FAA furlough reprieve: 'No fair!'

[JEDI]

http://money.cnn.com/2013/04/26/news/economy/faa/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

advocates for everyone else directly affected by the so-called sequester are miffed with the selective undoing of what were supposed to be across-the-board cuts.


What did they cut to balance the $ given back to the FAA?

 

[cubby1223]

Anyone who complains should receive double-sequester.

Anyone who complains should also have the right to personally seek loans from China to fund for their department.

 

[Scotteq]

Anyone who complains should receive double-sequester..

< A Christmas Story >
..."Oh Yeah!?!? Well, I Triple Double Dog Sequester You!

/stance'o'dominance

 

[Screech]

< Animal House >

They are? Then from this moment they're on double secret sequestration!

 

[HomerJS]

So cancer treatments held up?

Disaster relief held up?

But airline CEOs whine, politicians can't get home on time, congress and the White House cave on this. What a bunch of bullshit!

 

[Engineer]

What did they cut to balance th...Not sure if that's what passed or not though.

 

[Balt]

From what I was reading earlier, they simply shifted money around from within the FAA from one area to another (i.e. now one section of the FAA is taking a bigger hit than the other as the money is being shifted). Not sure if that's what passed or not though.

I believe this is correct. The sequester didn't provide much room for flexibility in where the cuts are made within agencies. Supposedly this bill doesn't provide additional funding, it just lets the FAA decide where the cuts will come from (so they won't have to furlough the air traffic controllers).

 

[sunzt]

I believe this is correct. The sequester didn't provide much room for flexibility in where the cuts are made within agencies. Supposedly this bill doesn't provide additional funding, it just lets the FAA decide where the cuts will come from (so they won't have to furlough the air traffic controllers).

Yup, it's coming out of the Airport Improvement Programs funds i think.

Anyway, it basically shuts down the argument who say the FAA had flexibility to move around funds and were only furloughing employees and controllers for show. If they had the flexibility then it wouldn't have required an act of Congress to move the damn funds. Also, i don't think it stops the furlough for employees who aren't controllers (maintenance, training, headquarters, engineering, programs, etc)

 

[wirednuts]

at some point people are just going to start using iou's to pay for everything... wait...

 

[BoomerD]

forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2307591

 

[Theb]

From what I was reading earlier, they simply shifted money around from within the FAA from one area to another (i.e. now one section of the FAA is taking a bigger hit than the other as the money is being shifted). Not sure if that's what passed or not though.

This is how the whole thing should've been handled. The departments should've been given a number and determined how they can cut that number from their budget.

 

[Theb]

Yup, it's coming out of the Airport Improvement Programs funds i think.

Anyway, it basically shuts down the argument who say the FAA had flexibility to move around funds and were only furloughing employees and controllers for show. If they had the flexibility then it wouldn't have required an act of Congress to move the damn funds. Also, i don't think it stops the furlough for employees who aren't controllers (maintenance, training, headquarters, engineering, programs, etc)

Indeed.

 

[Nintendesert]

This is how the whole thing should've been handled. The departments should've been given a number and determined how they can cut that number from their budget.

Yep. Hard to do though when you have so much pork in budgets that the departments can't even get rid of.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-04-28-08-58-08

Even the DOD and Army don't want more tanks but Congress keeps pushing it.

 

[Engineer]

Yep. Hard to do though when you have so much pork in budgets that the departments can't even get rid of.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-04-28-08-58-08

Even the DOD and Army don't want more tanks but Congress keeps pushing it.

I saw that earlier today and just shook my head. I guess the lobby of the tank manufacturers is very strong. There was enough money (more than actually) in that article alone to cover the FAA shortfalls to keep the towers stocked.

SMH

 

[EagleKeeper]

Yep. Hard to do though when you have so much pork in budgets that the departments can't even get rid of.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-04-28-08-58-08

Even the DOD and Army don't want more tanks but Congress keeps pushing it.

There are multiple programs like that.

Congress forces the purchases because it means work/donations from their home districts.

 

[dmcowen674]

I saw that earlier today and just shook my head. I guess the lobby of the tank manufacturers is very strong. There was enough money (more than actually) in that article alone to cover the FAA shortfalls to keep the towers stocked.

SMH

How many Tank manufacturers are there?

Edit: Article out this morning shows there is only one Tank Manufacturer in Lima Ohio.

http://news.yahoo.com/army-says-no-more-tanks-115434897.html

This undated file photo provided by the General Dynamics Land System shows the production of an Abrams tank in Lima, Ohio.

This should have it's own thread.

 

[Exterous]

Anyway, it basically shuts down the argument who say the FAA had flexibility to move around funds and were only furloughing employees and controllers for show. If they had the flexibility then it wouldn't have required an act of Congress to move the damn funds. Also, i don't think it stops the furlough for employees who aren't controllers (maintenance, training, headquarters, engineering, programs, etc)

If the FAA is like the FDA (and I have heard third hand accounts that they are) then Congress controls where a decent chunk of the department's funding is spent with regards to certain 'mandatory programs'. Congress didn't adjust any spending for these mandatory programs when the sequester hit so the FAA was unable to move a lot of needed funds around

The same thing is happening to the FDA. More food inspectors are getting furloughed while certain mandatory programs in the Drug part are continuing at full capacity. But no one cares about our food supply so no one notices.

This is how the whole thing should've been handled. The departments should've been given a number and determined how they can cut that number from their budget.

Congress would have had to get their paws out of their little pet programs though!

I saw that earlier today and just shook my head. I guess the lobby of the tank manufacturers is very strong. There was enough money (more than actually) in that article alone to cover the FAA shortfalls to keep the towers stocked.

SMH

Thats been ongoing since at least August last year