by Greg Walcher, E&E Legal Senior Policy Fellow
The Daily Sentinel
Every time congressional dysfunction has caused a temporary government shutdown, I’ve heard people make fun of the instruction that “essential workers” must report to work anyway. Pundits always ask, if other government workers are not essential, why do we pay them? What business hires workers it doesn’t need?
Nearly all employees think they are essential, but clearly the administration doesn’t agree. It has laid off or retired about 154,000 federal employees, according to the Office of Personnel Management. More layoffs are planned as various government activities are scaled back.
To put that in perspective, the total federal civilian workforce is about three million, so the layoffs total roughly 5%. Yet the reaction of government unions and numerous press reports have made it sound like vital public services will simply implode. My longtime friend Paul Driessen, a senior policy analyst with the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, has written numerous books and articles on energy and the environment. His latest column is about the relative impact of these federal jobs, compared to layoffs in the private sector that sometimes result from their regulatory work.
Referring to about 1,350 State Department layoffs, 2% of that department’s workforce, he cited a number of press accounts containing “Stories of tearful farewells, union outrage, and dramatic claims of ‘fascism’ that filled the airwaves.” We have unfortunately grown accustomed to such hyperbole in politics, with angry protesters flippantly throwing around terms like fascist, Nazi, and communist. But with respect to government reorganization and efficiency measures, some perspective is needed, as Driessen suggests.
