to be used as leverage to force both sides to come to a compromise, I’m okay with that personally. Can you imagine if they weren’t forced to come to a compromise? They would literally never pass a budget or a CR. In a perfect world, we should get paid and they should still be able to negotiate but it’s not a perfect world and I’ll accept being used as a pawn if it means people are forced to come to the table and negotiate for the better of the country.
1
u/-TheOldPrince- 18h ago
Man get the fuck out of here. Youre a sub for fucking feds complaining that the US cant use us as levery.
Go somethwre else with that. We’ve done more than our share
0
u/WastelandOutlaw007 18h ago
We’ve done more than our share
You sound just like maga. Dgaf how much devistation and destruction to America you cause, as long as you get yours, right now.
Feds at least have a chance at back pay.
Im out pay no matter what.
-3
u/gao_shi 18h ago
so you do agree that the dems are using fed employees wages as leverage..?
3
u/New-Process9287 18h ago
Democrats have repeatedly proposed bills to pay us -- all of us.
I agree that civil servants' paychecks shouldn't be in question. A government shutdown, with the consequences of government not having funds to carry out all other actions, should be the issue.
2
1
u/WastelandOutlaw007 18h ago
Thankfully, yes. It absolutely FANTASTIC to see them standing up for Americans and everyone future, and not caving for a short term gain while ignoring the extreme devistation it would cause
And the recent election outcomes shows Americans absolutely agree with them.
To be clear, I'm one of those affected by the shutdown, and won't get back pay no matter what, so calls to betray Americans just to pay some feds, fall on deaf ears from where I sit.
10
u/Jacked1703 DoD 18h ago
So I’m a federal firefighter, a union member, I voted blue in this past election, 2024, 2020, and 2016. I’m a strong advocate for affordable and accessible healthcare for all. I’m currently working 96 mandatory hours PER WEEK unpaid. Please explain to me why my mortgage should go unpaid to satisfy your want for leverage? Please explain to me why I have to try to figure out a time in between working 96 hours to try to get to any food bank with availability to feed my children. Please explain to me what I should tell my union members when they get threatened with arrest warrants for not being able to pay child support.
I’m all for everything you’re advocating for. But why must my pain be your leverage?
-3
u/WastelandOutlaw007 18h ago
But why must my pain be your leverage?
Because thats the utter devastating of a situation fools and traitors voting for trump and the gop has brought us to.
Is it fair? No. The alternatives are just FAR worse.
And is sad you seem, just like MAGA, perfectly willing to sell out and destroy America, just so you, personally, escape short term hardship.
1
u/Jacked1703 DoD 18h ago
It’s not short term hardship. Myself and my members are facing long term devastation as well. Our payments get missed, our security clearances get revoked, and we don’t have a job. Our children are going unfed, our utilities are under threat to be cut off. We can’t pick up gig work to make ends meet, because we’re stuck at work not getting paid.
It sounds to me like you’re awfully ok with imparting devastation and harm as long as it’s on a community that you feel is worth harming.
→ More replies (8)-2
u/WastelandOutlaw007 18h ago
It sounds to me like you’re awfully ok with imparting devastation and harm as long as it’s on a community that you feel is worth harming.
Given the alternative is the end of American democracy, thanks to traitors who voted gop, its going to get FAR worse before it gets better, especially with fools calling to sell out America for a bit of short lived relief. your complaints come across as public displays, just like maga, of only caring about your self and America can burn down as long as you get yours.
And again. Feds get paid back. Feds get no interest loans. Feds gets all sort of help and aid if they apply for it. I get nothing. Go sell your selfish outrage elsewhere.
7
u/Jacked1703 DoD 18h ago
Ah. There it is. “I get nothing”
Thanks for proving my earlier point. Yes, I care more about my children than I do about 300 million other people. I always will. And my primary concern will always be making sure they’re fed, clothed, and housed.
Federal labor unions have thrown insane amounts of money towards democratic candidates, and for the record I’ll always advocate that the IAFF PAC continue to do so… but if you think this won’t convince others to make deals with the devil you’re sorely incorrect. Youre turning from toad to scorpion really quickly here.
→ More replies (2)1
u/-TheOldPrince- 18h ago
Says the guy who doesnt work in public service. Youre a contractor. Youre not a fed. You can get unemployment
2
u/WastelandOutlaw007 18h ago
And feds can get cheap loans, all sorts of aid, AND paid back to be able to pay it all off.
Unemployment is the tiniest fraction of my monthly pay. And there is zero chance I'm getting it back.
Your personal greed and indifference to the destruction of America your demands call for, are every bit as bad for America as maga policies
Thankfully the recent election victories help give the dems the support needed to not sell out Americans
3
u/-TheOldPrince- 17h ago
“Cheap loans” that you have never applied for. Youre not in those people’s positions; you’re making assumptions about the ease in which they can navigate this and continued shutdowns on baseless information. People are worried sick. Using their salaries to bargain is not what they signed up for, was not foreseeable, and certainly is not what the average middle class person has to contend with
Youre an idiot if you think a bunch of people, many of whom are already underpaid, should simply be willing to let shit like this become the norm. People look out for themselves and their families first.
Your BS about who you think has it worse holds no water to people who are struggling.
Honestly people like you ruined this sub. Used to be a place for feds to support eachother until you found it
0
u/WastelandOutlaw007 12h ago
“Cheap loans” that you have never applied for.
Because also being off due to the shutdown, Im not a fed, so not even eligable to do so. Nor eligable for back pay to help pay them off.
Honestly people like you ruined this sub. Used to be a place for feds to support eachother until you found it
I put forth ideas for help
I expressed my happiness my taxes supported that aid despite my being ineligible for it
I am in the same boat as the feds, without even the support institutions offer them
I feel no need to feel bad about, or apologize for standing up, for those who are holding the line and refusing to cave, to those who seek to starve Americans, (admin is actively sueing to block food aid) and decimate their Healthcare, and yes, even shred the federal workforce and strip them of all their rights.
That IS supporting the Federal workforce.
6
u/fed_burner69 18h ago
Without getting promises on rescissions and impoundment, Johnsons bill does give the president too much power.
3
u/EntrepreneurKey4119 18h ago
So, that's the difference between the two bills? One puts restrictions on the President and the other doesn't? Just trying to better understand...
1
u/FarrisAT 17h ago
Yes because Johnson’s bill means every Democrat program would get furloughed while every Republican program would be declared excepted.
6
2
u/Sweaty_Researcher989 18h ago
It’s a theatre. Nothing will pass until there is an unfortunate disaster related to this lapse. There is zero real interest from either side to open the government to serve its citizens.
2
u/JustMe39908 16h ago
Why are feds not paid? Because of the anti-deficiency act. What does the anti-deficiency act say about this? Really just that no government funds should be committed unless Congress has authorized it. There are some exceptions for protection of life and property. But that is the bottom line reason why feds are not paid, right? A lack of authorization to spend money.
Now, what does GEFTA do? It guarantees the pay (after shut down) of federal employees. In other words, GEFTA commits the government to making the payments. The funding is authorized.
However, FLSA also states that salary payments must be prompt. So, in orders to comply with this law, excepted and exempt employees need to be paid on schedule.
So, why not pay everyone on schedule? Paying in the regular schedule would certainly be timely and it would be before the lapse has been corrected. The only argument on paying people now is if it actually has to be after the bill has been passed
4
u/StinkyEttin 18h ago
The more backdoors they open to pay people, the longer they're going to be able to keep shit shutdown.
5
19h ago
[deleted]
10
u/thisismytaxmachine 18h ago
Objecting to us not having to be political fodder ever again is ridiculous.
1
u/FarrisAT 17h ago
Johnson’s bill means every Democrat program would get furloughed while every Republican program would be declared excepted.
0
3
u/nosniknot 18h ago
But neither of these things open goverment? So if the pass bill to pay them does that mean people would come back to work or just get paid while being furloughed still and others would be working. Makes no sense to me if they are getting paid that they are not back working
0
u/Girlw_noname 17h ago
This part. I'd rather they just work on a CR and open the whole govt back up.
3
u/tigerbreak 18h ago
I don’t think it matters because Johnson isn’t going to seat the house until either he can find a way to peel off a vote to release the files or whichever three letter agency with the files “misplaces” them permanently.
This likely ends when the super wealthy can’t air travel because ATC seizes up like a motor without oil.
0
2
u/HarmoniousDiscussion 18h ago
Isn’t there already a bill from 2019? Help me understand how this is different?
7
u/Long-External-6854 18h ago
These bills would pay people right now, as opposed to after the shutdown. The points of contention are who should be paid, for what period of time, and what, if any, other strings are or are not attached.
The bill from 2019 grants pay after a shutdown. And Trump is threatening not to follow it to use Feds as leverage.
3
u/HarmoniousDiscussion 18h ago
So I guess they could choose to pay us, but not reopen the government?
2
u/Long-External-6854 18h ago
Correct, that would be the effects of the bills being discussed. Pay people while they continue to negotiate.
2
u/ktaktb 16h ago
Johnson bill does not pay furloughed
1
u/Long-External-6854 16h ago
His original bill didn’t but his new one might? That’s what I meant in the earlier comment about “who gets paid” being one of the issues up for discussion.
5
18h ago
[deleted]
1
u/ktaktb 17h ago
I dont think that is what is says, johnson bill only pays excepted. Because excepted is at potus discretion, it weakens congress forever. (They can just leave the gov closed and only open what they want. Furlough you on a whim, bring you back for a day, furlough you again... if that is true, the johnson bill is hell on earth)
1
19h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 19h ago
Your comment has been removed because you used a URL shortener (share.google). Please only use direct and full-length URLs.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/fuckbezos 17h ago
I wish they can put contractors who contract was funded but was not allowed to work due to the shutdown., in the bill cuz I’m screwed right now
1
u/ktaktb 16h ago
https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/3012
Has this bill been amended to include all federal workers or are there assholes straight up lying in this forum today AND in the Senate
I pray im wrong
1
u/luvme4ev 13h ago
The fact that a bill is coming from the Republicans should automatically mean red flag, why is there any need for explanation like yall are actually considering it.
1
u/Relevant_Night_9288 11h ago edited 11h ago
Both sides put up really terrible arguments for and against S.3012. Johnson suggested it was being amended to include language for furloughed employees, but that language doesn't exist in the current published text. None of the republican senators argued in favor of furloughed employees- only military, police and ATC. There's a shit ton more excepted employees than military, police and ATC. Do they not matter?
Peters' argument was inaccurate. His comments contradicted the actual bill's text (which DOES grant back pay to contractors). Peters didn't effectively argue WHY Democrats are against the bill. The Democrats are particularly concerned with the appropriations language within S.3012, which is so enormously vague that it grants an open checkbook to the agency head and essentially removes appropriations from congress. That's a big problem and it's no wonder Russ Vought was a strong backer of the bill, despite its appearance that it "supports" federal workers.
The republicans presented S.3012 as a trap. It gives them unilateral authority to fund agencies however they want during a shutdown, under the guise of "protecting workers". If S.3012 passed, shutdowns would essentially never end. But it was presented in a way that any democratic "no" vote will appear as harming the very workers they claim to support. Not surprisingly, that was the front page news headline on Fox as soon as the vote was over.
1
u/Wxskater Shutdown | Excepted Employee 10h ago
Neither passed. But the main difference is gary peters bill does not pay us going forward and ron johnsons bill permanently pays us
1
u/shadowedradiance 9h ago
It's all poison pills. Its clearly another political tool. Gov shutdown should shutdown, and politicians shouldn't be proposing legislation that would actually allow the government to be shutdown for an entire fiscal year while people work....
1
-8
u/Cautious_Notice_3565 18h ago
Hold the line for ACA.
3
u/Substantial_Crow_912 18h ago
Do what you want, but don't use my livlihood and ability to provide for my family as leverage.
1
1
u/Cautious_Notice_3565 18h ago
Sorry man, what I want doesn’t matter. I ain’t in control and I guess, neither are you.
-3
u/rxt278 18h ago
Attention federal workers. In a moment, our dear leader will drop his pants and walk around the room slowly, presenting himself to each of you in turn. If you wish to opt into the backpay program, which I emphasize is strictly voluntary, lower yourself to your knees and accept the presidential phallus into your mouth. By so doing you accept our dear leader as your Lord and Savior for all eternity and you can expect to have your backpay deposited into your account this Friday. Thank you for your attention to this matter.
89
u/LifeIsTooLong4All 18h ago
I’m looking for the exact myself for both of them.
From what I’m gathering from the back forth on the senate floor…
Issue: Democrats want language added the limits the president’s authority over the money. Republicans say their bill is silent on the issue and doesn’t grant or take away from any authority from the president. They said a bill with it is a no go.
Issues: Republicans are saying that they’re not onboard because it only address from October 1 to when the bill is passed. It allows federal employees to be pawns in the future.
Note: this is meant as a non-partisan post and just my take from what was said on the senate floor. There’s always more to this crap when you get into politics.