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

101–110 of 133 posts

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

#101

Post by xp84 »

sunnyps wrote: post #57
Alupis wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on which part you believe isn't true? The bill already passed the House. The Democrats have a minorotiy in the Senate. 60 votes are required to pass the bill - and Democrats are holding it up, deliberately for political reasons. It's entirely factual.

Republicans can end the filibuster in the Senate with a simple majority after which they can pass the funding bill with a simple majority. But of course, they won't do that since it opens up other bills to be passed with a simple majority too in the future. So it's not factual. edit: This is what they would need to do: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option

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 though they should not be confident that the DNC will ever be in a position to benefit from this new power later themselves.

I think shutdowns are usually pretty stupid, but I’m not reading for “nuclear option” to be the way this one gets resolved.

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

#102

Post by cosmicgadget »

fragmede wrote: post #88
SpaceNoodled wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's illegal, as it's a violation of the Hatch Act.

The official interpretation of the Hatch act was changed in April of this year, so it's likely not.

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

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

#103

Post by Alupis »

fragsworth wrote: post #89
culi wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

60 votes are needed to pass so we can agree both parties are at fault when it comes to any individual bill. But the last time Democrats negotiated a bill Trump decided to simply not appropriate the funds Congress passed. Something no passed president has ever done. Republicans are responsible for creating the environment where legislation passed can be selectively implemented

The party in charge generally decides the content of the bills they choose to vote on. It's the party in charge that wrote a bill they knew that no Democrats could accept.

And last time we had this same standoff, Democrats held a majority and Republicans were blamed for not "getting in line". Can't have it both ways guys...

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

#104

Post by Sabinus »

xp84 wrote: post #97
johnnyanmac wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to add some context to this "clean federal funding": a "clean bill" here means "let things expire". Democrats are fighting for a continuing resolution which extends whatever is about to expire. In this case, the ACA subsidies would expire if a clean funding bill is passed.

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…

Forget Medicaid expansions expiring, the Democrat ultimatum should be around Trump's crypto bribes and seizing the power of the purse from Congress.

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

#105

Post by mikeyouse »

xp84 wrote: post #99
mikeyouse wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

‘People should be lied to by the government out of political convenience’ is a theory I guess. Though not one I’d endorse. It’s equally true that “Senate republicans failed to put forth a spending CR that could attract 60 votes” or “Senate republicans failed to pass filibuster reform to only require 50 votes on spending measures.” Are equally true statements yet somehow they didn’t make the autoresponders. Weird.

Absolutely! All those things could correctly be said, and maybe that’s what would be said now if the Democrats had won the last presidential election! Instead, they ran a candidate who was so unpopular she dropped out before Iowa last time she ran. The DNC still hasn’t processed this reality, though.

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 our apolitical institutions into megaphones for the party in power is an absolute nightmare and is illegal for a reason.

Seriously - how can you possibly defend something like this: https://www.hud.gov/

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

#106

Post by plantwallshoe »

dingnuts wrote: post #38
plantwallshoe wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not factual that democratic senators are blocking the bill. Republicans have a majority in both houses and can pass the bill at any time.

not true, they do not have a super majority in the Senate and need a handful of Democrats to vote with them to achieve the 60 votes they need. that said, somehow the Democrats always find Republicans to compromise with them when they have a simple majority, so I do not know why it is so hard for the Republicans to soften their demands enough to peel off some moderates to vote with them

There is no law requiring 60 votes. Only a senate rule, which can be overturned with 51 votes.

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

#107

Post by plantwallshoe »

mcmcmc wrote: post #27
plantwallshoe wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not factual that democratic senators are blocking the bill. Republicans have a majority in both houses and can pass the bill at any time.

Budget resolutions require 60 votes to pass, so they really can’t. But they know that and their refusal to negotiate is blocking it. Dems are doing what’s best for their constituents by not voting for a budget that would skyrocket healthcare costs for millions of Americans. Meanwhile the GOP is spreading misinformation that Dems want to fund healthcare for illegal immigrants, who have NEVER been eligible for it.

There is no law requiring 60 votes. Only a senate rule, which can be overturned with 51 votes.

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

#108

Post by xp84 »

mikeyouse wrote: post #105
xp84 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely! All those things could correctly be said, and maybe that’s what would be said now if the Democrats had won the last presidential election! Instead, they ran a candidate who was so unpopular she dropped out before Iowa last time she ran. The DNC still hasn’t processed this reality, though.

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.

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

#109

Post by JustExAWS »

JustExAWS wrote: post #47
bragr wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The laws are different when you work for the government. Which laws? Because every government job I've come across has pretty strict rules on what you can and cannot say in public, or at least they way in which you have to frame it apart from your job.

I added the link in my comment in an edit before you replied to be fair https://www.welcometothejungle.com/en/articles/free-speech-a... But from the ABA for a more reliable source. https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/publications/yourab...

I meant I added the parent link after you replied. In other words it was on me for not providing a citation

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

#110

Post by fragmede »

cosmicgadget wrote: post #102
fragmede wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The official interpretation of the Hatch act was changed in April of this year, so it's likely not.

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 their official capacity. The new Hatch Act advisory opinion (the “April 25 Advisory") supersedes the May 20, 2024, and October 15, 2024, opinions in three ways.

> First, OSC will return to its traditional practice of referring Hatch Act violations by White House Commissioned officers to the President for appropriate action.

> Second, OSC is pausing the referral of cases against former employees to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) until the legal question concerning jurisdiction is resolved.

> Third, OSC is discarding the “year-round workplace political item prohibition" on wearing or displaying of political candidate or political party items in the workplace related to the campaigns of “current or contemporaneous political figures (CCPFs)." In practice, the blanket prohibition created too great a burden on First Amendment interests.

Post reply on HN