Executive Order on RIFs coming today

[Anonymous]

None of it matters. They will fire 70%, calling us Schedule F or Non-essential or not mandated by statute. Think about it—Dept of Education was created by statute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone give an example of a program that isn't required by law? My husband and I are having a hard time coming up with one.

Appropriations funding is often not very specific and jobs that are related to policy are often not specifically required by a law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone give an example of a program that isn't required by law? My husband and I are having a hard time coming up with one.

I work on a lot of discretionary grant programs at my agency. Many are “authorized” by Statute, e.g. “the Secretary is authorized to provide financial assistance to eligible applicants…”. It isn’t clear to me that is the same thing as being “required” by statute. As an attorney, I’d generally argue it is not the same thing. An authorization gives permission and a requirement is a mandate (e.g. “the Secretary shall ….”). As an attorney who wants to keep my job I’ll seek to argue that that the authorization is a requirement.

My job may be toast anyway, but this is the first thing I thought of in terms of work the agency does that may not be required by law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:None of it matters. They will fire 70%, calling us Schedule F or Non-essential or not mandated by statute. Think about it—Dept of Education was created by statute.

Exactly. Analyzing this doesn’t matter. They want to destroy government. Trump wants revenge and to rid govt of his enemies. Vought wants a white, nationalist, limited govt led by loyalists. And Musk wants to destroy society as a whole so he can create a new one on Mars. Together, they’re destroying it all and burning everything in their paths. Our only hope is the courts or some republicans in Congress to regain their spine and put a stop to this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can someone give an example of a program that isn't required by law? My husband and I are having a hard time coming up with one.

We have incredibly valuable staff who handle internal coordination and process improvements. Like project management for internal operations. Key to successful agency functioning, keeps us accountable and on track for all of the various things we do. None of that is required by statute. We have people who do public outreach and education about programs. Not required by statute.

We have a research and development arm that contributes to industry safety improvements, but not required by statute.

[Anonymous]

Does 'failure to comply with generally applicable legal obligations, including timely filing of tax returns' also apply to unpaid parking tickets or even just speeding? How about if it's reckless?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:None of it matters. They will fire 70%, calling us Schedule F or Non-essential or not mandated by statute. Think about it—Dept of Education was created by statute.

You give up easily, don’t you? “None of it matters”? Don’t believe them, FFS

[Anonymous]

soooooo are the civil enforcement agencies law enforcement? outside of the cfpb i guess, poor guys

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:how much you get paid if you get RIFed?

Depends on years in service.

[Anonymous]

CFPB was created by statute and is shut down this week with no explanation

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:None of it matters. They will fire 70%, calling us Schedule F or Non-essential or not mandated by statute. Think about it—Dept of Education was created by statute.

You give up easily, don’t you? “None of it matters”? Don’t believe them, FFS

+1 PP is probably one of the Muskrats.

[Anonymous]

I'm talking to someone at DoD and what's going on is completely insane. The military is going to grind to a halt.

[Anonymous]

At the very end: “ This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.”

Translation: they can’t do 99% of what they propose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As of March 14th, there is likely be a "funding shortfall."

The RIF EO supposedly directs agencies to remove any activities that are not specifically required by statute. Of course, that could be read broadly or narrowly. But, it gives agencies plenty of leeway to determine that a reorganization is needed.

For how many things this will be implementable? There are lots of activities that are authorized by law and/or appropriated explicitly, so the “by statute” clause might cover more than the DOGE folks think.

I'm pretty sure everything the Executive branch does is covered by statute ... except DOGE.

lol that is the great irony in all this

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm talking to someone at DoD and what's going on is completely insane. The military is going to grind to a halt.

Can you elaborate?