Republicans should be embracing the sequester. Yes, it
would be better for policymakers to make thoughtful trade-offs,
killing really stupid programs while protecting genuinely essential
outlays. But Congress won’t do that. And outlays have
to be cut somehow.
George Will points out the silliness of the claims of doom
and gloom being peddled by the Prez and his allies:
Even during this desultory economic
recovery, one industry thrives — the manufacture of synthetic
hysteria. It is, however, inaccurate to accuse the Hysteric in
Chief of crying “Wolf!” about spending cuts under the sequester. He
is actually crying “Hamster!”
As in: Batten down the hatches — the sequester will cut $85 billion from this year’s
$3.6 trillion budget! Or: Head for the storm
cellar — spending will be cut 2.3 percent! Or: Washington chain-saw
massacre — we must scrape by on 97.7 percent of current spending!
Or: Chaos is coming because the sequester will cut a sum
$25 billion larger than was just shoveled out the door (supposedly, but not
actually) for victims of Hurricane Sandy! Or: Heaven forfend, the
sequester will cut 47 percent as much as was spent on the AIG bailout! Or: Famine,
pestilence and locusts will come when the sequester causes federal
spending over 10 years to plummet from $46 trillion all the way
down to $44.8 trillion! Or: Grass will grow in the streets of
America’s cities if the domestic agencies whose budgets have increased 17 percent under
President Obama must endure a 5 percent cut!
It is worth noting that the same arguments apply to military
outlays, which also have raced upward over the last
decade. The Pentagon appears to be playing the same game as
the Prez. Notes Will:
The Navy’s participation in the political campaign to pressure
Congress into unraveling the sequester is crude, obvious and
shameful, and it should earn the Navy’s budget especially skeptical
scrutiny by Congress.
The Defense Department’s civilian employment has grown
17 percent since 2002. In 2012, defense spending on civilian
personnel was 21 percent higher than in 2002. And the
Truman must stay in Norfolk? This is, strictly speaking,
unbelievable.
Spending needs to be cut across-the-board. There can be no
sacred cows when outlays continue to race upwards for virtually all
programs under both parties. If Congress can’t be trusted to
craft a better set of cuts, so be it. Viva la Sequester!
Martin kzovich| 2.24.13 @ 7:51AM
I agree. But watch Boehner save us by caving. This is our problem.
Pecos Pete| 2.24.13 @ 8:34AM
No government agencies, nor their programs, will be shut down. They will have less to spend for parties, travel, consultants, and opulent offices.
Do you remember when government workers had to use metal desks? Now most governments have Taj Mahal buildings and offices to go along with the richness of their lives.
King O's rants about the sequester are simply lies.
Mike G| 2.24.13 @ 9:01AM
The reductions in planned spending (I refuse to call them spending cuts) will no doubt be made in the areas that will cause the most people to yell and scream about them. All of the ridiculously asinine programs we are paying for will escape unscathed.
chuck| 2.24.13 @ 8:51AM
My only problem with the sequester is that it is not large enough. How about 10% from each Cabinet Agency? Cut Federal employee pay by 15%, Congressional pay by 25%, Executive Branch pay by 30%.
Obama says we must "share" in the sacrifice. He should lead the way.
And no more free vacations for the fat-ass wife of his.
Lead by example. It's what true leaders do.
Maxwell| 2.24.13 @ 6:40PM
Oh, Chuck, I REALLY like your idea. I'd just like add one more item. Since everyone is so in love w/ Slick Willie, lets go back to the number of federal employees that were on the federal payroll at that time.
Occam's Tool| 2.25.13 @ 7:08PM
50% off the Executive Branch, and no payment for vacations other than Camp David. If he wants to play in Hawaii, pay for it all.
Jim Adcox| 2.24.13 @ 10:30AM
What about taxing the overspenders in government? When they exceed their budget, they must refund to the taxpayers that same amount, with interest!
Oldefarte| 2.24.13 @ 1:06PM
Yes absolutely bring it on! These domestic terrorists Democrats have been refusing to consider any governmental cuts and if any of their constituents [labor unionized governmental and civilian workers] lose their jobs, so be it. Serves them right. Maybe then they will begin using that thing between their ears to contemplate what is best for this country [instead of being MONICA'S for their labor union handlers]!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Stan Redmond| 2.24.13 @ 7:09PM
It is pathetic how LaHood and Obama have already resorted to extortion. They both know damn well there are no cuts. BUT, to punish the republicans Obama is willing to ensure every single American is pissed off. LaHood is already negotiating with the unions to shut down air traffic control undoubtably with Obama's blessing. Nepolotano will surely shut down TSA stations. That's one way to make sure every air travelling American is punished for Obama's petulant outbreak. I am sure there are more "under the radar" plans. Shut down national forests and parks. Shut down interstate toll bridges. Shut down border patrol. I wouldn't be surprised if this bastard would stop sending out Social Security checks just for good measure. And all the while the republicans will be blamed by 24-7 coverage of how they won't reach out to poor poor Obama.
I am sure he will find enough cash to fund Obamacare enforcement.
homme nike air max BW | 2.25.13 @ 1:16AM
Yes, it would be better for policymakers to make thoughtful trade-offs, killing really stupid programs while protecting genuinely essential outlays. But Congress won’t do that. And outlays have to be cut somehow.
Occam's Tool| 2.25.13 @ 7:08PM
Or he can vacation in Chicago, were he has a home. Like W did with his ranch.