Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Congress relieves Air Traffic Controller furloughs caused by Sequester

So the senate finally acted. They passed a bill with 100% approval that would direct the FAA stop the furloughs of air traffic controllers. However, they aren't increasing the amount of funds they get, so where are they getting the money? By breaking the "lock-box" that is currently being earmarked for modernizing the Air Traffic Control system.

In my limited understanding of how the Federal government works... this is the most idiotic thing I cold imagine. Talk about your waste. In all likelihood this is going to immediately cancel the contractors that are working on developing the new systems.

So what you say? Well, that means they get to keep all the money they've made so far... AS WELL AS THE TECHNOLOGY THEY'VE BUILT. This means that when they start the project again (and they will start it again... the existing system is like 50 years old) they'll have to pay like they've started from scratch... and since the Feds balked, I can assure you the price is going to go WAY, WAY up as they got screwed in the first round.

Never mind the whole issue where they "fixed" the pain caused by the sequester for affluent air-travelers... while leaving kids and the elderly out to hang in the wind, with the cuts to Head Start and Meals on Wheels and other essential services remaining in full force.

This Congress is useless.

by Anonymousreply 604/26/2013

So much short-sighted B.S. in our government (and our business world).

by Anonymousreply 104/26/2013

Stupid Democrats

by Anonymousreply 204/26/2013

Well if I were king of the FAA, I would inflate any issues occurring and root cause it at furlough effect.

Kind of like a spouse cutting off sex until spending limits are eliminated.

by Anonymousreply 504/26/2013

Damn shame that somebody isn't able to lobby for poor families like that.

Oh hell, who am I kidding? Congress doesn't do jack shit for anybody unless a corporation is involved.

by Anonymousreply 604/26/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!