OMG - I might vote Republican for the first time in my life.

[Anonymous]

The COLA adjustments for federal employees under President Obama have been dismal (assuming the proposed .5% comes through, .5% average for first term):

2013 proposed .5%
2012 0%
2011 0%
2010 1.5%

During President Bush's two terms federal employees did better (2.3% average for second term & 2.9% average for first term):

2009 2.9%
2008 2.5%
2007 1.7%
2006 2.1%

2005 2.5%
2004 2.7%
2003 3.1%
2002 3.6%

During President Clinton's last term (2.9% average):

2001 2.7%
2000 3.8%
1999 3.1%
1998 2.3%


I never thought I'd say this, but would I do better as a federal employee under a Republican administration?

[Anonymous]

COLA is a cost of living adjustment. The economy tanked because of the Republicans failure to regulate the finance industry. The housing market crash substantially lowered the cost of living. If you want a bigger COLA adjustment, inflation must increase and the housing market must recover.

[Anonymous]

Are you kidding me? The Repugs hate the Federal Government. If they get in office, they'll probably shut down your agency. I'm sure Obama wants to do more but knows that the House won't vote to raise salaries much, if at all.

Friends don't let friends vote Republican

[Anonymous]

The value of my house has gone down, but I have not noticed a decrease in other things, like my insurance premiums that have gone up. So I don't think 15:05's analysis is correct.

The only way the Republicans will shut down an agency in its entirety is if they can find one with no offices in a swing state.

[Anonymous]

You aren't the only one OP. I think Romney is vanilla enough that if he is the nominee I would vote for him. ACK!

[Anonymous]

You think the Republicans will increase the COLA for Feds? Not hardly.

[Anonymous]

COLAs are tied to inflation in the economy, and the official inflation rate has been low-to-zero, thus so have COLAs for federal employees, retirees, etc. While the president has some impact on the economy, there's no direct link between a president's politics and cost-of-living increases.

[Anonymous]

Not to mention your own data shows Feds did way better under a Democrat (Clinton).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not to mention your own data shows Feds did way better under a Democrat (Clinton).

Check those averages again. Clinton ties Bush for Bush's first term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The COLA adjustments for federal employees under President Obama have been dismal (assuming the proposed .5% comes through, .5% average for first term):

2013 proposed .5%
2012 0%
2011 0%
2010 1.5%

During President Bush's two terms federal employees did better (2.3% average for second term & 2.9% average for first term):

2009 2.9%
2008 2.5%
2007 1.7%
2006 2.1%

2005 2.5%
2004 2.7%
2003 3.1%
2002 3.6%

During President Clinton's last term (2.9% average):

2001 2.7%
2000 3.8%
1999 3.1%
1998 2.3%


I never thought I'd say this, but would I do better as a federal employee under a Republican administration?

You're an idiot. The best predent to you would be the one who presided over skyrocketing inflation, which would cause COLA to shoot through the roof. Do you understand how moronic this is? Do you even understand WHY you get a COLA???

[Anonymous]

Because if Romney is elected, I'm sure he'll strenuously defend federal pay raises against his fellow Republicans who want to abolish Energy, Commerce, Education, etc., etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Because if Romney is elected, I'm sure he'll strenuously defend federal pay raises against his fellow Republicans who want to abolish Energy, Commerce, Education, etc., etc.

yeah. cola is based on economy, not on political whim.

[Anonymous]

OP, assuming you're not just trolling, I really think you're uninformed about what the Republican view is on pay increases for federal employees ...

The proposal [for a 0.5% increase in federal salaries], which requires congressional approval, differs from Republican plans supported by lawmakers and presidential candidates that would freeze basic pay rates for one more year. Some of those plans also call for denying within-grade raises. In recent weeks, GOP lawmakers have called for extending the pay freeze as a way to pay for a payroll tax extension.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/white-house-proposes-05-percent-pay-increase-for-federal-workers/2012/01/06/gIQA18fyeP_blog.html
http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpps/news/white-house-to-propose-raise-for-federal-workers-dpgonc-20120106-fc_16856492

... average federal worker wages rose 1.3 percent in 2011, or slightly more than the 1.2 percent increase in average private wages. The federal increase, while modest, occurred despite the pay “freeze” because increases from “longevity, merit, and promotions” were not covered, the paper noted. [Conservative think tank Cato Institute proposes that] Congress should decline Obama’s request and retain the federal pay freeze for a few more years. At the same time, policymakers should pursue cuts to excessively generous federal worker benefits.

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/keep-the-federal-pay-freeze/

If you're a federal employee voting with your pocketbook, it sure seems like you should be pulling the D lever.

[Anonymous]

DO NOT DO IT!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The COLA adjustments for federal employees under President Obama have been dismal (assuming the proposed .5% comes through, .5% average for first term):

2013 proposed .5%
2012 0%
2011 0%
2010 1.5%

During President Bush's two terms federal employees did better (2.3% average for second term & 2.9% average for first term):

2009 2.9%
2008 2.5%
2007 1.7%
2006 2.1%

2005 2.5%
2004 2.7%
2003 3.1%
2002 3.6%

During President Clinton's last term (2.9% average):

2001 2.7%
2000 3.8%
1999 3.1%
1998 2.3%


I never thought I'd say this, but would I do better as a federal employee under a Republican administration?

This could be the saddest single-issue upon which to vote I have ever heard.