Look guys, it's called cost of living. Since when was making over $100,000 a lot of money, anyway? Most of those jobs are highly skilled positions. This isn't the 1960's. The average home price in the DC area is $325,000. Utilities are high, commuting costs are high and food costs are high. Obama has only give 1.4% increase in salary to federal employees. Look at past years. It's a big difference. You want to cut 20% salaries for Foreign Service Officers, CIA agents, FBI agents, NASA employees, NIH employees, CDC employees, NSA employees, and NOAA employees? I guess they are all a bunch of lazy bones. Who needs these agencies anyway? They only keep us safe. We can offer less income and get mediocre results, right? I'd want to be able to attract the best and brightest to assure our security. Are all federal employees highly productive? No. Is there a "good enough for federal work" stigma? Sure. But it's not true across the board, so why is it fair to call for a salary cut across the board? Don't think replacing fed. jobs with contractors would save money either. DoD is finding out the hard way that's not true. Use a knife, not a sledgehammer.

You need more comparative salary scales data. Better research = better argument.

Wow, let's hope all those DoD civilians don't share that myopia. You do realize that it took a lot of people to put your husband on those hilltops, don't you? And heaven forbid, if he is injured, it will take a lot of folks to get him back to you, active duty and civilian, and a few pencil pushers too. Way to be a team player. I'll pray for his safe return.

I've seen this idea pop up here a couple of times and it is stupid, stupid, stupid. Are you sure Mr. Warstler isn't an Obama operative? You guys support this, and you've just handed Obama his second term. Congratulations. People who are calling for the ax to gov't salaries clearly don't work for the gov't. They probably wouldn't shame themselves that way. Here's the thing, a federal employee makes less that private sector employee with an equivalent job. Get that through your skulls. And a lot are veterans, like my husband. He chose a federal position so he could improve the quality of care for our veterans and active duty. He could make considerably more in the private sector. His salary has been cut already by 2%. There is a hiring freeze in most agencies. Do you even read the news, Mr. Warstler? There is also an implied sense of soft bigotry here that I'm picking up - most federal employees are lazy black people who vote Democrat, right? You are way out of your depth and will get your asses handed to you, if this is best you can do. You have to get deeper in the weeds, have a clue how government is run, strategically cut spending and reduce jobs. With this proposal, you're cutting a lot of federal employees off at the knees, including vets. So go ahead, the IED's didn't get everybody. You guys can finish them off. Thanks.

Most government jobs are professional jobs. They actually make less than equivalent positions in the private sector.

By importance, I meant legal precedent or a compelling social issue. I know it's a thin line between political influence and social issue, but I'm just tired of the call for changing the way things are done in Washington with regards to Congress. I'm not defending Congress, but I don't know if people consider SCOTUS as having a political influence or that decisions made by justices might be influenced by politics. I'm not calling them corrupt, but I'm saying that it's become popular to demonize the way things are done with the Executive and Legislative Branches. Politics is dirty, and I keep seeing so many folks getting elected on the premise that they will clean it up, knowing full well they won't. It's a contact sport, there aren't bad guys or good guys, i.e. lobbyists, just strategies/plays for getting your agenda through within the legal limits of the law. At least that's the way I see it.

One thing that I don't understand in the pass they give SCOTUS. As a branch of government, it's just as political. I don't think they always decide to hear a case based on its importance. I think sometimes it's how much political influence a case has before it's heard. Let's not talk ourselves into believing the SCOTUS is on some pedestal elevated above Washington.

The fed. gov't has actually had a hiring freeze for a while within several agencies, including the VA, the second largest gov't agency. I don't know if the author realizes that gov't employees make considerably less than they would in the private sector. Why do you want to punish federal employees? A week of unpaid leave? My husband is a fed. employee, do you know the last time we went on vacation? Try never. Because DC is freaking expensive, and it's hard enough to pay our mortgage, set money aside for retirement and put food on the table. Did I mention he's a veteran like a lot of other federal employees? You want to cut them off at the knees, too? Why don't you cough up $10,000? That's what you're proposing that my family does. How about cutting entitlements, 2/3 of US spending? Trim the Department of Ed. that's actually getting a bump in this budget. Oh, and how about government contractors? Do you know how well they do? Why don't you go after them?

That big dummy managed to singled-handedly hack off the Navy and the Marine Corps. Marines have a great deal of respect for corpsman. To add more insult to injury, Obama receives medical care from the folks at the National Naval Medical Center. Corpsmen are one of the largest groups of medical professionals there, and in the Navy as a whole. So, it's not like he's never met one.

Isn't her child now "cured" of autism? I think I remember seeing that. Sure, I respect parents rights to do research and make decisions as they see fit. However, I'm very suspicious of this jump in the likelihood of an autism diagnosis - 1 in 150, might even be a smaller ratio. I'm not a medical doctor, but if you look at the symptoms on the lower end of the autism spectrum, like asberger's for instance, there are a lot of adults that fit this category - growing up they were sometimes called "nerds." I'm not trying to diminish the heartbreaking situations of parents of children with severe autism, but the spectrum seems awfully broad. By that measure, almost every engineer and scientist I know has mild asbergers. Part of me, the conspiratorial part, suspects the supposed frequency of autism diagnosis has more to do with public schools trying to get more money for special ed. programs. 20 years ago, a kid who was very intelligent and a little socially awkward was just nerdy, but now he's diagnosed with asberger's and his school system gets $$ to provide therapy. Remember when ADD/ADHD was so prevalent with kids? I know there are kids and adults with these disorders, really, but it appears all too tempting to bleed the taxpayer and get more attention for your cause, if you broaden the symptoms to capture more kids.