For the past 60 years, at least, politicians have been trying to figure out if career federal civil servants are Republicans or Democrats.

Feds tend to be slightly older, better-educated and are more likely to be military veterans than the rest of the U.S. workforce. And they are everywhere, presenting an intriguing demographic.

In recent years both sides, Democrats and Republicans, seem to have concluded that many, if not most, government workers lean Democratic. Whether true or not, the result has been that Republicans, especially the current crew in the House, like to beat up on civil servants while Democrats take them very much for granted. Look at the last five-or-six pay raises. Or non-raises.

Tuesday’s column —   Are feds politically red or blue — or both? — prompted some excellent responses from feds who have been-there-done-that through Democratic and Republican regimes.

Here are a couple:

“Mike, in response to your Nov. 15 column, it’s excellent and right on point. It demonstrates that the way to get as much as possible done in this town is to be bipartisan, reasonable and accommodating, while always keeping your eye on the goal. The adults whose goal is to advance on any issue know this (including the MCs you note who successfully evaded partisan traps in order to advance what they viewed as an essential goal). That is why politics is referred to as the art of the possible.

“Then there is partisan politics. Remember that the parties are not part of the governing structure created by the founders, but rather two gangs akin to the Crips and the Bloods who have insinuated themselves into our structure to seek control of the corner (territory where governmental activity occurs) in hopes that they can control local commerce (federal dollars) to the benefit of their “team” members and goals. Partisan politics is a wedge that gains territory by showing that your team is better than their team. Crips don’t gain territory from the Bloods by being reasonable and accommodating. Their existential purpose is to maintain or, better yet, expand. The way to expand when territory is sought by more than one is to engage in combat. That is why the founders warned us from allowing ‘factions’ (as they were then known) to infect our body politic.

“We can still heed the founders’ caution and we may even be at a useful inflection point. Remember, for all the sturm und drang, Donald Trump (who has been a registered Democrat for most of his life) demolished the traditional Republican Party via a hostile takeover by beating 16 Republican candidates. In so doing, he also defeated the latest iteration of the Bush Dynasty. Although the Democrats rebuffed their own hostile takeover by keeping Bernie Sanders from winning, Trump then went on to demolish the Clinton juggernaut which had attached itself to the national Democratic Party since Bill gave the keynote convention address in 1988. The Clinton “near” dynasty has dominated that party and its funding sources for more than a generation, and its collapse exposes a bench that has atrophied due to its expectation of eight more years. (The Clintonites appear to have maintained their grip on the party even during the historic tenure of President Obama).

“With both traditional parties deservedly in tatters, just maybe the adults will follow the lessons demonstrated by those cited in your column. They knew that whoever won elections, we needed a competent corps of civil servants to run government programs, and one needs to offer adequate pay and benefits to maintain that corps. Many of the current challenges facing America can also be resolved in like manner. And for those that can’t, it is still possible to have a respectful debate of the options. Trump may have given us an opportunity to do that if we are willing to follow the founders’ advice and keep the parties down. The problem is not politics, the problem is partisan politics.

“Thanks for the opportunity to vent. In my view the two national parties both failed this year to provide the one useful service they have traditionally offered for American voters, i.e., to winnow the field down to two acceptable but distinct choices. George Will said that we would end election day with a loser who deserved to lose and a winner who did not deserve to win. So true.” — Long Time Maryland Fed

And here are two very different takes, one from former Labor Department worker in Virginia and the other from a HUD retiree in Florida. Guess which one is a Democrat and which a Republican?

“The Bureau of Labor Statistics, like the Department of Labor, is so left wing that they fall of the political scale. I and a few of the senior staff were quiet about our conservative beliefs, although I think many of the leftist staff knew we were not politically with them. The union was unbearable, always supporting the most unproductive employees. I say any more and the Obama goons will be at my door!” Labor Department vet

        Read more: Mike Causey

“Surprise!! Trump has already walked back all of his campaign promises, except for Social Security and Medicare.

“FYI, I went to a Trump rally in Kissimmee. Thousands of people hanging on his every word. Truly thinking he plans to build a wall, deport all illegal aliens, repeal and replace all of Obamacare, drain the swamp. They fed on each other. Lost of very mad blue-collar white people.

“What I find so interesting is that Trump appears to me to be a centrist, not a real right winger to any degree. Yet the folks at the rally believed and were lead to believe he was very right wing. Great marketing!!!!

“PT Barnum was right!!!” Marc In Florida

Nearly Useless Factoid

By Michael O’Connell

Carnival entrepreneur Phineas Taylor (P.T.) Barnum ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Congress in 1867.

Source: Wikipedia

Copyright © 2024 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.