How to prepare for government jobs?

In the 2010 midterm elections, Republicans ran on the platform of "jobs, jobs, jobs," but since gaining control of the House, they have not presented a single "jobs" bill, but have introduced multiple bills that increase the role and size of government such (namely, introducing several bills regardi

• This isn't what these politicians ran on. Federal funding of abortion is already funding of abortion is already banned by law. Limiting access to those services is "big government" in the most literal sense.

• Answer:

  The reaction to the Bush Administration's failure to put a brake on spending is what led to the formation of the tea party idea, and brought 64 or so net changes in the House. That means that there are even more - around 75 - new GOP house members, who won mostly on a platform of reduced spending. Laws that define crimes have an impact on prison construction, and laws that affect reproductive rights have an effect on poverty and (obviously) population. But these are for the most part not spending bills. They are what people mean when they talk about "social" issues. They are at the edge of the question about what it means to have a bigger, more powerful government. Many fiscal conservatives are social conservatives. See Not all are, of course. But I think it's easier to conceive their position if you start by recognizing that their belief is that life begins at conception. It's not something that is a matter of science. If they believe that, then an abortion is no different from smothering an infant in its crib, which is something most of us would oppose, most of the time. Many libertarians would generally agree, by definition, that asking the government to get out of most issues and jump into other is contradictory. That makes sense to me. But law enforcement is always law enforcement. We make judgments about who should be arrested and who shouldn't all the time. We move from jailing people in possession of tiny amounts of drugs to relaxing those laws signficantly, and it's not because somebody found that the drugs work differently from what we thought before. Lawmakers can generally walk and chew gum at the same time. It's often said that they are wasting their time on this or that small issue while important issues go unresolved. It's almost never true; there's an army of staff on the Hill who could churn out hundreds of bills if there was a reason and a will to do so. I wouldn't call them distracted by social issues. I would say that they are voting their conscience. The entire tea party movement is about reduced government spending. It was a reaction to a stimulus bill signed days into the new Obama administration, when these people realized they didn't trust the Republicans any more and had nobody to turn to. The stimulus was, in theory, supposed to help the unemployment problem. Those in favor say it did keep it from getting worse, or it was too small, etc. Many, on the other hand, think that by borrowing another trillion or so dollars from our children, we didn't get much of a boost. The entire theory of these people is that bigger government spending (in its grand total) can never be good for the overall economy. If you get upset enough about this, call up a candidate you like better, and go work for them. Really. Do it tomorrow. It will make you feel better, and certainly more useful, than asking questions you don't want answers to.