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

Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

fly.faa.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 299 posts

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#191

Post by aidenn0 »

o11c wrote: post #132
pfooti wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I think the actual underpinning support that broke this time is recission. In the past, of congress passed a budget with money for the some department or line item, that money would be spent. Now the president has claimed that he doesn't have to spend money he had been directed to spend by finding bills, and (importantly) the supreme court has upheld this stance. This means that there is no longer the ability t…

Frankly, it's time to look into seeing how recall elections work in various states. "Our legally elected representative directly refuses to represent us" should be plenty of grounds.

Recalling congressional representatives is probably not allowed. AFAICT, however, there has never been a federal court ruling on the (likely) exclusive right of congress to expel members.

The closest I could find was Burton v. U.S., where the court declined to rule, since the law in question didn't apply to senators at the time.

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#192

Post by _DeadFred_ »

dionian wrote: post #109
sigmar wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's double speak to call it a "clean CR" when there was just a huge bill changing a ton of tax code, budget, and increasing ICE's budget by 10x.[1] Passing the CR would have approved those spending changes as if they were in an appropriations bill. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Big_Beautiful_Bill_Act

with a clean CR we can open the government temporarily and pass a budget, right? the whole CR thing is terrible, we need single subject bills

They aren't negotiating. They went home. Their job is to come up with a budget but once this didn't go through they just... went home.

BTW the not passed continuing resolution only goes through November 21st.

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#193

Post by joecool1029 »

c0nducktr wrote: post #181
greedo wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Constitution forbids states from recalling Congressional representatives.

Citation needed, as I can’t find evidence of this.

They aren't wrong: https://www.cga.ct.gov/PS98/rpt%5Colr%5Chtm/98-R-1540.htm

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#194

Post by LexiMax »

colechristensen wrote: post #79
ipython wrote: post #30

My concern is that we will end up in a state of perpetual government "shutdown". The republicans, instead of reopening the entire government, will simply choose agencies to fund in order to keep the pain felt by the American people just low enough so they don't get fired (ala office space). Once that happens, Congress has basically iced itself out. Oversight from unfriendly government agencies? No worries, they're sh…

>Someone tell me why this couldn't happen. Beware the ides of march. During a constitutional crisis that doesn't seem to have an immediate resolution political violence should be expected from the inside as an attempt to reach a resolution. The last line of defense is that military leadership actually do have a pretty solid loyalty to the constitution and soldiers are pretty well trained to follow the chain of comman…

> The last line of defense is that military leadership actually do have a pretty solid loyalty to the constitution and soldiers are pretty well trained to follow the chain of command.

Trump has done a number of monumentally stupid things over the past 10 months, but publicly threatening his generals takes the cake.

Donald. Sweetie. Pumpkin. What were you thinking? These men are career military men who are not impressed or intimidated by you or your bone spurs.

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#195

Post by sershe »

Why are ATC paid by the federal government anyway? As far as I understand airports are separate private heavily regulated entities. Seems like thus should be trivial to solve by having airports/municipalities pay for their ATC. Might also improve the pay if they have to compete and take blame for this kind of stuff, instead of passing the buck.

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#196

Post by _DeadFred_ »

billy99k wrote: post #65
ipython wrote: post #30

My concern is that we will end up in a state of perpetual government "shutdown". The republicans, instead of reopening the entire government, will simply choose agencies to fund in order to keep the pain felt by the American people just low enough so they don't get fired (ala office space). Once that happens, Congress has basically iced itself out. Oversight from unfriendly government agencies? No worries, they're sh…

[flagged]

They control the body. Their solution to not passing a budget, nor a continuing resolution was... to just go home.

You can negotiate a budget during a shutdown. You can't negotiate if you sent everyone home.

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#197

Post by tombert »

johnfn wrote: post #188
tombert wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say it was the only reason to take a job, and I clarified that even at the time. It's perfectly fine to factor in other benefits to the job, (e.g. how much you like the work, how much you like your coworkers, etc.). I actually quit that BigCo and took a paycut to work at a different company because it was soul-draining. When I say "we all do this for the money", I'm saying that this is a necessary component…

In your OP, your primary argument, as I read it, was that business is fundamentally a business transaction. When I pointed this out, you changed your argument to how there are other benefits to a job. My point is that if you go around and tell everyone at work that you're doing it because of the money, you're... not coming off particularly well? A statement like that comes off a bit odd and socially tone-deaf? And ye…

I said “they give me money and benefits”, and I didn’t define what those benefits were. As I said, I hated working at that BigCo and took a pay cut to work with people I liked more to do work I thought would be more fun. To me the benefit was being able to do work I enjoyed more. I apologize if that wasn’t clear, obviously there are more categories to choosing a job than net pay; if there weren’t we wouldn’t have any teachers.

It wasn’t like I just blurted it out when people were deciding which database to use, it was relevant to the discussion. I can’t remember the exact conversation but IIRC we were having trouble hiring someone for a role and the topic of compensation came up. I felt my comment was relevant, and I genuinely didn’t even consider that people would have issue with it because I thought it was borderline tautological.

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#198

Post by mindslight »

aidenn0 wrote: post #187
mindslight wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impeachment. Negotiations should start with impeachment. The President is not faithfully executing the laws passed by Congress, and the Supplicating Council has decreed that the only remedy is impeachment. It's time to impeach and convict.

When about half of congress is more okay with the executive collecting power than with impeaching the executive, that threat is meaningless.

Well yes, the follow up to my point is that every member of Congress who is not currently supporting impeachment/conviction is complicit in this abject failure of governance.

Congress has had problems for decades (thanks to Newt and the childish boomers), which is what has been accreting so much power in the Presidency to begin with. But there is still time to pull up by Congress reasserting its authority as an institution, and that time is now.

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#199

Post by keysersoze33 »

ipython wrote: post #30

My concern is that we will end up in a state of perpetual government "shutdown". The republicans, instead of reopening the entire government, will simply choose agencies to fund in order to keep the pain felt by the American people just low enough so they don't get fired (ala office space). Once that happens, Congress has basically iced itself out. Oversight from unfriendly government agencies? No worries, they're sh…

(we need to talk about your TPS reports)

Re: Ground stop at JFK due to staffing

#200

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

svnt wrote: post #168
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rammed through, is an interesting way to write that they had the votes and passed HR1. When Democrats had the Admin, Senate, and House, they put the ACA provisions on sunsetting subsidies in. How dastardly are the Republicans that they forced Democrats to do that when it was done with almost zero Republican votes? Your post is just game. “My side is good and their side is evil”… don’t you get tired of that?

“We passed clean government funding that cost 20 million people their health care coverage.” You are falling for semantics games.

It’s the CR that Dems passed last year.

Stop. You aren’t even falling for it. They’re using shutdown as leverage to try and get something they couldn’t get when they had all three houses. You can agree or disagree that is a good idea or that it will work, but can’t pretend it isn’t what it is.

Post reply on HN