-
Enough With the Bipartisanship
May 24, 2013 | 45 comments
-
Damage Control for Dummies
May 22, 2013 | 85 comments
-
Assessing a Week of Scandal
May 17, 2013 | 135 comments
-
After Obamacare
May 16, 2013 | 24 comments
-
The New Paternalism
May 3, 2013 | 39 comments
Political Hay
Sequestration Depression
The GOP is sort of cutting spending. Don’t give it too much credit.
(Page 2 of 2)
And then there’s the content of the cuts. Many conservatives are irritated about sequestration because it disproportionately targets the military. I don’t share their frustration, but I do understand it. The Pentagon has already accepted $487 billion in cuts over the next ten years through spending caps. Meanwhile the most hefty and consequential drivers of our debt – entitlements, health care spending, and student loans — are mostly untouched by sequestration.
The more you look at the sequester, the more trivial it seems. And yet both sides of the aisle are running around in circles, screaming and pointing at each other. How can anyone with this mentality be trusted to raise the Social Security retirement age, or turn down the higher education faucet?
So carry on with the pessimism, conservatives. Washington is still depressingly broken. Spending cuts are still politically repulsive. And only a handful of Republicans are seriously trying to fix the problem.
If the country is drunk on government spending, sequestration is a baby step towards the Brita filter. That’s it.
About the Author
Matt Purple is The American Spectator’s assistant managing editor.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (41) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Matt Purple
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2013/02/20/sequestration-spending-obama
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Jack in Wi| 2.20.13 @ 7:16AM
Matt: I agree with your comments. It is just a baby step. Whole departments have to be done away with. The non entitlement and defense budgets could be cut 50% and all foreign aid could be done away with. The country would be a far better place and we would have a handle on our finances.
TLP| 2.20.13 @ 2:13PM
A prominent member of Chicago’s homosexual community claims Barack Obama’s participation in the “gay” bar and bathhouse scene was so well known that many who were aware of his lifestyle were shocked when he ran for president and finally won the White House.
“It was preposterous to the people I knew then to think Obama was going to keep his gay life secret,” said Kevin DuJan, who was a gossip columnist in Chicago for various blogs when Obama was living in the city as a community organizer and later a state senator.
“Nobody who knew Obama in the gay bar scene thought he could possibly be president,” said DuJan.
Chicago Tribune.
TLP| 2.20.13 @ 4:02PM
My mistake.
It wasn't the Chicago Tribune.
Google: Barack Obama Gay Bathhouse Story.
GOOGLE IT!
Arnie| 2.20.13 @ 7:30AM
Wait. I don't understand the Republican talking points. They mean to say Obama is a big spender, AND a big slasher. WTF ?!@?#?$
Now, there are many stupid Americans, but the majority of the public is not stupid enough to fall for that garbage.
The Republicans should just call themselves the Orwellian Party of Assholes that loves everybody and all (unborn) babies but not actual living humans.
Moe Blotz| 2.20.13 @ 8:48AM
In RE: your second paragraph beginning with "Now", may we assume you include yourself in that group? (_!_)
TLP| 2.20.13 @ 9:19AM
We're gonna start Shunning this guy, from now on.
Responding is pointless, as his comments are just Assinine and without any sense of Truth or even Reality.
Obviously, he hasn't any friends. And, seeing as how he's not about to make any, Here?
It's probably the most Humane thing we can do, if we just pretend he's not here, so he can find someplace else, where, at least he'll have a One in a Million chance at making a Friend.
Ignore Him.
Von Mises Jr| 2.20.13 @ 9:23AM
Can't these guys spot Perp when they see it yet?
No offense intended, but at AT they don't argue with trolls. It makes for a much better thread to simply post "troll alert - please don't feed the trolls."
CJW| 2.20.13 @ 4:35PM
Von
Instead of troll alert, use purp alert for the various purps.
Anthony| 2.20.13 @ 10:03AM
Arnie, the suggestion of the State Rep from Colorado was for you girls to advise your rapist that you were menstruating, not going through menopause. But perhaps your rant is indicitive of your hormonal imbalance.
Can't you get anything right?
And you're supposed to wear your chastity belt with the locking mechanism in front, not in back, silly boy.
Arnie| 2.20.13 @ 10:50AM
Hey silly boy Anthony, did Sarah Palin run for president with that money you sent her?
Oh no, she didn't. Woops... Well, I bet she spent your money on some much needed $500 shoes.
Anthony| 2.20.13 @ 1:11PM
No moron, as usual you're ass backwards. That would be Jessie Jackson Jr., and his corrupt City of Chicago councilwomen wifey who spent hapless D fool's campaign money on Rolexes, Michael Jackson's fedor, and Malcom X memorabilia, to the tune of 750K.
I bet you gave Jackson money as well.
Well, that's two more lefty reprobates on the way to the slammer.
And if you ask me nice Arnie, I'll get you a cell with Bob Menendez, he likes little girls like you.
CJW| 2.20.13 @ 5:06PM
Anthony
There's a book on Rev Jessee, "Shakedown", about his MO. He charges a company with racism, then settles when the company agrees to sensitivity training for its employees and a contribution to Rainbow Coalition. The sensitivity training is done by one of Jessee's pals who then make a contribution to Rainbow Coalition, or whatever it is now called.
The best payoff was when Miller or Anhouser beer gave a distributor franchise to one of Jessee's kids.
Anyone else does this and you get a federal RICO indictment.
Young Jessee must have thought why go through this complicated shakedown like my daddy, just take it from the campaign funds. As lady Bubba would say, what's the difference, what does it matter, bottom line they took the money.
Arnie| 2.21.13 @ 4:25AM
Oh poor Anthony. You see, I never gave any money to Jessie Jackson Jr. I'm not even from his state.
But you admitted giving money to Sarah Palin, who completely played you like the cheap violin that you are, and pretended for years that she was going to run for president, but instead just ran around the country in a bus with expensive clothes that she bought with money you and your fellow flock of sheep fanatics sent to her.
You got swindled fool.
CJW| 2.20.13 @ 4:36PM
purp alert
Al Adab| 2.20.13 @ 8:23AM
When cuts are spread out over years to come, they are effectivly meaningless. In the event it amounts to what about 85 B out of a 1.4 T budget? That is about a nickle on the dollar. With the possible exception of the adverse impact on military readiness and capabilities, this is much ado about nothing.
Von Mises Jr| 2.20.13 @ 9:37AM
You are correct Al. It is about a 2% decrease in the 6-8% baseline Budget increases.
The Rule of 72 gives an approximation of the doubling of the currency’s nominal value. So if our statist in DC put 8% increases in year-over-year, it means that the Budget doubles every nine (9) years. If they cut the rate of growth to 6%, we double every twelve (12) years.
Baseline Budgeting can be traced back to Congressional Budget Act of 1974. They initially inflated the Budget by about 3%. It is now 8%. If we do not stop this insanity, we will be beyond trillions and talking quadrillions. And DC will have virtually all of them.
The Ten Year Projected Budget will allegedly decrease from $44+ trillion to about $43 trillion over ten years with sequestration. But I suspect that these are Monopoly Money statistics since we are now at about $3.6T to $3.8T that will grow by 6-8% and should give us 6T to $8T Budgets by 2023.
Buy gold and silver.
TLP| 2.20.13 @ 9:49AM
It's actually $85 Billion out of $3.2 Trillion.
Everything he said yesterday, was Bullshitt. First Responders, Police, Firemen, Teachers, Doctors and Nurses are not paid for by the Federal Gov't.
He just gave $85 Billion to Sandy Relief, and we were all told that it was No Big Deal. They killed the Republicans when they said it was too much. Now, they wanna get out of THEIR AGREEMENT because, Now, all of a sudden, $85 Billion is too much.
We're finished, as a Country.We have a Constitutionaly Protected Free Press who refuse to DO THEIR JOB, and to Hell with the Country.
We have a Political Party, in the Democrats, who won't be satisfied until we're Borrowing Money from GREECE, and California is written in Chinese on all of our Maps.
The first casualty of War is the Truth.
They've been at War with our Founding Principles for 100 Years. And, in all those years, the Media hasn't told The Truth about a single Democrat President. They've run interference while these Democrats went about their business of diluting the Fabric of this Country through their Lowest Common Denominator Immigration Policies, their Blame America First Education System, and their "Set'em Loose Bruce" Judicial System that never saw a Crook who wasn't made that way by a White Patriarchal Society, or a Cop that wasn't Racist, on the Take, or just praying for an opportunity to Kill a Black Man.
And now, the Worst one of them all was just given 4 More Years.
There's a Storm Coming.
George S| 2.20.13 @ 10:58AM
... actually it's 3.8 trillion. But what is 600 billion among friends? 150% of the FY 2008 GW Bush deficit is all.
Warrior| 2.20.13 @ 11:09AM
Using the same basic ration of $4 trillion and cutting $100 billion. To the average American making $50K a year, it would be like cutting $15-20. Just seeing this being debated by the ruling elite makes me want to watch more Lancelot Link and less C-SPAN.
Von Mises Jr| 2.20.13 @ 11:40AM
Don't tell barry you still have $15-20 disposable income or he will raise your taxes.
Al Adab| 2.20.13 @ 11:48AM
Everybody notice what happened to the payroll withholding the last month?
c. j. acworth| 2.20.13 @ 8:35AM
I wonder what the reaction will be when the sequester happens (if it happens) and nothing of any consequence...happens? When the world does not come to an end, granny still gets her Social Security check, our fighter planes do not fall out of the sky over Afghanistan, etc. Will people be alert enough to look at each other and say, "Gee, that wasn't so bad after all. Maybe we don't need to spend so much. Maybe we can cut some MORE."
Mike G| 2.20.13 @ 8:55AM
Yeah, don't count on it. Just like local pols, they will cut the things that people want the most, and leave their boondoggles alone. Then people will yell and scream until the pols undo the reduced increases in spending.
TLP| 2.20.13 @ 10:00AM
It'll be indifference.
The Media will never speak of it. Like Beghazi, Fast and Furious, or his frequent participation in the Chicago Bathhouse Scene back in the day.
He went Las Vegas to a Fundraiser, just Hours after our First Ambassador since 1979, was Murdered, along with 4 other Americans. He was Picking out his Clothes, even while the Attack was still going on.
He Forged Documents to a Federal Judge. Did you know that?
His Drilling Moratorium is Illegal. Did you know that?
He has been In Contempt of a Federal Court for almost 4 Years, now. Did you know that?
It took him 5 Days to get to New Orleans after the last Hurricane. George Bush was there in 3. Do you remember that?
He spent 5 Days FUNDRAISING his way to Louisiana. Do you remember that?
That's how it is with Cheerleaders.
They only Cheer when things go their Team's way.
N8tivTxn| 2.20.13 @ 9:17AM
How can anyone with this mentality be trusted to raise the Social Security retirement age, or turn down the higher education faucet...or vote for TERM LIMITS?
markenoff| 2.20.13 @ 10:11AM
You've got it backwards. We should lower the social security retirement age to 45. Think of how many jobs will open up if everyone 45 and up retires. And a lot of those jobs will require college degrees so make attendance at college mandatory for everyone. There's no reason why every American kid shouldn't go to college. After all, we have the illegals to do all the jobs Americans won't do. And we need to abolish term limits so Obama can stay in office indefinietly. It will take the rest of his life to repair all the damage Bush did.
Anthony| 2.20.13 @ 10:09AM
If the Rs can't make the case that sequestration would only reduce the rate of percentage increase in Obozo's bloated spending binge, except for the miliary, then these clowns really need to leave town forever.
What complete incompetents these morons are, the whole g**damn lot of them.
It's going to be one ugly crash.
Peej| 2.20.13 @ 10:30AM
Are you really surprised that spending cuts are repulsive? Who really wants to lose a hand-out in this country today?
Pecos Pete| 2.20.13 @ 10:38AM
There will be no real spending cuts. Taxes will be raised. The debt cap will be raised. The annual deficit will continue to be in excess of $1 Trillion. KingOcare will raise health care and insurance costs.
Politicians will continue to get rich on the PEOPLE's money. The Ruling Class ... ummm, Rules. And the Stupid Class will continue to elect themselves into utter chaos.
fmm| 2.20.13 @ 12:55PM
Which type of government would you rather live under?
A government which produces things which the citizens actually want and are willing to pay for while leaving enough money to the citizens to plan for their own future and build worthwhile enterprises along with staying out of their lives beyond a few rules or regulations which provide for safety and support in the case of emergencies;
or
A government which demands at least half of your earnings which does not even pay for its spending and results in a reduction of the citizens net worth over time while producing nothing other than regulations which control every aspect of your lives on pain of punishment?
Please vote.
cicero| 2.20.13 @ 1:44PM
I love it. A United States Rep. Representative who is worried about sequestration because it may cause him to lay off one of his aides. How many people have been laid off in this country because of the disastrous policies of these seme representatives? Has he ever considered the possibility of calling all of his staff together and informing them that he is gooing to reduce all of their wages so he can retain the one that would have been laid off?
Maybe they could just cut the outlay across the board 1%, thereby saving about $360 billion per year. Or, horrors of horrors, they could cut the pot by %5, and balance the budget - if they ever get around to submitting one.
Or perhaps, the House could simply refuse to allocate any money until the Senate and the White House submit a budget that the House can take seriously. I know that I am talking nonsense now, but wouldn't it be unique if these folks actually did what they are being elected and paid to do?
Fiscal| 2.20.13 @ 1:53PM
You all seem to support the Republican nonsense of "cuts only". This continues the "get something for nothing" philosophy that only helps liberal spenders. The truth is that you must make people pay for what they get. When they see how much it takes out of their paychecks, true fiscal conservatives will win the vote. If there is no pain, there is no gain. Right now, the average voter feels no pain and fiscal conservatives will continue to lose. We should support tax increases to balance the budget and a flat tax with virtually no deductions to insure that it is being felt by the voter.
That said, I agree with most of you that the sequester is rather small and at best, a political ploy. But no matter what the Republican politicians do, it will be blamed on them because Obama did put forth a plan. Republican lawmakers won't put out a plan because it would entail cuts in Social Security and Medicare and since their constituents are much older than Democrats, they're afraid to do the right thing.
The conservative strategy is wrong, wrong, wrong -- and it is a losing strategy even if it makes most of you feel good.
PolishKnight| 2.20.13 @ 2:09PM
And a flat tax strategy is also pie-in-the-sky thinking. Not only is it difficult to implement politically but also logistically. The IRS has millions of pages of income to just define income. If a business has a high income and expenses, they'll get killed.
And a flat sales tax? Even worse! Define a "sale". If a company has multiple divisions and they transfer different material between them, is that a sale? The effect of such a tax code would be to encourage consolidation. Company A buying from company B would pay a tax, but if they're the same company, no tax.
Tax fraud would then entail people finding ways to buy things wholesale or making them "fall off the truck" from their company. Think the current IRS audits are bad? Imagine having to produce sales slips for EVERY item in your home otherwise paying a tax and penalty on them!
The best tax would be what the kings of old levied: Property. No way to smurf it. No way to hide. If it's an asset protected by the state, you pay. As simple as that. It also is inherently progressive. A poor person who is having a hard time getting by with few assets will pay little while a wealthy person will pay more. But EVERYONE will pay something.
Fiscal| 2.20.13 @ 3:06PM
Millions of pages to define income? Really? Millions? A while ago, I was a senior executive of a tax software company. The definition is really not that bad if you get rid of the tax incentives. A flat tax would be assessed on NET INCOME, not GROSS INCOME. Capish? I wish more people would understand these concepts.
The reason it is difficult to get legislators to approve a flat tax is that it takes away some of their power, and the power of their lobbyists/donators. People in DC are not trained in economics, or for that matter business (they are mostly lawyers), so they really don't understand tax incentives, subsidies, and tax deductions and their resultant effect. Both Dems and Repubs think they know better than the free market. They don't.
If you think that a flat tax would be any different than the current tax code in terms of company consolidation, you really don't understand how taxation works. Taxes are on income, not revenue. Capish?
CJW| 2.20.13 @ 4:38PM
Pa has a flat rate income tax. Most municipalities have a flat rate of 1 to 4%. There is no problem defining income or enforcing it. Just about every state has a flat rate sales tax of 6 or 7%.
cicero| 2.20.13 @ 3:18PM
The Reps have been calling for entitlement reform for years. The only way to save Medicare and Social Security is to make them actuarily sound. Raise the age and income limits. No one is arguing against that. When I became elligible for SS, they had raised the age from 65 to 67. O K, I'm fine with that, even though I had been contributing since my 18th birthday. They forced me to sign up for Medicare, even though I am still working and still paying for my own med insurance. It was not optional. For the working class, we all contributye to our own SS and Medicare. I agree that there should be a cost for all benefits, andd it should be pegged to afordability.
Right now, we have more people permanently on welfare. Medicaide, SSDI, and other forms of relief than ever before, and the ranks are growing. These programs are turning into bribes for votes. No one is talking abouts cuts only. But to even talk about there being no spending problem is lunacy. Only a fool could utter such nonsense - or a thief.
old progrmr| 2.20.13 @ 3:51PM
This is getting ridiculous, on both sides of the aisle. The lies are staggering from everybody in government. We are talking about a cut of $1.2 trillion over a 10 year period. This is a cut of $120 billion per year out of a yearly budget ranging from $3.2 trillion to $3.8 trillion per year (total projected expenditures over a decade of about $41 trillion). Even if we assume that Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are off the table (47% of total budget in 2012), this is a budget cut of only 8.7%. For instance, this means a cut to Defense spending of about $52 billion per year. Hell people, Congress just passed a Sandy Hurricane relief bill that cost $60 billion spread over two years that was loaded with pork and payoffs to unions. The Pentagon says that they must furlough 800,000 civilian employees, if the average salary and benefits of these workers is only $70,000 per year, that alone will save $56 billion so that no other cuts would be required, but the Pentagon tells us (lies to us) and says we can't even fuel our carrier fleets. If these dolts in Washington would ask everybody to sacrifice a little, they would demand proportional cuts in Social Security. For example a 3.0% cut to Social Security payments would save a total of another $19.2 billion or a reduction of monthly payments for a recipient receiving $2,000 per month of $60. We are being scammed by real political con men on every side.
cicero| 2.20.13 @ 4:06PM
o.p. A 1% cut across the board will save $380 billion a year. A 5% cut will balance even this bloated budget (or non-budget spending fiasco). All they really have to do is to go back to the budget of 2007, when we certainly were no underspending, and we would be running a surplus. The only way to save the country is just to shut Washington down. SS and Defense can continue (without the F-35), and the world will keep spinning around. The beaurocrats may have to find something useful to do, but beyond that, no body will notice, unless the press decides to look.
homme nike air max BW | 2.20.13 @ 10:54PM
Cuts We Deserve (And Are All Obama’s Fault). We can only hope the EPA hasn’t outlawed gas-guzzlers large enough to fit that bumper sticker.
Cuffs| 2.21.13 @ 11:38AM
What the hell is so hard about the Repubs challenging Obama on this gloom & doom
sequestration. Just say NO!!!!
Put the ball in Obama's court and tell
him to cut from other revenue sucking
departments--Education, Commerce,
EPA and Ag. What is the problem.
These agencies waste more money
than they are worth. They are full
of overpaid paper-pushers with
huge pensions--get rid of them, but no
we have to cut Medicare, Medicaid and
police. What sham!! Obama is
so juvenile it hurts to see and hear him.
What a fraud.
Bill8472| 2.21.13 @ 1:45PM
Sequestration is a testament to the unwillingness of Congress to do what it takes to come up with a decision regarding spending. Just like four years without a budget.
Why are we paying these people? They are totally useless. They are NOT doing the peoples' work. They are NOT leaders. They ARE occupying space. It's amazing to me that they have approval ratings above 10% - it should be zero.