The “Deep State” … fact or fiction
There is a lot of talk about a “deep state” – sometimes referred to as the “administrative state” or just “the bureaucracy.” Those on the right see the burgeoning bureaucracy as a threat to the inalienable rights of the people, the federal system and a bottom up republic. The left cast concerns about a deep state as some sort of conspiracy theory – viewing a strong central regulatory government as the best determinant of rights and a benevolent overseer.
So, which is it? A baseless political conspiracy theory or a dangerous amassing of undemocratic powers by an ensconced Washington establishment?
It is important to keep in mind that authoritarianism, tyranny and oppression require a consolidation of power in a central government operated by quasi-permanent elitist authority – in the extreme, a dictator. It is the opposite of government of the people, by the people and for the people.
As a believer in the Founders’ concept of limited government with maximum power resting with the people, I view the growing bureaucracy in Washington with considerable alarm. What the Founders feared most was a powerful central – and potentially tyrannical – government.
We often note that the Constitution and Bill of Rights were established to protect our inalienable rights and freedoms. But we need to ask, from what and who? The answer to that question is simple …excessive government. The Founders made that very clear.
The Constitution is based on the supreme “inalienable rights” of the people, not the supreme power of the government to establish arbitrary or transitory rights. The Founders saw excessive government as the greatest potential threat to our rights and freedoms. So much so that they enacted the much-ignored 10th Amendment as part of the Bill of Rights, it states that any powers not specifically granted to the federal government are to be retained by the states and we the people. THAT is the central core of conservative political philosophy.
To underscore their belief in a limited federal government, the Founders established the concept of states rights. Just as the people have inalienable rights, states have rights that are not to be abridged by the federal government – even though they have been to an extreme degree.
It is beyond refutation that the federal government has amassed increasing regulatory powers over the states and the people over many years – at the expense of our personal freedoms AND ability to influence policy. The power of governance has been gradually shifting from bottom up to top down – from the consensus of we the people to the determination of an aloof elitist ruling class.
Those on the left tell us that the bureaucracy is merely the worker bees laboring in a non-partisan manner in the best interest of the people. That may have been the case in the early days of the Republic. But like Frankenstein’s creation, the bureaucracy has evolved into a power of its own – shredding the Constitution and shattering the pillars of democracy.
The main problem has been the growth of an entrenched branch of government that has broadened its regulatory scope and has assumed increasing powers without accountability to the people. Bureaucrats often note that elected officials come and go, but they operate indefinitely without the assent of the people.
This is not a new issue. It has been at the core of the conservative/progressive debate for generations. I first started writing about my concern over the growth of the bureaucracy and the expansion of federal power more than 40 years ago. At the time, I described the bureaucracy as the fourth branch of government – and potentially, the most powerful branch. It has since increasingly usurped powers from all three constitutional branches – the Executive, the Legislative and even the Judiciary.
What is today called the “deep state” is that same concept. It is the marriage between the bureaucracy, progressive political officeholders, who believe in empowering the federal government is their own retention of power, and a political infrastructure of professionals – lawyers, accountants, consultants, lobbyists, etc – who feed off government. That is the Washington establishment – a rose by any other name.
Since consolidation of power in a central government is the essence of authoritarian tyranny (the opposite of constitutional federalism), it can be fairly stated that those who believe in an ever more expanding and powerful central government represent and promote authoritarian concepts.
The more powerful the national government, the less influence the people have. We can attend local hearings and talk to our most local officials. As power moves up to the state and federal levels, our individual influence evaporates. We are no longer self-governing but ruled over by nameless bureaucrats. It was exactly what the Founders feared most. It was inherent in Benjamin Franklin’s admonition that “it is a Republic, IF YOU CAN KEEP IT.” We are currently not keeping it.
In its most benign description, the federal bureaucracy is merely of non-partisan workers who carry out laws enacted by Congress … orders issued by the President of the United States — and decisions of the courts. That may be a nice theory – and may have had some validity in the 1800s. But it has evolved over the past 100-plus years into a self-motivated and self-instructed branch of government. It operates superior to the three major branches of government – and has assumed regulatory powers traditionally the purview of the states.
The essential difference between progressives and conservatives is that the former believe a big powerful central government is the proper means of governance, while conservatives see the consolidation of power in an aloof and unaccountable central government as an evolving danger to personal freedom and the ability of the people to govern in our own best interest.
Creeping authoritarianism may be the way republics and democracies die. Perhaps it is inevitable. Whether we call it fascism, communism or socialism, all central planning authoritarianism have the same two realities – a loss of the people’s freedom and influence in the development of public policy AND the eventual catastrophic failure to serve the interests and welfare of the people. We have seen this failure over and over in such places as Russia. Cuba and Venezuela.
More than thirty years ago – as China was moving away from dogmatic communism – a high ranking government official asked me: “Why is America moving in the direction we are running from?” It was a good question. Why, indeed?
Those on the left talk of protecting the inalienable rights of the people even as they curtail them. They talk of upholding and defending the Constitution even as they undermine it.
The primary threat to the American Republic comes from a self-empowered unaccountable bureaucracy. Whether you call it the “deep state,” the “administrative state” or whatever, this issue is the same. We the people lose our right and ability to self-govern THE government,
So, there ‘tis.
As in one of his previous columns, Larry conflates “deep state” with the “administrative state” or “bureaucracy”. Yes, the left views the “deep state” as a right-wing conspiracy theory. The right cites the “deep state” as an excuse for anything that doesn’t go their way, whether it be an election or a Supreme Court ruling (less likely these days), or an environmental regulation they don’t like. They blame the “deep state”, foriegn governments, George Soros, shadow governments – everything but themselves and their policies.
In reality, the administrators and bureaucrats follow the laws that Congress passes. Congress passes the best representation of what Republicans (and Larry) accuse them of having nefarious motives. In reality, it’s the ultra-wealthy who are opposed to the bureaucracy, because they have lost the battle out in the open. Their only hope is to villify the administrators of the laws and convince people that the “deep state” is working against the will of the people.
Larry recognizes that a dictator amasses power, but fails to recognize that Felon Trump is trying to do just that. Felon Trump’s personal needs are focused on himself by his two failed elections (in popular vote), his failed Presidency, and his impending sentencing for multiple felonies and his remaining trials. What started out as a game to increase his brand awareness has turned into a battle where he loses everything if he doesn’t win.
Felon Trump and his ilk have created Project 2025, which, among other things calls for firing all of the federal bureaucrats and replacing them with his own loyalists. As President, Felon Trump used the Attorney General to downplay his crimes. Felon Trump put his own people in the Diplomatic core, to subvert the normal transactions between countries. No other President has tried to consolidate personal power in that way.
Blaming the Deep State or bureaucrats for “creeping authoritarianism” ignores what the Republican Party has become over the years, since Reagan and culminating with Felon Trump at the helm.
Joseph S Bruder … More abysmal ignorance? You say “In reality, the administrators and bureaucrats follow the laws that Congress passes.” One of the major issues for many years has been the bureaucracy exceeding or disregarding “the intent of Congress” in enforcing legislation. That is one of the major corruptive qualities of the bureaucracy. Your Pollyanna view of how government works is parts of the problem. You are a classic radical leftist in peddling that a strong central government servers the people’s interests and desires. That is how authoritarians talk about government. It is always for the benefit of the people. Try to ell that to the people in Cuba, Russian, North Korea, etc.
Larry, I’ve worked with bureacracies from the legislative side. They NEVER pass a rule without lengthy reviews and long periods for public comments. Every rule gets approved by a subcommittee dedicated to that particular branch of regulators. Because of my technical background, I served on committees involved with public utilities. There’s nothing more regulated (or boring) than the PUC, but it also affects pretty much every voter in the state. It has nothing to do with “a strong central government” – it’s about the people delegating authority to the legislature, who works with the agencies to set up the rules. There are NO rules made without legislative input, no legislation without a long and drawn-out process, and if Congress doesn’t like a rule they are free to amend the law. My experience is that agencies try extremely hard to meet both the letter and the spirit of the law. First, it looks really bad for the agency when they get rules reversed, and secondly, getting reversed in a very public way often erodes confidence in the agency leaders and leads to their replacement.
I doubt you can name a rule where the agency exceeded either the will or the intent of Congress. For example, the Clean Water Act designated navigable waterways and their tributaries as protected. Of course, today’s Republican Conservatives are up in arms about that (even though Republicans and Nixon helped push the law and created the EPA), because some big companies get pissed off when they get sued by the EPA for polluting creeks and streams. But the intent was clear – prevent pollution from flowing to into lakes and ponds, creeks and streams, rivers, and the ocean. It’s not “bureaucratic overreach”, it was exactly what Congress intended at the time. Republicans would like to change that to allow “some” pollution, but there would be a tremendous outcry from the public, and Republicans would lose elections. The rules mean that there is paperwork and review when someone wants to do something that affects a waterway, fines and cleanup fees if they do it illegally, and it might mean that some businesses may not be allowed to do what they had planned – but you know, most people approve of that. Maybe not Conservative Republicans who think that every regulation is bad, but most people. And you only have to look at rivers that used to burn because of the chemicals, (Cincinatti comes to mind) or the ones that were too dirty to swim in and now they’re not (for example the Potomac and the Charles rivers), to know that the original authors of the law were correct in their legislation.
If you think the organizations are exceeding the “will of Congress”, what you really mean is that “Congress passed a law that Conservatives don’t like, and now Conservatives are bitching and moaning to get it changed”. You use perjorative descriptions like “radical leftist” and “pollyanna view” and “abysmal ignorance”, but in reality you have no fucking idea how it works and are striking out because you’re a paranoid old man who thinks the “deep state” is out to destroy the world. Man, you’ve really got to stop watching FOX News and listening to Felon Trump.
Time to hang up your spurs, partner.
Joseph S Bruder … It is obvious you only have had experience at the state level. You are unaware of the problem with “intent of Congress” and the FEDERAL bureaucracy. And for the record, I watch MSNBC and CNN much more than FOX. You base you affirmative insults on your own ignorance That is the problem with you, You just shoot off you mouth to make points without having any consideration for the facts. You are lucky that the owner of PBP believe in the First Amendment and allows you to make a fool of your self.
Larry, I am going to assume that when you say, “administrative state” or just “the bureaucracy.” , you are referring to all of the lawful departments of federal government and their respective agencies, such as the EPA, NHTSA, IRS, etc.
The APA is a remedial statute designed to ensure uniformity and openness in the procedures used by federal agencies. The Act is a comprehensive regulatory scheme governing regulations, adjudications, and rule making in general terms.
And then there is the CRA. The Congressional Review Act (CRA) is a tool that Congress may use to overturn rules issued by federal agencies. The CRA requires agencies to report on their rule making activities to Congress and provides Congress with a special set of procedures under which to consider legislation to overturn those rules.
Under the CRA, before a rule can take effect, an agency must submit a report to each house of Congress and the comptroller general containing a copy of the rule; a concise general statement describing the rule, including whether it is a major rule; and the proposed effective date of the rule. After receiving the report, Members of Congress have specified time periods during which they must submit and act on a joint resolution of disapproval to take advantage of the CRA’s special “fast track” procedures. If both houses pass the resolution, it is sent to the President for signature or veto. If the President were to veto the resolution, Congress could vote to override the veto.
If a joint resolution of disapproval is submitted within the CRA-specified deadline, passed by Congress, and signed by the President, the CRA states that the disapproved rule “shall not take effect (or continue).” The rule would be deemed not to have had any effect.
Now Larry, I have just outlined the process for making a rule and getting rid of a rule. Congress can use the CRA to overturn any rule it deems unconstitutional, or inappropriate, or unnecessary. It all involves Congress one way or another.
So what is your gripe??? Are you really taking 1000 words to describe two words, “Government over-reach”?
It seems to me that government has grown because the country has grown in so many ways from technology, chemistry, economy, etc. and it all has to be controlled so as not to harm the people. It almost seems like what you propose which seem to be to get rid of these regulatory agencies, is actually radical, not the current system! It sounds like you would advocate toxic chemical dumping in the north part of the Mississippi River such as in Minnesota as ok if the MN state says its ok, despite what it might do to shrimpers and fishers in LA? Is this what you really want?? Do you realize the number of lawsuits that would take place?? And how it would tear apart our happy union of states!??
Are you attempting to justify Project 25 without actually saying it??? Sure sounds like it. Wipe out the IRS, Dept. of Education, EPA, etc. etc. I do not think you realize the good some of these agencies do such as the Dept. of Education Federal loans and grants for education, school lunch programs that feed poor kids, etc. EPA that keep the waters clean for everyone from the source to the end of the river.
China was running from what Emily Wu wrote about in her book “The Feather In The Storm”. They were running away from the Mao Era which is quite different that the USA decades ago when the man asked you that question. China is now finding out that it does not have much clean water nor clean air and its got a major health problem. Your answer should have been that we recognize the need for some government control for the health and safety of the people but we are not anywhere near the Mao Era, and have no desire to get there.
Larry, I do not feel like I have any rights that have been curtailed. Can you tell me of some that were curtailed?
Trump will do more to curtail our rights than any progressives could do. Its called Project 25 – and he already started with rigging the SCOTUS with people that think like you to overturn Row v. Wade. Trump calls it Agenda 47 but it is the same wording as Project 25 – which is wildly unpopular in the USA!
Please give me three “unaccountable beauracracies” and why you feel they are unaccountable since we have the APA and the CRA???!!!
Maybe Mr. Bruder’s last paragraph about you just might be true!!! Up till now, I have thought that you were just writing stupidity in your articles to be a bit of an asshole and get more responses which translates to more money for getting paid by the word. Now I am seriously wondering just what your mental state is my friend. HELL YES!!! You really need me more than ever to keep you honest and on the narrow path!!!!
Horist: got proof? How many rules and regulations are deemed unconstitutional and how many of these “lean left?”
What I want to know Frank is how many of my rights have been curtailed??? I can’t think of any, and now I am worried about what I have lost!!!!
Help me Frank!!! I am happy in NC. I seem to have plenty of rights!!! But what if Larry is correct!!! OMG I think I am about to melt down!!!
Larry probably won’t answer you. Maybe he will say the regulations against lead paint and leaded gasoline should be trashed then we can all be mentally ill. I’m remembering that stupid article in PBP about lead hunting ammo and how we should allow it despite the increased lead counts in rivers and stream near popular hunting grounds. As a hunter I understood the article but still thought it was good to get rid of lead ammo projectiles and shot.
Tom, pretty funny. Of course, Horist is exaggerating. And you must know the basic offense is the concept of rules and regulations looking like laws enacted without representation. And now that the biased SCOTUS has totally buggered this up, it’s actually an important issue.
Almost every law restricts someone from something. And almost always winners and losers. That’s the right; the right for you not to follow rules and regulations restricting you.
One point I agree; it’s a fucking red tape jungle out there and red tape alone would stop me from being a small business. It’s red tape hell just to open your doors and if you hire someone, double the red tape. Thank God in the corporate world, I had people to cover me. In my own life I am pretty much off the grid and out of sight so I just do what I like. Don’t need no stinkin hunting or buildingee permits, I just stay out of range.
But to think there’s some sort of conspiracy coming after Horist or slowing down Trump is ludicrous. And giving the President the King-like ability to replace all his serfs every change of party, maybe every four years is a waste of time and money. These guys preach chaos as a cure for paranoia; it will not work. They will still be frustrated and paranoid.
Fyi: your lead comment is funny since you have a candidate promising lead solutions for liberals. Close to home eh? Hope he loses. You guys were looking better n better.
Frank, do you mean Mark Robinson the GOP candidate that Trump endorsed!??? That man is a certified nut!!! How he ever became Lt. Gov I do not know!! He is running commercials in NC that say the solution to “the abortion problem” is for women to keep their skirts down!!! By the way, his wife had an abortion when they were dating. I wonder if he can spell hypocricy?
Raping and Murdering Biden was only put in power by those dirty Dark forces seeking power and not
caring about who was to be murdered by their policy’s.
And yes, the Republicans and Democrat’s are both guilty of this.
Why do you suppose Trumps first term was Kayos as those Republicans on the Deep State side did not
know what to do as Trump was elected.
As said before, I am not a Republican for these very reasons, as Both sides pander to the Dollar.
I am Trump supporter!
Why do you think Trump had no backing when he took office as those on the Republican side
had back door deals with Democrat’s they needed to fulfill.
This Term when Trump is elected, he will do what he should have done the first term, Flush the
Washington D C Toilet and get rid of the floating turds that stink up the Republican Party!
The Evil like Soros’s, will always exist, it has from the dawn of time and will always tempt honest people with Silver!
Their gain is ALWAYS EVERYONELSESS LOSS!
Just amazing how everyone knowing more than you Larry just a month ago said Biden was the Man!
Clowns!, NO Puppets!
As I read “The Deep State, Fact or Fiction,” I am amazed how Horist tosses in the kitchen sink of every conservative lament. So many dog whistles, so little time. Deep State, Washington Establishment, Authoritarianism, Autocrat, Dictator, Bureaucracy, Powerful central government, States Rights, Aloof Elitest Ruling Class —– oh my, how can Horist sleep at night.
The Deep State is nothing more than a large bureaucracy manned by people from both parties, in large numbers each, passing rules and regulations that follow the laws passed by Congress. There is no conspiracy, no coordination, no attempt to control your life beyond setting up specific rules and regulations by individuals. No conspiracy, no cabal, no coordinated effort by either party.
The best overreach was his conclusion: “Those on the left tell us that the bureaucracy is merely the worker bees laboring in a non-partisan manner in the best interest of the people. That may have been the case in the early days of the Republic. But like Frankenstein’s creation, the bureaucracy has evolved into a power of its own – shredding the Constitution and shattering the pillars of democracy.” That’s just fucking funny to conclude the pillars and shattered as the Constitution is shredded….. Especially from a guy who worked for Nixon at a time the growth was exponential.
Does the Deep State exist? Yes and no. There is no coordinated effort within the government to control your lives. Basically, there cannot be. Horist lays blame: “It is the marriage between the bureaucracy, progressive political officeholders, who believe in empowering the federal government is their own retention of power, and a political infrastructure of professionals – lawyers, accountants, consultants, lobbyists, etc – who feed off government. That is the Washington establishment – a rose by any other name.” By definition, this cannot be true and Horist cannot prove this truth.
He states it’s a matter of size as in big government bad, Founders wanted small as possible. Everything should be done at the State as the Founders Intended. This may be true, but where is the line? The Founders did not envision the radio, the tv, the internet. They lived when it took weeks or months to get the news out. They couldn’t even get from place to place at speeds higher than a horse. James Madison in the Federalist Papers said our government is: “neither wholly national nor wholly federal.” Yes, the leaning to governance was towards the States, that does not say the Founders would not be OK with the current status. And the Founders saw a place, an evolving place, for both the Federal and State Governments. Where the line is will be our cross to bear.
The Founders wanted a Federal and State Governments for three reasons: to avoid tyranny by either State or Federal leaders, to allow more participation in politics with Federal Elections, and my favorite, to use the states as “laboratories” for new ideas and programs.
Horist is right, size matters. The Federal Government has indeed grown. And with growth comes bureaucracy, red tape, and other complexities. The US has grown too, and with 330M people comes bureaucracy, red tape, and other complexities. The days of Deano’s “Purple light in the canyons. That’s where I long to be. With my three good companions. Just my rifle, pony and me” are pretty much over. There will be community wherever you are. Suck it up, buttercup. But even with community, community efforts, we still can have individual liberties if we try.
The federal government has exploded since Horist started working for it. Peaking about 2010, it’s been pretty flat since then except for a covid crash. But pretty flat for a couple decades. However, Donald J. Trump expanded the Federal Government to be the largest amount in over a decade. Go figure.
Funny thing, State Government size follows a similar expansion path as the Federal Government. Go figure, going to the States will not shrink government. State governments are six times or more larger than the Federal Government.
Clearly moving things from the Federal Government to the States will only increase the size of government and, if size matters, will deepen the State. Now you will have 50 little fiefdoms instead of one big kingdom. Plus, clearly the Federal Government has more transparency than the 50 States. I guarantee you DeSantis is not transparent in Florida for example. And let’s face it, I live in NJ, need I say more?
So, its big government, it’s progressives, life is over as we know it…. Except, every state has a minimum of 1% of its workforce working Federally. Some states have over 20% like DC, MD, VA, and then NM and AK — go figure on that. So, the Deep State exists in all 50 states, spread across the country.
Politically, the government leans left with 40% voting Democratic followed by 30% voting Republican with a large “undecided” or uncommitted status. IOW —- one would think with a 30% Republican block, that political bias could be discovered by whistleblower.
So, let’s get to it. What is the Deep State. Yes, size matters, makes things red tape and the lot. Also, by definition, there are laws, rules, and regulations —– and THAT’S what creates the Deep State; they make the rules and regulations that supposedly follow the laws made by Congress and therein lies the rub, the friction, that an unvoted class basically makes laws via rules and regulations. And no matter how you cut it, all laws pick winners and losers. Laws, rules and regulations boil down to someone can’t do what they want, and if they do, they get punished for it.
Is it progressive or Democrat focused — well, it leans that way but hopefully, legal and just. And by lean, I mean all people have bias and it’s a 40/30 split in the Fed for Dems and Repubs, both have bias.
I do not think you can prove a Deep State any eviler than that. People from both sides of the aisle making rules and regulations which will happen with a similar size government IF you move it to the states, probably larger due to economies of scale lost.
What do I think? I like State’s Rights for the “laboratory” aspect, but in today’s society, with today’s technology, I need less need for that against the need to assess, address, and fix problems while monitoring and measuring results. An example is our education system with it’s local governance model. How has the 50-state laboratory worked? Can anyone even say which State is best? Which State is most cost-effective? A laboratory only matters if it delivers results. At this point in time, given almost every state has a different educational plan —- one would have to say the experiment has failed. Not that I want to see education go Federal, but I would like to see more laboratories, but only if WE make them work.
As to individual rights, liberties — and keep your fucking hands out of my business, my body —- hey, I’m your huckleberry there. But that can be done at both the State and Federal level. And should be.
I agree Frank. The founders had a small government to begin with. There were not many intra-state issues to wrestle with so there was not a big need for a larger federal bureaucracy. The original reason for the creation of a Federal government was to resolve issues between states and to ensure consistency between states in money, transportation, and to some degree military to protect the country. Had there been internet back then, it may have been different.
Yeah I think its kind of funny that Larry is railing against the same bureaucracy that used to send him his big paycheck. But this is not uncommon for Larry – he subscribes to the Trump Book of Ethics. Even in the article written about him back in ’92 or so it discusses how he will bite the hand that feeds him!!!
Nope no need to say more – NJ is known to be the armpit of the nation. LOL Did I just piss you off??? LOL Well I am from PA.
Frank, sometime back in a previous Larry article response, I published a listing of states and how much federal money they get. For the most of top 15, there were 14 RED states and only one BLUE state! So maybe we can start by not giving red states federal money and shrink the budget!!!
You and Stormy Daniels agree!! She also implies that size matters, and she don’t like no darn toadstool!!!
Maybe the unvoted class is making some rules and regs but they still are required to interface and explain themselves to Congress because of the APA and CRA laws – see my reply to Larry. And those agencies are controlled by the folks we voted in. So I do not have a problem with it.
The entire government is now made up of progressive leftists.
95% of government political contributions went to Hillary.
97% of Justice Department contributions went to Hillary.
94% of IRS contributions went to Hillary.
99% of State Department contributions went to Hillary.
99.7% of Education Department contributions went to Hillary.
But wait, it gets worse:
We are way behind in this war. If we don’t take back our colleges and universities, we will be fighting against an inexhaustible supply of America haters and Democrat activists.
From Professor John Ellis:
The [college and university] hiring being done now is at the rate of about 50 to one, not five to one or eight to one. So you’re going to wind up with a complete monoculture
The academia is poisoning one profession after another. It’s totally poisoned journalism. It’s poisoned the teaching in the high schools because the high school teachers are all trained on college campuses, and we — the society needs to wake up and decide whether it really wants to pay these vast sums of money to support this apparatus.
From Larry Arnn at Hillsdale College:
The fact is that since the 1960s, the Left has increasingly controlled the tools of education, and it has used those tools to undermine informed patriotism, with the ultimate goal of transforming American government and society.
If we don’t stop the seed of this problem in our colleges and universities, we will lose our country. And the problem starts in Elementary School!
GRob … Good info. There is a reason bureaucrats lean heavily to the left. That have a vested interest in growing government — expanding their influence and power. That is true of top officials like Dr. Fauci … the folks handing out government contracts …. the people behind the counters … and those teachings in our schools. There is no check on demands because there is no distinction between management and workers.
Good info with no source, just like your info Larry!
GRob: good stuff — I love the facts. Question: got source for those 2016 statistics in Federal contributions to Hillary? Sure are different numbers from the 2020 version or the general makeup of the Federal Government, by party, by vote.
As I posted, the Federal Government employee database notes itself as “40% voting Democratic followed by 30% voting Republican with a large “undecided” or uncommitted status. IOW —- one would think with a 30% Republican block, that political bias could be discovered by whistleblower.” For the source, try the Federal Times for the 2020: “About 43% of respondents said they planned to vote Democrat this year compared to 33% Republican and 16% independent.” Perhaps your folks are just cheap, but I doubt it. As an industry, the government votes heavy, both sides. *https://www.federaltimes.com/fedlife/career/2024/05/10/federal-workers-both-democrat-and-republican-eager-to-vote-this-fall/*
Federal Times is least biased, highly factual media. What’s yours GRob?
But wait, there’s more: from FedSmith.com: “For the 2020 election cycle, total contributions from employees in the following agencies came to $37,368,311. A total of $27,141,594 was donated to Democrats by employees in the agencies listed below. A total of $9,026,820 was donated to Republicans. Stated differently, 72.63% of donations went to Democrats and 24.15% went to Republicans.” OK — that’s more what I would expect.
I think your numbers are strange can’t wait to see your source.
At best, you can say the Federal Government leans left and there are plenty Republicans to stand up and say something if something is wrong. Also, you do know that you can apply for jobs there and they will NOT ask your political party, right?
Yup, the schools are liberal. Because we care about kids, you care about coal…….
The directors are appointees — they will favor the President’s party, but not always, at least for Democrats where we have a number of Republicans in high places. But the workers are safe from the 4-year turmoil of mass replacement. And that’s really what this is all about: granting the President the ability to replace the entire government when coming to office and replacing the entire government with your pawns. Like I said, when that happens I will get my real estate license for the DC metro as home sales there will outpace anywhere in the country. But if you think that gets you good government, for the people and BY the people, you are fooling yourselves —– it gets you brownshirts and all that entails.
Republicans —– leave those workers alone!!
Good point Frank! It is actually illegal for a federal employer to ask political affiliation of a prospective hiree! GRob may not realize this.
Hey, I had one of those jobs on the IUSS SOSUS project!!! Nobody ever asked my about my politics nor did we ever discuss it in the office. And nobody came canvassing us for party donations. The only canvassing that was done was the yearly United Way Drive, where I was the canvasser in chief!!!
Yeah good point on the federal workers. I find it interesting that Larry’s idol DJT wants to give the presidency the right to fire federal employees and require their allegiance to DJT – this is in Project 2025, and referred to by DJT as Agenda 47. Sounds like fascism to me!!!
But in the end, we all are just another brick in the wall!!!!
GRob, I also have an account and listen to FREE lectures from far right Hillsdale College which is a conservative hatchery, like Heritage Foundation. I like their courses, particularly the one on the U.S. Constitution and the Founders. I am sure you watched it.
Wow, Hillary got everything!!! Amazing. Got any sources on where these figures come from???
And the Deep State, about 2.1 million government employees, is in collusion with Democrats who keep them in power.
And now, President Biden’s EO 14019 compels all government agencies to take part in a nationwide effort to register voters.
This is referred to as Bidenbucks and it will make Zuckerbucks look like child’s play.
EO 149019 states: “executive departments and agencies should partner with State, local, Tribal, and territorial election officials to protect and promote the exercise of the right to vote, eliminate discrimination and other barriers to voting, and expand access to voter registration and accurate election information.” Oh my, promoting voting, how strange, and Republicans are dead set against that. How weird.
On the Federal employees, over 30% are Republican. Give it a rest. Your case has been dismissed a number of times so far, hopefully you can get it to the SCOTUS so you can stop your whining, one way or another. Republicans just love to restrict, to ban, to destroy. All they seem to have lately is grudges over persecution conspiracy theories like these.
Darren,
Who did Biden murder? Who got murdered by Biden policies?
Trump tried draining the swamp and just put bigger rats into the swamp. This time it will be a gang of felons. He has already recruited several.
I have consistently said all along that I did not like either choice, Biden nor Trump. But if forced to choose, Biden would be the better choice because he would do less damage and would provide unity with our allies..
Did you listen to the Republican leaders speak at the Dem Convention. There was a Hispanic person who escaped communism. She warned that Trump is doing exactly what the autocrat communists did in her country.
By the way, Biden did one thing that Trump will never ever do. He gave up power because he loves his country and its people’s welfare. Trump would never do this. Trump loves power and Trump. Listen to the Stephanie Grisham speech at the DNC day 1. You will get an idea of what Trump thinks about the people.
Larry. you need to work more on your right jab. Its
not working got you. On the other hand, your left hook has been missing the mark time after time.
If conspiracy theories are all you have, then you have given the readers all you got. The thing about conspiracy theories is they have holes in them that planes can fly through and shred the lies those tales are made of.
I did not read in your comments any statements of proof for your broad generalizations that might impress some, but only those who see like you, tyranny and injustice brought on by “Big Federal Government”.
Your long history of holding biases favoring the right while denigrating anyone and anything you judge as left inspired.
Rational logic and common sense are, apparently, not your forte on matters of national size relative to the number of souls who look to their federal government for aid when the state is out of its depth and insufficient for the needs of the people, health, safety, and security.
40 years is arguably to long for one with a misconception to sit and ferment into caustic acids and ultimately destroy the capacity for objective judgement. Then, all life is divided into colors, either something is black and wrong or white and right. How simplistic and easy that is for processing difficult complex issues in life. Some would see that philosophy for making judgments to be unintelligent and stupid. Others could discern someone of that narrow mindedness to be abysmally stupid.
Stupid is as it is in the eyes of the beholder. More than enough proof in evidence on hand that you, Larry, are self convicted of your correctness on every issue you bring forward in your posts. The fact is that no mortal human being’s mind has thought out and judged every issue as absolutely correct or totally incorrect.
Dictators, autocrats, kings, and emperors force reality into terms of their choosing. They are in power and have authority over how judgements are made. You, Larry, are not one of those. You imagine exercising control over what is as you say it is. Truth is, you are accountable for your opinions, as are your readers accountable for theirs. As soon as you out yourself in a public statement of opinion on some topic, the accountability clock starts, with out exception. You open yourself up to questioning. In what manner the questions are managed happens to be up to you. Whether your preference is debate style arguing of points, open discussion organized by points, or as witnessed in this case, mishandled free for all, no holds barred fist fight like chaos in barbaric disregard for others’ intelligence.
Larry, you may believe that after each article of yours receives comments from readers, often they contain rebuttals. Your customary approach comes with verbally abusive attacks on another’s intelligence, personal beliefs, political philosophy, and their professional integrity.
First, in a formate which invites reader participation through comments, there should be an expectation of a two way street allowing freedom for discussion both ways. This has been opened for two way traffic pro and con by Larry himself entering this comment field with comments of his own primarily negative in nature and accusatory in tone.
PBP is unique among other blogs and pages that will allow comments. In my on line reading experience, no other organizations have the low level of respect for individual readers dignity and intellectual integrity. Responders to some article may post rude and mannerless comments, but the editors mostly let the comment stand without retaliation. Not so professionally mannered and honor respecting is PBP. The writers there do not take as they give out.in abuse and disapproval.
For a grade given in journalism they receive a D-. This mark was arrived at by taking an average of all PBP’s writers staff. At least two received F grades.
AC,,,, Good God! is that all you have …. long nasty bitter old man rants parading as a critique? I do not respect ignorance or arrogance … and especially when they are combined. AC … you ARE amusing, but not enlightening. So, complain, insult, demean and whine on — and be thankful that PBP indulges you in your dotage.
Horist, GRob, Darren,
None of you gents stepped up to toe the line and support your claims.
BUSTED.