If Newt Gingrich gets blown out in Florida, is it time to drop out?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Things aren't looking pretty for Newt Gingrich in Florida, but that doesn't seem to matter much to him.
Despite trailing Mitt Romney in the polls by double digits and being outspent by an estimated $12 million in the Sunshine State, Gingrich is vowing to stay in the race all the way to the convention.
And that has some Republicans worried.
They're concerned that if Romney and Gingrich keep battling for months to come, it could weaken the eventual nominee, who then must face off against President Obama in the fall.
Others suggest that a prolonged fight makes both Gingrich and Romney better candidates.
A piece in Politico called “Why Newt Won't Quit” suggests that for Gingrich, the next great challenge of the campaign comes from within:
"Gingrich may have the will to keep fighting, but whether he's capable of keeping his cool, delivering a consistent message and executing a long-shot plan to overtake Romney is an altogether different matter."
Also working against Gingrich, no more debates until February 22.
Meanwhile, although Gingrich is vowing to stay in it for the long haul, his campaign is already lowering expectations for some of February's races.
The campaign says Michigan and Nevada will be difficult contests for their candidate. Romney won both states in 2008. Also, Michigan is Romney's birth state, and his father was governor there; Nevada has a lot of Mormons.
Gingrich is largely setting his sights on March, when more Southern states start voting.
The question is whether the money and the media attention will dry up before then.
Here’s my question to you: If Newt Gingrich gets blown out in Florida, is it time to drop out?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Do federal workers deserve better benefits and higher salaries than private sector employees?
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
At a time when the government should be making drastic spending cuts across the board, they might want to start with their own.
A new report out by the congressional budget office shows federal workers get much better benefits - including health insurance, retirement and vacation - than private sector workers.
On average, the federal government spends 48% more on benefits for its employees than private employers do.
As for salaries, federal workers make just 2% more than private sector workers.
But there's a big difference when you break it down by education.
For example, for federal workers with only a high school diploma, their benefits are 72% higher, and their wages are 21% higher than they would be in the private sector.
On the other hand, workers with doctorates or professional degrees are worse off working for the government. Their benefits are about the same and they earn 23% less than those in the private sector.
The CBO report suggests retirement benefits could be the key here. That's because most retired federal workers get pensions and subsidized health insurance. Not so for the private sector.
Overall, it's estimated that the government paid 16% more last year in salary and benefits than it would have for the same workforce in the private sector.
There are roughly 2.3 million federal civilian employees - less than 2% of the total U.S. workforce.
In 2010, Congress and President Obama agreed to a two-year federal pay freeze.
But the president now wants a 0.5% pay increase for federal workers in 2013. Hey, it's an election year.
Here’s my question to you: Do federal workers deserve better benefits and higher salaries than private sector employees?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments