Just Sayin'

Where Do Our Legislators Stand on the Sequester ?

Posted by Paul Adair on March 5, 2013

Political, Economy, Education, Employment, Taxes, U.S., Wisconsin

The deadline for action to replace the Sequester has come and gone. A self-inflicted wound, the Sequester requires $85 billion in budget cuts this year and $1.2 trillion over the next decade. These blanket cuts are the latest in a series of moves to reach a more sustainable Federal budget. The cuts come on top of $1.7 trillion in 2011 cuts and $600 billion in revenue from the conclusion of the Bush tax cuts on high income earners.

The effects of the Sequester meat-cleaver have been documented elsewhere. There are huge cuts in everything that the Federal Government does, including border security, military readiness, the FBI, research and development, Head Start, air traffic control, NASA, education, etc., etc. etc.

Not one of our Washington legislators likes or wants the Sequester. They all agree that the “dumb” cuts should be replaced by targeted cuts. However, Republicans have stalled negotiation on a replacement by refusing to consider added revenues from closing tax loopholes. They are balking at defense cuts. This has led to a failure at negotiating a smart and bipartisan Sequester replacement. What have our elected employees in Washington done to stop this foolishness?

Jim Sensenbrenner is partially responsible for the budget woes that led to the Sequester in the first place. He was in office when the US went from the Clinton budget surpluses to record deficits. He voted for unprecedented Bush tax cuts (2001 and 2003) and two unfunded wars. His party implemented a too-expensive prescription drug plan. However, he now poses as a deficit hawk.

In a 2/27 interview on Sykes, Sensenbrenner said, “Sequestration was a blunderbuss way of cutting spending”. He blames the Sequester entirely on President Obama. Never mind the fact that Sensenbrenner voted for the Sequester as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011. Never mind that he hasn't been involved in any real attempt to avoid the Sequester. In fact, he is part of the problem, making the unfathomable statement that "We can't solve the budget problem by increasing revenues."

In December, the House passed a Bill that pretends to offer an alternative to the Sequester. The Spending Reduction Act of 2012 is a joke that House Republicans know could never gain bipartisan support. It offers no revenue, no Defense cuts, and is a manifesto to undo the Democratic agenda. The bill guts funding for a range of domestic programs, defunds Obamacare and the Consumer Financial Protection Act, and axes programs for children, the elderly, and veterans. Sensenbrenner voted for this non-starter Bill, which passed by a narrow 215-209 vote

Despite doing nothing constructive to solve the Sequester impasse, Sensenbrenner expresses outrage that the Sequester is actually happening. That cutting $85 billion in one year is actually visibly affecting Federal programs. According to his Sykes whinefest, he is angry that in order to save money, the USS Harry S Truman carrier task force group will not deploy to the Persian Gulf. He is irate about the cost cutting measure of a pre-trial supervised release of some undocumented workers by the INS.

Before becoming our US Senator, Tammy Baldwin was in the US House from 1999-2012. During that time she was fiscally responsible, voting against the budget busting Bush tax cuts, the War in Iraq, and the Prescription Drug plan. In December 2012, she also voted against the Republican Manifesto, the Spending Reduction Act of 2012, described above.

Baldwin is a supporter of a balanced Senate Bill to replace the Sequester. The plan, called the American Family Economic Protection Act , identifies $120 billion of savings, split evenly between budget cuts and closing tax loopholes. The targeted cuts do not jeopardize the economic recovery or our future. The bill was introduced on February 26. It had the support of a majority of Senators. However, it did not have the 60 vote super-majority required to end a Republican filibuster, and could not go for a Senate floor vote.

Tammy Baldwin is the one of our legislative officials most willing to work for a compromise on the Sequester. She feels that everything should be on the table to solve the crisis-domestic spending, defense spending, and increased revenue through elimination of tax breaks.

Like Baldwin, Ron Johnson did not vote for the 2011 Budget Act that included the Sequester. He felt that the Bill did not go far enough, calling it inadequate and disgusting.

Johnson is not about to work with the Democrats to craft a deal on the Sequester. When asked about increased revenues from closing tax loopholes, Johnson stated, “That’s not going to happen.” He went so far as to say that John Boehner would lose his House Speakership if he worked with Democrats to craft a solution to the impasse. He voted to maintain a filibuster on the Senate Democratic plan, effectively killing it.

In a 2/15 WPT interview, Johnson sounded a bit schizophrenic on the Sequester. In one breath, he tried to downplay the size of the cuts, saying “that’s barely pocket change.” In the next breath, he was stating that the cuts “would be devastating for our military” and how we should replace the defense cuts with more domestic cuts. Johnson's ulterior goal is to reform cut our Medicare and Social Security systems.

None of our Washington legislators want the Sequester. A viable replacement cannot be reached by domestic cuts alone. Yet, Republicans keep repeating that the military budget and closing tax loopholes should be off the table.  Of the three, only Tammy Baldwin appears willing to negotiate a smarter plan. She would like to find a way to get out of the endless artificial fiscal fights. In a WPT interview, she said, “We've been living from fiscal cliff to fiscal cliff and crisis to crisis and the people are sick of it. We've got to get back to the point where we are governing and budgeting in a responsible way.”