Government Ajar

Day seven of the government shutdown the government is closed.  Or is it?  The official word is that the government is shutdown but it appears that many parts of the government are open after all.  Agencies charged with protecting our national security have remained open.  Border patrol agents, prison guards, and air traffic controllers remain on the job and are receiving paychecks.  As are employees of overseas embassies and active duty military personnel.  Approximately 400,000 Department of Defense civilians were furloughed but it now appears that as of this morning most have returned to work because of the last week's last minute passage of the Pay Our Military Act which is now being interpreted to allow workers who "support service personnel" to be recalled.  Apparently "support" is broadly defined here since those domestic commissaries that were shuttered last week are reopening and AFN (American Forces Network), the life blood for American network television for personnel stationed overseas will once again resume their programming.  (I suppose that by reinstating these services morale is being lifted but won't a budget resolution go farther towards increasing happiness than easy access to Nabisco and the latest episode of The Voice).  Cadets played in this past weekend's college football game between the Naval Academy and the Air Force Academy under the auspices that it would actually cost more to cancel the game than it would to play it.   (And having the game go on made ticket holders happy).  Over the weekend FEMA recalled many of their furloughed employees when it appeared that Tropical Storm Karen was going to make landfall along the Gulf Coast.  And then there are the Federal employees who got us into this mess in the first place; members of Congress have been working and throwing barbs across both sides of the while receiving a paycheck.  But wait, Congress does appear to be working; on Saturday they managed to reach an agreement that would allow furloughed employees to receive back pay for the days they missed once this impasse is over.  So perhaps progress is being made.

Some agencies and programs clearly are closed though.  The Department of Justice's Amber Alert program which provides immediate notification across the country when children go missing has gone off line.  Amidst great controversy, the National Park Service is closed but some states and local governments are using their own funds to keep parks open since they are vital to the economic health of their communities. WIC (Women, Infants, and Children), the Department of Health and Human Services program that provides nutritional assistance to women and children has closed their doors in some states and have cut back on services in others.  Head Start programs across the country have stopped providing day care services as well.  A fiery bus crash that left eight people dead in Tennessee won't be investigated because the NTSB employees who would normally investigate the accident are furloughed.  So yes, it appears that our government is still shut down. 

Kind of....  Sort of.... It depends.... Or at least those programs that don't have a strong political voice advocating on their behalf seem to be closed.  If this is the case, and it appears that it may be, we can't really say that the Federal government is shutdown but rather, those portions of it that are deemed non-essential are closed.  But "non-essential" is all relevant.  First, it begs the question of who decides what is essential and what isn't and second, why is the government providing "non-essential" services in the first place?  For the people who depend upon these services they certainly are essential.  So if we are to use FEMA as an example, it would appear that government programs aren't essential until a community, entity, or someone in government with a powerful voice claims that they actually are.  Is this how a democracy is supposed to work?

So is the government open or closed or maybe a little bit of both?  And what does this mean for the American people?

The Blame Game

It is all Obama's fault.  It is the fault of Congress; the House, the Senate or both? Republicans are to blame or perhaps the Democrats are really at fault.  In whose court does the responsibility lie? More importantly, is blame really the issue we should be discussing now?  As a country shouldn't we be more concerned about what will happen next to the millions of people who will be effected by the government's sequestration?

We are one week into the long anticipated witching hour in the United States. It had been talked about for weeks now yet no one seemed to believe that it would really happen, but it did.  The government sequestration has gone into effect but what does that really mean?  In between fears of the Snowquester storm, Washington appears to be functioning as (ab)normally as it did leading up to this mess.  What does the sequestration mean for us as a country and as individuals?  Does it effect us differently if we are employed in the private sector versus the public one or if we are students or unemployed?  Will some areas of the country be effected more than others?  Is it possible that some people will escape unscathed from this national embarrassment?

Anticipating the worst, the Department of Defense got ahead of the game and set about trimming their expenses before the sequestration actually happened.  The deployment of the U.S.S. Harry S. Truman strike group and her thousands of personnel was cancelled hours before setting sail, planes have been grounded, and contracts for ship and aircraft repairs were immediately recalled.  Yesterday it was revealed that the U.S. Army will begin cutting tuition assistance for its soldiers and notices are circulating alerting military families about reduced hours at military hospitals, commissaries, and even DOD operated schools.  Federal employees and contractors across all branches of the government are on notice for furloughs that could reduce annual take home pay by up to 20% of their salaries.  This includes border patrol agents whose presence along our borders would be drastically diminished and the TSA agents who provide security screenings at the nation's airports.  If you think the lines are long and cumbersome now, imagine what they will be like with lower staffing levels.  The high profile and always popular White House tours have been cancelled until further notice and notifications have been sent out about reductions in monthly unemployment insurance checks.

The broad swath of reductions makes it appear that no segment of the American population will be immune to the effects of sequestration.  So if every American is or will soon be feeling the effects of Washington's inaction, what are we all going to do about it?  Are we going to sit back and let the status quo ride?  After all, this is what Congress seemed to do in the weeks and months leading up to the 1st of March.  As voters are we going to call our elected officials telling them how we are being personally effected by the sequestration and demand that they do something about the stalemate?  Regardless of the outcome are we going to remember this come November and every November that follows?  Or will we fall along our voting party lines and blame the other side while reelecting our incumbent candidates?  As a voting public do we share in the blame with our Congressmen and women?

But at the end of the day, does fault really matter? I think not; we should be more concerned about what type of message these (in)actions are sending to the rest of the world. If the United States, a world leader that has traditionally served as a role model for democracy and good government, can't pass important legislation and agree on a budget, who are we to expect the same from other countries?  What are notifications about a reduction in national security and a smaller international military footprint saying to the rest of the world?  Instead of laying blame, what the most important thing for us to do right now is to bring this financial fiasco to an end sooner rather than later.

On the Road To Sequestration

Sequestration.  Its been the buzz word filling the U.S. news, conversations in the Embassy cafeteria, and work staff meetings for weeks and the frenzy is only picking up speed.  How will a sequestration effect me? Glenn and I are both federal employees so will we both still have jobs?  And what the heck is a sequestration any way?  (Per the Merriam-Webster dictionary, a sequestration is defined as the act of seizing or placing something in custody---which in this case would be the seizing custody of the federal budget and its lack of money).  Will both political parties reach a mutually agreeable resolution before the witching hour sets in?  Will a palatable compromise be reached that keeps both jobs and public services in tact?   I think the answer to all of the above questions is "it depends."

Just as no one seems to be able to answer these perplexing questions, no one can agree on who is at fault for America's current fiscal crisis.  Republicans blame the Democrats while Democrats blame the Republicans.  Some say the problem lies with the current politicians in Washington while others say the problems started during previous administrations.  Blaming the opposite party and one's predecessors seems to be the only thing that everyone can agree upon. However, laying blame doesn't bring about the desperately needed resolution and as the countdown clock continues to tick away, the potential realities of this crisis inch closer to becoming a reality.

On an individual level I'm not sure how a sequestration would actually effect  me.  I am a part time employee of the Department of State and the message I have been receiving from my employer is that furloughs are unlikely to happen at our Embassy.  There is the caveat that if furloughs were to take place we would all receive thirty day advance notices before any action was taken. Because I am only a part time employee and my income is essentially our family's "play" money, my being furloughed wouldn't drastically effect us.  We would cut down on our travel, perhaps eliminate a dinner or two out, and yes, reduce my internet shopping, but I think we would essentially escape unscathed.  Glenn is an active duty military member. Given his current position it is unlikely that he would be furloughed but one never knows.  One never knows.

I would hazard a guess that all federal agencies are developing contingency plans for the "what if" moment.  Some, like the Department of Defense, are already making those "what if" moments a reality and taking otherwise drastic measures in preparation for the worst case budget scenario.  The recent "indefinite delay" i.e. cancellation of the deployment of the Harry S. Truman Strike Group,  has not only reduced the U.S. Navy presence in the Persian Gulf by half but left thousands of families in upheaval.  From cancelled apartment leases to moves and general mounting uncertainty, many military families are already experiencing the effects of the looming sequestration and are left wondering what will happen next.  (Yes, as military families it is ingrained in us that we must be flexible and ready to face the unexpected, but this is still an unprecedented turn of events).  Immediately on the heels of this aborted deployment came word that major repairs of ships would be delayed.  Contracts for ship repairs or new construction have been cancelled and the trickle down effect has and will continue to have drastic negative effects on states that are already struggling in these fragile economic times.   Civilian Department of Defense contractors, of which there are close to 800,000, are being told to prepare for a 20% reduction in their salaries over a six month period.  For most families, this reduction in pay will have a drastic impact on their quality of life.  Orders, the official paperwork that tells military members what jobs they are moving to next and allows families to make plans for relocations, school transfers, and securing housing, are also on hold pending budget resolutions.  Combine this with reductions in health care access and childcare services, cuts that are already being implemented, and the daily way of life for thousands of families is changing.  What does all of this mean for us as individuals?  More importantly, what message is this sending to the rest of the world?  (Who, if conversations with my international friends and my reading of foreign newspaper articles are any indication, are all watching these developments closely).

How is it that the most powerful nation in the world is finding itself in this situation?  It should be unimaginable but unfortunately, what used to be unimaginable is now a reality.