The Lessons of the Government Shutdown

[Muda69]

http://reason.com/archives/2019/01/16/the-lessons-of-the-government-shutdown

Quote

This government shutdown is now longer than any in history. The media keep using the word "crisis."

"Shutdown sows chaos, confusion and anxiety!" says The Washington Post. "Pain spreads widely."

The New York Times headlined, it's all "just too much!"

But wait. Looking around America, I see people going about their business—families eating in restaurants, employees going to work, children playing in playgrounds, etc. I have to ask: Where's the crisis?

Pundits talk as if government is the most important part of America, but it isn't.

We need some government, limited government. But most of life, the best of life, goes on without government, many of the best parts in spite of government.

Of course, the shutdown is a big deal to the 800,000 people who aren't being paid. But they will get paid. Government workers always do—after shutdowns.

Columnist Paul Krugman calls this shutdown, "Trump's big libertarian experiment." But it's not libertarian. Government's excessive rules are still in effect, and eventually government workers will be paid for not working. That makes this a most un-libertarian experiment.

But there are lessons to be learned.

During a shutdown when Barack Obama was president, government officials were so eager to make a point by inconveniencing people that they even stopped visitors from entering public parks.

Trump's administration isn't doing that, so PBS found a new crisis: "Trash cans spilling... (P)ark services can't clean up the mess until Congress and the president reach a spending deal," reported NewsHour.

But volunteers appeared to pick up some of the trash.

Given a chance, private citizens often step in to do things government says only government can do.

The Washington Post ran a front-page headline about farmers "reeling... because they aren't receiving government support checks."

But why do farmers even get "support checks"?

One justification is "saving family farms." But the money goes to big farms.

Government doesn't need to "guarantee the food supply," another justification for subsidies. Most fruit and vegetable farmers get no subsidies, yet there are no shortages of peaches, plums, green beans, etc.

Subsidies are a scam created by politicians who get money from wheat, cotton, corn, and soybean agribusinesses. Those farmers should suck it up and live without subsidies, too.

During shutdowns, government tells "nonessential workers" not to come to work. But if they're nonessential, then why do we pay 400,000 of them?

Why do we still pay 100,000 American soldiers in Germany, Japan, Italy, and England? Didn't we win those wars?

We could take a chainsaw to so much of government.

 

The New York Times shrieks, "Shutdown Curtails FDA Food Inspections!"

Only if you read on do you learn that meat and poultry inspection is done by the Department of Agriculture. They're still working. And the FDA is restarting some inspections as well.

More important, meat is usually safe not because of government—but because of competition.

Food sellers worry about their reputations. They know they'll get bad publicity if they poison people (think Chipotle), so they take many more safety measures than government requires.

One meat producer told me that they employ 2,000 more safety inspectors than the law demands.

Lazy reporters cover politicians. Interviewees are usually in one place—often Washington, D.C. Interviewing politicians is easier than covering people pursuing their own interests all over America. But those are the people who make America work.

While pundits and politicians act as if everything needs government intervention, the opposite is true.

Even security work is done better by the private sector. At San Francisco's airport, security lines move faster. Passengers told me, "The screeners are nicer!" The TSA even acknowledged that those screeners are better at finding contraband. That's because San Francisco (Kansas City, Seattle, and a dozen smaller airports) privatized the screening process. Private companies are responsible for security.

Private contractors are better because they must compete. Perform badly, and they get fired.

But government never fires itself.

Government workers shout, "We are essential!" But I say: "Give me a break. Most of you are not."

Rack this post.  This government shutdown only goes to show how unessential a lot of the federal government is.

 

[swordfish]

https://apnews.com/d90578a1687049e9a67db01582ce4278

Kevin Hassett, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said Tuesday the shutdown is slowing growth more than predicted.

An economic shift could rattle Trump, who has tied his political fortunes to the stock market and repeatedly stressed economic gains as evidence that his tax-cut package and deregulation efforts are succeeding. Economic optimism had already cooled somewhat as Trump’s trade fight with China shook the markets.

Hassett told reporters the White House is doubling its estimate of the strain on the economy of the shutdown, and now calculates that it is slowing growth by about 0.1 percentage points a week.

With the shutdown in its fourth week, that suggests the economy has lost nearly a half-percentage point of growth so far, though some of that occurred at the end of last year and some in the first quarter of this year. Hassett said the economy should get a boost when the government re-opens.

SF wonders - how does the shutdown slow growth in an economy like the US?  Except for the 800,000 employees, who will receive back pay after the shutdown, how does the growth of a capitalist based economy slow down because of a shutdown?

[Muda69]

41 minutes ago, swordfish said:

https://apnews.com/d90578a1687049e9a67db01582ce4278

SF wonders - how does the shutdown slow growth in an economy like the US?  Except for the 800,000 employees, who will receive back pay after the shutdown, how does the growth of a capitalist based economy slow down because of a shutdown?

I would guess that those 800,00 employees aren't creating invoices to private companies for materials ranging from toilet paper to .50 caliber ammunition.  Unfortunately many private companies biggest customer is the US federal government.

 

[Impartial_Observer]

20 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

I would guess that those 800,00 employees aren't creating invoices to private companies for materials ranging from toilet paper to .50 caliber ammunition.  Unfortunately many private companies biggest customer is the US federal government.

 

Or worse yet, they've already shipped materials and now can't get paid. The US Government is notoriously bad pay to begin with, I'm sure with this shutdown it's even worse. 

[swordfish]

https://apnews.com/d90578a1687049e9a67db01582ce4278

Also from that article - Speaker Pelosi asks the President to delay SOTU speech.

In a letter to Trump, Pelosi cited security concerns, noting that both the Secret Service and the Homeland Security Department are entangled in the partial government shutdown, now in its fourth week. She added that unless the government reopens this week, they should find another date or Trump should deliver the address in writing.

https://nypost.com/2019/01/16/secret-service-dhs-say-they-can-handle-state-of-the-union-security/

The Secret Service and Department of Homeland Security said they can handle security at President Trump’s State of the Union address — which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wants Trump to postpone.

Both federal agencies have been largely shuttered as the partial government shutdown enters its record-breaking 26th day.

But Homeland Security chief Kirstjen Nielsen wrote on Twitter that both agencies are good to go.

“The Department of Homeland Security and the US Secret Service are fully prepared to support and secure the State of the Union. We thank the Service for their mission focus and dedication and for all they do each day to secure our homeland,” she wrote.

Meanwhile, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said Pelosi’s request was “unbecoming” and motivated by politics, not security concerns.

“It is not a security issue — that’s politics. It’s pure politics,” he told the network.

What doesn't she want us to hear from the President?

[swordfish]

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/trumps_shutdown_trap.html?fbclid=IwAR1TTfuren5WzGQaEFbJmVWUxGokw6N27TPPkN3CjDnjHINWzxr1YbUZR4Y

Has President Trump suckered Democrats and the Deep State into a trap that will enable a radical downsizing of the federal bureaucracy?  In only five more days of the already "longest government shutdown in history" (25 days and counting, as of today), a heretofore obscure threshold will be reached, enabling permanent layoffs of bureaucrats furloughed 30 days or more.

Don't believe me that federal bureaucrats can be laid off?  Well, in bureaucratese, a layoff is called a RIF – a Reduction in Force – and of course, it comes with a slew of civil service protections.  But, if the guidelines are followed, bureaucrats can be laid off – as in no more job.  It is all explained by Michael Roberts here (updated after the beginning of the partial shutdown):

A reduction in force is a thoughtful and systematic elimination of positions.  For all practical purposes, a government RIF is the same thing as a layoff. ...

Organizations must stick to predetermined criteria when sorting out what happens to each employee.  They must communicate with employees how and why decisions are made. ...

In deciding who stays and who goes, federal agencies must take four factors into account

1.    Tenure

2.    Veteran status

3.    Total federal civilian and military service

4.    Performance

Agencies cannot use RIF procedures to fire bad employees. 

Update: See also: OMB issues guidance on Reduction in Force layoffs due to partial shutdown

A lot of procedures must be followed, and merit ("performance") is the last consideration, but based on the criteria above, employees already furloughed can be laid off ("RIFed") once they have been furloughed for 30 days or 22 work days:

When agencies furlough employees for more than 30 calendar days or 22 discontinuous work days, they must use RIF procedures.

An employee can be terminated or moved into an available position[.]

This seems to be what was referenced in this remarkable essay written by an "unidentified senior Trump official" published in the Daily Caller, which vouches for the authenticity of the author and explains that it is protecting him from adverse career consequences should the name become known.  I strongly recommend reading the whole thing.

The purported senior official makes the case that devotion to "process" eats up most of the time of federal bureaucrats and is also used by enemies of President Trump's initiatives to stymie the legitimate orders issued by his senior officials:

On an average day, roughly 15 percent of the employees around me are exceptional patriots serving their country.  I wish I could give competitive salaries to them and no one else.  But 80 percent feel no pressure to produce results.  If they don't feel like doing what they are told, they don't.

Why would they?  We can't fire them.  They avoid attention, plan their weekend, schedule vacation, their second job, their next position – some do this in the same position for more than a decade.

They do nothing that warrants punishment and nothing of external value.  That is their workday: errands for the sake of errands – administering, refining, following and collaborating on process.  "Process is your friend" is what delusional civil servants tell themselves.  Even senior officials must gain approval from every rank across their department, other agencies and work units for basic administrative chores.

Then the senior official notes what I have just called the "trap":

Most of my career colleagues actively work against the president's agenda.  This means I typically spend about 15 percent of my time on the president's agenda and 85 percent of my time trying to stop sabotage, and we have no power to get rid of them.  Until the shutdown.

Those officials who waste time and stymie the president's initiatives now are not present because they are not categorized as "essential."

Due to the lack of funding, many federal agencies are now operating more effectively from the top down on a fraction of their workforce, with only select essential personnel serving national security tasks. ...

President Trump can end this abuse.  Senior officials can reprioritize during an extended shutdown, focus on valuable results and weed out the saboteurs.  We do not want most employees to return, because we are working better without them.

Keep in mind that saboteurs cannot be individually identified and RIFed, but they can be included in the layoffs if they meet the criteria above in terms of seniority and service, and they must be given 60 days' notice.  But once they are gone, they are no longer free to obstruct using the "process" as their friend, because they are gone.

You can expect lawsuits on every conceivable point, and I suspect that the definition of "furlough" will be one matter of dispute.

If this was the plan all along, it would explain why President Trump goaded Chuck and Nancy in his televised meeting with them last year, boasting that he would claim credit for the shutdown.  How could they resist a prolonged shutdown when he made it so easy to blame him?

President Trump has proven that he is a "disruptor" who changes the framework of thinking on major issues by refusing to accept the "givens" – the assumptions of how things always have been done and therefore always must be done.

So who is the "senior official"?  I don't know, but I think Stephen Miller is the sort of bold thinker who might volunteer to telegraph the strategy just five days before the deadline.  Give Chuck and Nancy something to think about and probably reject as unthinkable.  Then they can't complain that they weren't warned once the trap is sprung.

Such a mass RIF would be the Trump version of Ronald Reagan firing the air traffic controllers when they went on an illegal strike in 1981.  That was completely unexpected by his enemies, vehemently criticized, and successful.

Among other benefits, it taught the leaders of the USSR that Ronald Reagan was a man whose threats cannot be dismissed as mere rhetoric.  If you think that Xi Jinping, Kim Jong-un, Angela Merkel, and any other foreign leaders would not draw the same conclusion from a massive RIF, then you are kidding yourself.

Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/trumps_shutdown_trap.html#ixzz5crzZTHoa 
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Interesting theory......

[Muda69]

17 minutes ago, swordfish said:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/trumps_shutdown_trap.html?fbclid=IwAR1TTfuren5WzGQaEFbJmVWUxGokw6N27TPPkN3CjDnjHINWzxr1YbUZR4Y

Has President Trump suckered Democrats and the Deep State into a trap that will enable a radical downsizing of the federal bureaucracy? 

As an advocate for smaller government one can only hope....................

 

[Muda69]

The Shutdown’s Real Lesson: Government Has Taken Hostage Too Much of the Economy: https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/shutdowns-real-lesson-government-has-taken-hostage-too-much-economy

Quote

We are in the third week of the federal government’s partial shutdown. The shutdown is affecting the lives of many federal workers and may soon start disrupting the broader economy. Because the government exerts control over major industries, when the politicians butt heads, it damages activities such as aviation, tourism and recreation.

The problem with the shutdown is not that President Trump is holding the government “hostage,” as House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said, but that the government has taken hostage of too much of the U.S. economy.

Consider security screening at the nation’s 450 commercial airports. The government took over that function in 2001 when it created the Transportation Security Administration. Over the years, the TSA has generally done a poor job, caused congestion and wasted a lot of money.

And now, because the TSA is the only screening organization we have, the shutdown may affect the entire nation’s air travel. A spokesman for the TSA screener’s union said Tuesday: “Some of [my members] have already quit and many are considering quitting the federal workforce because of this shutdown … The loss of officers, while we’re already shorthanded, will create a massive security risk for American travelers since we don’t have enough trainees in the pipeline.”

He’s probably exaggerating the risk, but political battles would not impact such important activities if they were separated from the federal government. Many advanced nations, including Britain and France, have privatized their screening or moved it to the control of local airports. If we followed suit, there would not be just one “pipeline” for trainees because airports could contract services from numerous companies.

It is a similar situation with our government-run air-traffic-control system. The spokesman for the federal controller’s union said the negative “ripple effect” of the federal shutdownmay last months or years, while the head of the Airline Pilots Association said “the disruptions being caused by the shutdown are threatening the safe operations” of the nation’s airspace.

During the 2013 budget sequester battle, controllers were furloughed and thousands of flights were delayed before the politicians cobbled together a budget deal.

All of this is unnecessary. Dozens of nations have separated their ATC from their government budgets. Canada privatized its ATC system in 1996 as a self-funded nonprofit corporation. That structure has created financial stability, improved management, and generated innovation. The U.S. controller’s union has been so frustrated with federal budget instability and the slow pace of innovation under the current structure that it has backed Canadian-style ATC reforms.

Millions of Americans and the tourism and recreation industries are being affected by National Park Service furloughs. “National parks face years of damage from the government shutdown,” a National Geographic writer said. The national parks have long suffered from deterioration and mismanagement even under normal operations.

The solution is to restructure the parks as nonprofit organizations self-funded by fees and contributions, or to transfer them to state control. Today, while the government’s Frederick Douglass National Historic Site in Washington, D.C. is closed, the well-run and private Mount Vernon in Virginia-home of George Washington-is open for business.

As federal deficits soar in coming years, budget battles will worsen. That will cause more shutdowns, and it will mean that the national parks, air traffic control system and other assets will be starved for investment.

Our ATC system needs billions of dollars to upgrade to new technologies such as satellite navigation, but it is not clear where the money will come from under current federal control. As for the NPS, it faces at least $11 billion in deferred maintenance because appropriations must be spread over a bloated system of more than 400 parks and sites.

Amtrak and the U.S. Postal Service are not affected by the shutdown, but they are losing billions of dollars on their inefficient operations and can’t make needed reforms because of Washington’s dysfunction. They should also be cut loose from federal control.

Privatization of such businesses may seem radical, but a privatization revolution has swept the world since the 1980s as more than 100 countries have moved more than $3 trillion of state-owned businesses to the private sector. Air traffic control systems, postal services, passenger rail and other activities have been successfully privatized abroad.

The federal government’s budget management is a total mess and getting worse. To limit the damage, it’s time to untether the government from as much of the economy as possible.

Agreed.

 

[TRCJunkie]

Lessons of the government shutdown: Have 3-6 months of living expenses in your bank account for when sh!t hits the fan. 

[swordfish]

I wish I had Muda's old "cats playing ping-pong" gif - it would apply here......

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-denies-pelosi-aircraft-for-foreign-trip-in-response-to-call-for-state-of-the-union-delay

President Trump on Thursday abruptly denied military aircraft to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for a foreign trip just minutes before the congressional delegation was set to depart, in a stunning response to her call to delay the State of the Union address amid the government shutdown.

In a curt letter, Trump said her trip has been “postponed.”

“Due to the Shutdown, I am sorry to inform you that your trip to Brussels, Egypt, and Afghanistan has been postponed. We will reschedule this seven-day excursion when the Shutdown is over. In light of the 800,000 great American workers not receiving pay, I am sure you would agree that postponing this public relations event is totally appropriate,” Trump wrote.

CLICK HERE TO READ TRUMP'S LETTER TO PELOSI

 

“I also feel that, during this period, it would be better if you were in Washington negotiating with me and joining the Strong Border Security movement to end the Shutdown. Obviously, if you would like to make your journey by flying commercial, that would certainly be your prerogative.”

 

According to sources, the president pulled the plug on her aircraft as she was about to leave for her overseas trip. Her congressional delegation military aircraft was slated to leave at 3 p.m. ET.

A senior White House official also told Fox News that all congressional delegation travel by military aircraft is now postponed.

A source told Fox News that when moving to cancel Thursday's flight, the White House reasoned that the trip would keep Pelosi out of the country beyond next Tuesday night—when the next government pay period would occur.

"If she had gone on this trip she would have guaranteed that 800,000 federal workers would not receive their second paycheck because she would not have been here to negotiate any kind of deal," a senior White House official said Thursday.

[Muda69]

2 minutes ago, swordfish said:

I wish I had Muda's old "cats playing ping-pong" gif - it would apply here......

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-denies-pelosi-aircraft-for-foreign-trip-in-response-to-call-for-state-of-the-union-delay

President Trump on Thursday abruptly denied military aircraft to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for a foreign trip just minutes before the congressional delegation was set to depart, in a stunning response to her call to delay the State of the Union address amid the government shutdown.

In a curt letter, Trump said her trip has been “postponed.”

“Due to the Shutdown, I am sorry to inform you that your trip to Brussels, Egypt, and Afghanistan has been postponed. We will reschedule this seven-day excursion when the Shutdown is over. In light of the 800,000 great American workers not receiving pay, I am sure you would agree that postponing this public relations event is totally appropriate,” Trump wrote.

CLICK HERE TO READ TRUMP'S LETTER TO PELOSI

 

“I also feel that, during this period, it would be better if you were in Washington negotiating with me and joining the Strong Border Security movement to end the Shutdown. Obviously, if you would like to make your journey by flying commercial, that would certainly be your prerogative.”

 

According to sources, the president pulled the plug on her aircraft as she was about to leave for her overseas trip. Her congressional delegation military aircraft was slated to leave at 3 p.m. ET.

A senior White House official also told Fox News that all congressional delegation travel by military aircraft is now postponed.

A source told Fox News that when moving to cancel Thursday's flight, the White House reasoned that the trip would keep Pelosi out of the country beyond next Tuesday night—when the next government pay period would occur.

"If she had gone on this trip she would have guaranteed that 800,000 federal workers would not receive their second paycheck because she would not have been here to negotiate any kind of deal," a senior White House official said Thursday.

Happy to oblige.  Watching Ms. Pelosi and Mr. Trump play petty political games is lot like watching these cats:

Edited January 17, 2019 by Muda69

[Muda69]

Two Proposals To End the Government Shutdown Just Failed in the Senate: https://reason.com/blog/2019/01/24/two-proposals-to-end-the-government-shut

Quote

Parts of the federal government will remain closed after two proposals to re-open the government failed on the floor of the U.S. Senate Thursday afternoon.

A plan backed by Democrats that would have funded the government for two weeks without including $5.7 billion for President Donald Trump's border wall received 51 votes—short of the 60 required in the Senate to avoid a filibuster. Even if it had passed, it may have faced a veto by Trump.

Separately, a Republican-backed proposal to fund the government and Trump's wall received just 50 votes, with several Republicans voting against the proposal. That plan would have increased borrowing by about $20 billion to find the border wall and spend $12.8 billion on disaster relief, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Even if it had passed, it would have faced an uncertain future in the Democrat-controlled House.

 

And so the shutdown rolls on.

Thursday's votes provide a nice illustration of the dilemma facing Congress as the government shutdown reached its 34th day. It's impossible for either party to get a funding bill through the Senate without bipartisan support, and there does not appear to be enough bipartisan support for much of anything at the moment. Sen. Joe Manchin (D–W.V.) was the only Democrat to cross party lines and support Trump's border wall, and the six Republicans who backed the Democratic proposal were not enough to push it over the line.

Trump's efforts at blaming House Democrats for the shutdown—a shutdown that he said last month would be his responsibility—are only going to make it more difficult to reach any compromise that could pass the Senate.

The next attempt to reach a breakthrough is expected to come from the House, where Democratic leaders are reportedly prepping a bill that would spend $5.2 billion on border security—mostly high-tech options like drones and cameras—without granting permission for Trump to build a physical wall.

Trump has rejected that idea. On Thursday, he wrote on Twitter that "very simply, without a Wall it all doesn't work."

That's the other complicating factor. Even if a compromise to reopen the government could find a path through Congress, it may face a veto from Trump—who has spent this week embarking on a misleading effort to turn his border wall proposal into a rhyming slogan. There's not much in the way of an obvious solution to all this, short of Trump backing down.

While political gridlock is almost always entertaining, the current shutdown has done nothing to actually reduce the federal government's power or cost. If anything, the shutdown is likely to swing public sentiment towards bigger government, since each passing day brings new stories of how the shutdown is creating hardships for public employees in a variety of ways.

But the ongoing shutdown does create opportunities for finding ways to get government out of areas where it really shouldn't be in the first place. Like air traffic control, for example. Or the completely unnecessary agency within the Department of Treasury that's supposed to approve the labels that go on beer bottles. Regardless of how the shutdown eventually shakes out, one can hope that the past month has at least highlighted a few ways in which government's involvement in everyday life is problematic—not just when the government is running, but when it's stopped too.

Agreed.

Who here on the GID is currently missing a government service due to the shutdown?

 

Edited January 25, 2019 by Muda69

[Muda69]

If You Still Think the Shutdown Proves Government Is Important, You’re Seeing What You Want to See: http://reason.com/archives/2019/01/28/shutdown-lessons-2019

Quote

The theatrical federal government semi-shutdown is now over, or at least on hiatus, while the dominant political tribes in D.C. take a break from posturing to pay a few bills. And, I admit, I'm honestly sad to see the end of an inconvenience to government workers. Even as media pundits lamented the plight of federal employees waiting on delayed paychecks, it became increasingly obvious that many of their tasks are unnecessary, better performed by the private sector, or downright dangerous.

Illustrating the theatrical and unnecessary nature of much of the shutdown was a story in my local paper about National Park Service rangers fining "trespassers" at sites including the Montezuma Well Indian ruins. The sites were closed because 22 employees were furloughed and "volunteers also can't return to work" (because reasons, I suppose). But Montezuma Well is free to enter and the small ranger station there is often unstaffed. The four officers still patrolling may well be the most official activity the place has seen.

Unlike patrolling locations that are frequently unguarded, air traffic control is a job that needs to be done. So it was troubling when the Federal Aviation Administration announced that unpaid federally employed controllers were calling in sick, creating delays at airports. But why are we dependent on the government for air traffic control?

 

After all, an important recent report from the U.S. Department of Transportation's own Inspector General pointed out that Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, and France "commercialized their air traffic operations via independent air navigation service providers" that "are financially self-supporting." The report added that the United States could learn from their experience.

The various foreign approaches studied in the report range from government-owned corporations to for-profit partnerships. All the operations are funded independent of government taxes and appropriations, meaning that they can continue functioning through the overseas equivalents of the Trump-Pelosi show.

Unsurprisingly, the airline trade association, Airlines for America, supports privatization. Industry analysts say their cause got a big boost from the shutdown.

Of less concern, air travel-wise, was the growing absentee rate among TSA workers as their paychecks failed to materialize. Sure, it sucks to work for delayed compensation. But nobody conscripted them into government service—they took those jobs of their own accord. And they're very, very bad at what they do.

"Undercover investigators were able to smuggle mock explosives or banned weapons through checkpoints in 95 percent of trials," ABC News reported in 2015.

Of travel safety, security expert Bruce Schneier says "the two things that have made flying safer since 9/11 are reinforcing the cockpit doors and persuading passengers that they need to fight back. Everything beyond that isn't worth it."

"The relationship between the public and the TSA has become too poisonous to be sustained," admits the agency's former administrator, Kip Hawley.

TSA workers do excel, though, at abusing opportunities to rob, grope, and harass travelers.

Harassment, of course, is a core responsibility for the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). Like too many law enforcement agencies, they largely exist to stop people from doing what they have every right to do—in their cases, to interfere with people's right to self-medicate and to possess the means for self-defense.

Also like too many law enforcement agencies, these two federal bureaucracies have an unpleasant record of misbehavior. The ATF is frequently guilty of "rogue tactics," as the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel put it, and has lost many of its own firearms while trying to regulate those belonging to the public. The DEA has a history of brutality, partying with criminals, and occasionally trafficking in contraband itself.

I find it equally difficult to feel sorrow over the FBI's complaints about shutdown-induced difficulty in paying snitches and buying drugs in stings (no word yet on how the cash crunch affected the bureau's domestic surveillance operations or its campaign against private encryption). Given the bureau's checkered and politicized record, anything that slows it down should provide plenty of Americans with a feeling of relief.

Speaking of a cash crunch, is anybody really sorry that IRS employees suffered some financial discomfort from the sort-of government shutdown? That is, I'll point out, the type of experience they specialize in inflicting on others. Besides, it may not be such a bad thing if the nation's tax collectors fell a bit behind in their role as political weapons wielded by the powerful against their enemies.

Commenting on soldiers who enlist to fight in imperialist wars, the philosopher Herbert Spencer once remarked, "When men hire themselves out to shoot other men to order, asking nothing about the justice of their cause, I don't care if they are shot themselves."

By comparison, it doesn't seem excessive to me to refuse to shed tears over temporary financial inconveniences for government workers whose jobs, in all too many cases, pose threats to life, liberty, and property.

No, the experience of working while waiting on a delayed paycheck isn't pleasant for anybody. But the private sector is also hiring, and it's perfectly capable of taking over many of the actually necessary jobs that government does. Given the nasty, intrusive, and abusive nature of so much of the rest of what occupies the government's time, we should be happy to see it go unfunded.

Many of the tasks done by government, it turns out, are better done by somebody else. And many of the rest are best not done at all.

Here! Here!