Mary Katherine Ham:
In an impressive display of Beltway mentality, the Washington Post invited federal workers to sing the blues about their possible furloughs, should the government shut down. These federal workers already have better pay and benefits than most of the taxpayers funding their jobs, and in the event of a government shutdown, those taxpayers come to find that much of what they’ve been funding is “nonessential,” according to the very government that employs these multitudes. But it hurts to be told you’re “nonessential,” and the Washington Post allows a place to vent. Some of those who contributed are officially “essential” and should be— they perform “essential activities to the extent that they protect life and property,” according to the Office of Management and Budget.
Others should probably stay quiet, lest loudly proclaiming their job descriptions makes taxpayers think, “Wait, what are we paying you for?” Like this guy:
And, lo, it came to pass that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission environmental engineers were furloughed, and from that day forth, we were forced to dine on raw ox tails and dried lentils before we ventured out to light the tiki torches that ward off bands of marauding coyotes and looters but stand as a bleak reminder of better times, when we knew how to use fire to cook meat. But that was before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission environmental engineers were furloughed for 3-7 days, my child.
Most of the political danger of a government shut down, unfortunately, likely falls on Republicans. It’s not fair that part of the reason for that is a media happy to blame them and them alone, as Mark Halperin pointed out, but it’s the truth and one we must recognize as we’re gearing up to fight a message battle on that front. But there is danger for Democrats and liberals, too, just as there was with sequestration. A shutdown necessarily highlights many jobs taxpayers had no idea they were funding. Most of the pain from a shutdown falls within the Beltway, where as I mentioned, salaries are higher and the economy more prosperous than the rest of the country thanks to taxpayer money siphoned from them to serve the ruling and contractor class. And, in the end, it may be that people’s personal experiences don’t live up to the sky-is-falling expectations set by the media and Democrats. That’s what happened with sequestration, and it’s why the Continuing Resolution’s spending levels being set at sequestration level is a virtually controversy-free part of this fight. The fact that America doesn’t fall apart when small parts of the federal government are dismantled is a good thing, for the country in general, and for making conservative arguments. It’s less likely that a shutdown redounds to conservative benefit on this front than sequestration did but it’s worth pondering if we end up in this message battle.
