Politics

January 30, 2013

Deal to avoid sequester seems remote

Across-the-board cuts loom as the March 1 deadline approaches with party leaders entrenched.

The Washington Post

WASHINGTON - Less than a month after averting one fiscal crisis, Washington began bracing Tuesday for another, as lawmakers in both parties predicted that deep, across-the-board spending cuts would probably hit the Pentagon and other federal agencies on March 1.

click image to enlarge

FILE - This Nov. 2, 2009, file photo shows Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter standing in front of a MRAP all terrain vehicle (M-ATV) at the Pentagon in Washington. The Afghan war effort eventually would be harmed by across-the-board budget cuts, even as the Obama administration intends to shield the military's combat mission from the reductions, Carter said. "There will be second-order effects on the war," Carter said. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta, File)

AP

Party leaders say they see no clear path to compromise, particularly given a growing sentiment among Republicans to pocket the cuts and move on to larger battles over health and retirement spending.

Adding to the sense of inevitability is the belief that the cuts, known as the sequester, would improve the government's bottom line without devastating the broader economy. Though the cuts would hamper economic growth, especially in the Washington region, the forecast is far less dire than with other recent fiscal deadlines.

Cuts to the military and the defense industry remain politically problematic. But Tuesday, even some of the Pentagon's most fervent champions seemed resigned to the likelihood that the cuts would be permitted to kick in, at least temporarily.

"I think it's more likely to happen. And I'm ashamed of the Congress, I'm ashamed of the president, and I'm ashamed of being in this body, quite frankly," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham, R-S.C.

"How do you go to somebody in the military who's been deployed four or five times . . . and say, 'For your good work over the last decade, we're going to ruin the military; we're going to make it harder for you to have the equipment you need to fight, and we're going to reduce benefits to your family?' " he said.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., was only slightly more optimistic, saying there is a an even-probability threat that the sequester will strike in March.

As the deadline approaches, legions of corporate executives, nonprofit officials, mayors and governors are working the phones and trekking to Capitol Hill in hopes of securing a last-minute deal. Cuts to government contracts have already triggered layoffs, particularly in the defense industry. And agency officials are warning of mass furloughs of government workers that could delay medical research, leave national parks understaffed and otherwise disrupt federal operations.

The sequester is a product of the 2011 fight over the national debt, when the new GOP House majority insisted on spending cuts equal in size to the increase in the federal debt limit. The result: Spending caps that would force President Barack Obama to slice $1 trillion from agency budgets over the next decade, along with $1.2 trillion in additional cuts that would hit automatically on Jan. 2, 2013, unless Congress agreed on a plan to replace them.

The sequester was designed to be abhorrent to both parties. With the exception of a few programs spared by Congress -- including Medicaid, Medicare benefits and food stamps -- every government account would be sliced by roughly the same amount. Many Republicans were queasy about a projected 9.4 percent reduction in military programs. And many Democrats were alarmed by the prospect of an 8.2 percent cut to Head Start, air-traffic-control operations and community development block grants.

Despite the threat, lawmakers riven by larger ideological differences over taxes and spending have not agreed on an alternative plan to generate $1.2 trillion in savings over the next decade. Late last month, in the throes of negotiations over the "fiscal cliff," the White House and congressional leaders informed rank-and-file lawmakers that the sequester would kick in on Jan. 2.

That sparked a furious lobbying campaign by outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who helped secure a deal to delay the sequester for two months.

 

Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our accuracy form

Send question/comment to the editors




Further Discussion

Here at PressHerald.com we value our readers and are committed to growing our community by encouraging you to add to the discussion. To ensure conscientious dialogue we have implemented a strict no-bullying policy. To participate, you must follow our Terms of Use.

Questions about the article? Add them below and we’ll try to answer them or do a follow-up post as soon as we can. Technical problems? Email them to us with an exact description of the problem. Make sure to include:
  • Type of computer or mobile device your are using
  • Exact operating system and browser you are viewing the site on (TIP: You can easily determine your operating system here.)


Blogs

More PPH Blogs