Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 133 posts

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#121

Post by johnnyanmac »

foogazi wrote: post #115
xp84 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Democrats already lost the battle on those things (cuts to Medicaid + no extension of Obamacare subsidies) and they were already going to happen because Democrats didn’t (and don’t) have the votes to renew them because they can’t win elections. Now they’re using this opportunity to try to get those things back at gunpoint. It’s not propaganda that the Republicans have offered a CR which changes nothing additional…

> Democrats didn’t (and don’t) have the votes to renew them because they can’t win elections. They win once and all of a sudden they feel they are the new kings

After this all blows over, I never want to hear a 1A nor 2A argument from anyone who voted for this ever again. Nor anything about balancing the budget It's clear that they love to be treaded on and welcome it on a red carpet.

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#122

Post by mikeyouse »

xp84 wrote: post #108
mikeyouse wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point that everyone is so keen to miss is that those are fine statements to make by political parties or candidates and wholly inappropriate and obviously illegal ones to make by government employees and websites. . That there are two valid opposing ‘truths’ which can be wielded to bludgeon a political opponent is exactly why we made it illegal for the government to make these type of statements. Turning all of o…

They’re facts. What’s wrong with them? Democrats did shut down the government. One party currently wants a clean CR and the other, the minority, wants to advance their agenda as a condition of not forcing a shutdown. This is an exact reversal of what the republicans did years ago and we all mocked them for it. Anyway, they’re facts.

"The Radical Left in Congress shut down the government" is a 'Fact' you think is appropriate to be displayed via a popup to every visitor on HUD.gov?

"The radical left has chosen to shut down the United States government in the name of reckless spending and obstructionism." is an appropriate message for Treasury.gov when it's illegal to use Federal resources for political messaging?

Be serious.

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#123

Post by cosmicgadget »

fragmede wrote: post #110
cosmicgadget wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait was the statute amended or did the judiciary change the interpretation?

https://osc.gov/News/Pages/25-99-OSC-Announces-Updates-to-Ha... > Today, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) announces a new advisory rescinding the Hatch Act advisory opinion dated May 20, 2024, and a related advisory opinion dated October 15, 2024. The Hatch Act, a federal law passed in 1939, limits certain political activity of federal employees while they are on duty, in the federal workplace, or acting in t…

So not judicial nor legislative. The Hatch Act has not changed, the president's OSC appointee has unsurprisingly decided that executive will investigate itself.

While you can grasp the barest of threads that your original statement was true because the OSC is "official" and anyone is afforded an interpretation, it's really goddamn deceptive. If anything is "the" intepretation it's derived from statute and/or common law, not one side's lawyers.

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#124

Post by xp84 »

UncleMeat wrote: post #118
xp84 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s weird to me that any Democrat would be rooting for the nuclear option right now. After losing so badly last year, after demographic trends continue to degrade their ability to win majorities in either house or in to win in most swing states, and with Trump improving his numbers even in blue states last year. Democrats are currently daring Republicans to eliminate their last resort option to block anything, even…

While I'd prefer to get the first legislative crack at it, I am extremely convinced that the filibuster is poison to our country. Congress cannot pass anything meaningful except one omnibus spending bill each year via budget reconciliation, which has arcane rules around flat budget impact after 10 years. Since congress can't do anything, we naturally move more and more of the details of federal governance to executiv…

Your points are really insightful. Especially:

> Since congress can't do anything, we naturally move more and more of the details of federal governance to executive agencies and executive orders.

It's really interesting how wildly different this is than parliamentary systems where Parliament is the ultimate authority and the executive's tenure simply ends if they lose the 'confidence' of a plurality in Parliament.

Instead we have a useless legislature as you described, and an executive whose claim to all this additional power is actually quite dubious, yet that executive controls nearly everything. I don't think a swing to the other party changes this, either (not that the DNC is capable of winning elections enough to ever hold the kind of power the GOP now has). I think from now on, the President will rule by executive action, and use creative avenues like rulings from friendly courts to vaguely legitimize this power.

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#125

Post by xp84 »

mikeyouse wrote: post #122
xp84 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re facts. What’s wrong with them? Democrats did shut down the government. One party currently wants a clean CR and the other, the minority, wants to advance their agenda as a condition of not forcing a shutdown. This is an exact reversal of what the republicans did years ago and we all mocked them for it. Anyway, they’re facts.

"The Radical Left in Congress shut down the government" is a 'Fact' you think is appropriate to be displayed via a popup to every visitor on HUD.gov? "The radical left has chosen to shut down the United States government in the name of reckless spending and obstructionism." is an appropriate message for Treasury.gov when it's illegal to use Federal resources for political messaging? Be serious.

TBH I agree that one is too much. The ones that say "Democrats blocked H.R. whatever which was a clean CR" are fine though. Perhaps someone with at least half a clue okayed that kind of phrasing, and then people got carried away writing the more ridiculous ones knowing it would curry favor with Trump.

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#126

Post by fragmede »

cosmicgadget wrote: post #123
fragmede wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://osc.gov/News/Pages/25-99-OSC-Announces-Updates-to-Ha... > Today, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) announces a new advisory rescinding the Hatch Act advisory opinion dated May 20, 2024, and a related advisory opinion dated October 15, 2024. The Hatch Act, a federal law passed in 1939, limits certain political activity of federal employees while they are on duty, in the federal workplace, or acting in t…

So not judicial nor legislative. The Hatch Act has not changed, the president's OSC appointee has unsurprisingly decided that executive will investigate itself. While you can grasp the barest of threads that your original statement was true because the OSC is "official" and anyone is afforded an interpretation, it's really goddamn deceptive. If anything is "the" intepretation it's derived from statute and/or common l…

I mean, the OSC isn't some bunch of randoms who call themselves "official" for funsies. Violations of the Hatch Act fall under their jurisdiction. They're the ones that investigate violations. They put out a statement that says political messages (of a certain kind) are totally fine.

This means, to me, that claiming "The official interpretation of the Hatch act was changed" isn't at all a stretch. The officials, the ones in charge of interpreting it, put out a statement saying they've changed how they're interpreting it. How is that deceptive? What words would you use instead?

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#127

Post by dns_snek »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #120
xp84 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Democrats already lost the battle on those things (cuts to Medicaid + no extension of Obamacare subsidies) and they were already going to happen because Democrats didn’t (and don’t) have the votes to renew them because they can’t win elections. Now they’re using this opportunity to try to get those things back at gunpoint. It’s not propaganda that the Republicans have offered a CR which changes nothing additional…

>’m not a democrat or a republican, I’m not rooting for either one You clear are of you're rooting for your own Healthcare premiums to go up. This really isn't a left or right issue. Heck, this proportionately hurts red states more. Must be so tiring in office to try and defend people who actively wish for your destruction.

> This really isn't a left or right issue.

That's precisely what this is, views on welfare are one of the most fundamental ideological differences between "the left" and "the right".

What's messed up is that people who need social welfare and subsidies the most end up voting for conservatism and austerity, so everyone ends up twisting the definitions of "the left" and "the right" to rationalize their own choices.

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#128

Post by johnnyanmac »

dns_snek wrote: post #127
johnnyanmac wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>’m not a democrat or a republican, I’m not rooting for either one You clear are of you're rooting for your own Healthcare premiums to go up. This really isn't a left or right issue. Heck, this proportionately hurts red states more. Must be so tiring in office to try and defend people who actively wish for your destruction.

> This really isn't a left or right issue. That's precisely what this is, views on welfare are one of the most fundamental ideological differences between "the left" and "the right". What's messed up is that people who need social welfare and subsidies the most end up voting for conservatism and austerity, so everyone ends up twisting the definitions of "the left" and "the right" to rationalize their own choices.

It's really not, it's a uniquely American problem. You don't have the far right in the UK nor Japan nor India try to argue about increasing Healthcare premiums. It's as foreign idea to them as national id's are for the US.

But yes, I completely agree with your comment otherwise.

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#129

Post by xp84 »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #120
xp84 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Democrats already lost the battle on those things (cuts to Medicaid + no extension of Obamacare subsidies) and they were already going to happen because Democrats didn’t (and don’t) have the votes to renew them because they can’t win elections. Now they’re using this opportunity to try to get those things back at gunpoint. It’s not propaganda that the Republicans have offered a CR which changes nothing additional…

>’m not a democrat or a republican, I’m not rooting for either one You clear are of you're rooting for your own Healthcare premiums to go up. This really isn't a left or right issue. Heck, this proportionately hurts red states more. Must be so tiring in office to try and defend people who actively wish for your destruction.

I’m not on Obamacare, so my premiums aren’t going up. Obamacare is also pretty terrible, since those plans always have worse networks than private insurance since those plans have shitty reimbursement rates. Anyone who can avoid Obamacare plans avoids them, and is smart to do so.

One reason I don’t support the DNC is because Obamacare is such a shitty and compromised system, designed to help insurance companies maximize their profits. Since the Democrats can’t convince anyone to vote for them because they are obsessed with draping themselves in the mantles of unpopular culture war issues, they have proven unable to get the kind of power it would take to pass even a public option, let alone an “NHS.”

I don’t support the GOP, of course, because instead of coming up with a better alternative or an overhaul, they just fuck around with it and try to make it worse and more expensive.

Both sides are idiots here.

Re: Gov workers say their shutdown out-of-office replies were forcibly changed

#130

Post by cosmicgadget »

fragmede wrote: post #126
cosmicgadget wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So not judicial nor legislative. The Hatch Act has not changed, the president's OSC appointee has unsurprisingly decided that executive will investigate itself. While you can grasp the barest of threads that your original statement was true because the OSC is "official" and anyone is afforded an interpretation, it's really goddamn deceptive. If anything is "the" intepretation it's derived from statute and/or common l…

I mean, the OSC isn't some bunch of randoms who call themselves "official" for funsies. Violations of the Hatch Act fall under their jurisdiction. They're the ones that investigate violations. They put out a statement that says political messages (of a certain kind) are totally fine. This means, to me, that claiming "The official interpretation of the Hatch act was changed" isn't at all a stretch. The officials, the…

The judiciary interprets the law. As I said, you can narrowly say OSC is "official" and "interprets" the law, but it's a deceptive way to describe the situation. Hopefully we'll see another group successully claim standing for being harmed by Hatch Act violations.

An honest way to describe the situation is "the Trump OSC has decided that Trump should investigate Trump and it is unclear if anyone else can sue for relief from a politicized civil service". At the very least "they've put out a statement saying they've changed their interpretation" is far better than the passive voice.

Post reply on HN