We've spent a fair amount of time looking at the details of the sequestration fight, so perhaps now is a good time to appreciate the forest instead of the trees.
The Washington Examiner's Byron York, with whom I rarely ever agree, notices an overarching problem with the Republican message.
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed Wednesday, House Speaker John Boehner describes the upcoming sequester as a policy "that threatens U.S. national security, thousands of jobs and more."
Which leads to the question: Why would Republicans support a measure that threatens national security and thousands of jobs?
It's puzzling, isn't it? With nine days to go before this self-inflicted wound begins to do real damage, the Republican message seems to have three parts: (1) the sequester would do real harm to the country; (2) Republicans will allow it to happen anyway; and (3) this is a political winner for the GOP.
I'll confess that I often struggle to understand how congressional Republicans see the world, but this fiasco in the making is puzzling, even for the GOP. Indeed, York's question need not be rhetorical -- if Republicans believe the sequester cuts are awful for America, why are they imposing it on America?
York, a conservative in good standing, added, "The effect of Boehner's argument is to make Obama seem reasonable in comparison. After all, the president certainly agrees with Boehner that the sequester cuts threaten national security and jobs. The difference is that Obama wants to avoid them."
This, too, is exactly right. Democrats and Republicans agree that the sequester is dangerous, but Democrats are ready to reach a compromise and the GOP isn't. This is a winner for Republicans, how?
And in the larger context, isn't Byron York's incredulity evidence that maybe the right isn't entirely unified when it comes to the GOP's strategy?
Keep in mind, it's not just York.
The Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol today urged his party to rethink the "deeply irresponsible" approach that allows the sequestration cuts to happen.
But wait, say Republican tacticians, it's a chance to gain leverage against the president.
Leverage for what? The GOP pols who talk about "leverage" never explain what they're going to use that leverage for. The Republican House can and should prevent further tax increases, and for that matter domestic spending increases, regardless of how the sequester battle turns out. The sequester gives Republicans no leverage here. And the House will have no more ability to insist on needed entitlement reforms or on the shape of next year's overall budget with the sequester in effect than if it's not.
The good news is, there's one solution that should make just about everyone happy: just turn the damn thing off. There's no reason these automatic cuts have to happen -- all Congress has to do is decide not to hurt the country on purpose. Democrats and Republicans could go back to fighting over the budget and related fiscal issues, the deficit will continue to shrink, and the economy will continue to slowly recover.
Policymakers put this sword of Damocles over their own heads, and there's no reason they can't undo what they've done, putting the sword away.
But this won't happen because Republicans -- the folks who agree this sequester is so very dangerous -- refuse to even consider turning it off.
Leave a Comment:
"Which leads to the question: Why would Republicans support a measure that threatens national security and thousands of jobs?"
Because he doesn't have the intellect to do the right thing.
Maybe Obama should have stood up and said he wanted the sequester to happen. No republican could go along with that.
“Their political reactions express rather a profound and largely unconscious hatred of our society and its ways -- a hatred which one would hesitate to impute to them if one did not have suggestive clinical evidence ... The pseudo-conservative, Adorno writes, shows 'conventionality and authoritarian submissiveness' in his conscious thinking and 'violence, anarchic impulses, and chaotic destructiveness in the unconscious sphere…… The pseudo conservative is a man who, in the name of upholding traditional American values and institutions and defending them against more or less fictitious dangers, consciously or unconsciously aims at their abolition.'"
-- Richard Hofstadter: The Pseudo-Conservative (1965)
These gop/tp Idiots are doing everything that they can to dismantle America for many reasons and the main one is their hatred of a black-man being in the WH - They make no sense , they are willing to destroy many American lives just because of their ignorance , racism , greed and of course they Want total Control as-well ! Yes , it is the SOS with them "My way or the Highway" and Nothing more than that ! IDIOTS ! Adolph would be so proud of them , wouldn't he !
These idiots in congress need to put on permanent leave without pay or benefits of any-kind ! Seeing that they are so damn Lazy and refuse to do their job and neglect and purposefully turn their backs on America !
After-all the gop/tp could care-less if Americans have Jobs - a roof over our heads and food on our tables and our children being in a safe , dry , warm place to LIVE ! They could care less and yet they claim that they support all of these things for Americans and our children ----- How much More Hypocritical can these Nuts and their supporters be ? Real True American Patriots Huh - Yeah Rite !
Why are you folks going apoplectic over a net $60 Billion cut? We sent nearly that much to Sandy restoration. Hysteria is not helpful. Don't be gullible.
Scooterstain - Yeah don't be Gull-able - Yeah-Rite - listen to you and your hypocrisy and your ignorance of common-sense !
The Kochs with their American for Prosperity campaign money (better to buy Congressmen by) and the American for Prosperity agenda(tax cuts for the job creators, get rid of regulations, end the government involvement in education, energy and environmental protection, etc.) and the $30 million spent for lobbying each year and you have what is happening on the sequester issue, the Hagel confirmation, and a host of other issues that are critical for the well-being of the United States. They believe in pushing issues to the brink. As for John [(Benghazi, Hagel) McCain, he is repaying the Kochs for getting him re-elected and as one willing to carry out orders, he will take whatever position the Kochs tell him tol. As for (Benghazi) Graham, he has to be reelected and needs the Kochs money to help him do so.
So if you want to know why the Republicans are all over the map on issue after issue, look to the Kochs.
DON'T TRUST THE KOCHS! THEY ARE TRAITORS TO AMERICA!
That's because you're thinking rationally. Think crazy. Then they're easy to understand.
"Consider a Congressman. Then consider an idiot. Ah, but I repeat myself."
-- Mark Twain, 1873
We had an election, and elections have consequences. This is something conservatives in the GOP have yet to grasp since the President won a second term. Republicans remain quagmired in the status quo of the Tea Party and kitchen-sink campaigning. They aren't interested in cooperating. Mitch McConnell's new goal is to prevent a Democratic victory in 2016, now that his other first priority of destroying Obama failed so miserably. Conservatives are still operating in a land of unskewed polls and Dick Morris pep talks about a Romney landslide. The rest of the country is rapidly leaving these intractable partisans behind. - progressive
The last statement places the sequester solely in the arena of politics...exactly where it doesn't belong if the "good of the country" is what is at stake.
To determine whether the sequester is desirable, you have to also consider the alternatives. There are many who genuinely believe that the continued rise of spending more and more than we have is itself more detrimental to the US in the long run than the sequester will in the short term.
And this is less than a 3% cut...we don't have 3% of waste? Really? I say pass a bill giving agencies more flexibility in where to make the cuts so priorities can always be considered and move forward.
I'm curious as to where your 3% figure came from. The sequester is $1.2 trillion ($600 billion military and $600 billion civilian) which is 3% of $40 trillion. Are you saying that our disposable budget, the part that isn't interest payments, SS and Medicare, is $40 trillion?
Rob, you mean this rise in spending?
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/hearsay-economics/
Rob: The sequester is not considered "desirable" by any serious thinker or non-wingnut. Just the fact that you dishonestly frame the debate and provide sketchy numbers kinda proves that. I admit there is a positive, the bloated defense budget that grows tenfold every decade does need attention, but the bottom line is the sequester is stupid.
Idiots,
No, I mean this rise in spending. Actual dollars rise, not a percent of GDP, etc. Notice the HUGE jump in 2009 that has been maintained AND increased.
dkm,
I was referring to the cuts as a percent of federal spending. The 85 billion dollars a year cut over the next (what 10 years?) of the current spending of 3.8 trillion dollars. I do think there should be more flexibility in where the cuts fall but cutting just over 2% of a 3.8 trillion dollar budget seems doable to me. But, what do I know as everyone here keeps telling me.
(Please dispute my numbers if I have them wrong. Granted, I do understand there were lots of things in the budget of 3.8 trillion that were protected from the sequester.)
Lebowsky, would you agree that cutting 2.5% or so across the board of the total budget should be achievable? (As to my sketchy numbers, I hope I've clarified.)
Strange, no mention by Robkins of the "huge" rise in spending between 2002 and 2009.
I wonder why ever that could be?
Doug, I'm with you...if you read my posts, I constantly say both parties are the problem in many areas, increase spending is one of them.
Bullsh*t robtroll. And you know it.
When God was handing out common sense, the teapubs said they didn't want to bother with pennies. Does that explain it?
When they were passing out brains, Republicans thought they said "trains" and asked for a slow one.
Just turn the damn thing off.
I think this has been the Republican strategy all along. They just want to see if the Dems will cave and sacrifice anything anyway.
The most puzzling aspect is the jobs issue that repubs keep raising with respect to the sequester. They worry about the loss of jobs in the defense industry if the sequester happens, but they are willing to let those folks lose their jobs. Yet, contradictatorially, they also keep saying that government doesn't create jobs---Romney was spouting it non-stop during the primaries and general election. If government doesn't create jobs, then how can a cut in government funding of defense cost jobs??? In the end, if the sequester does happen, it will end up providing one more boulder on the mountain of proof that austerity hurts an economy, especially in the area of employment. How do you spin that in 2014? "Sure, the sequester happened, and it cost lots of jobs, but if we just do even bigger cuts, jobs will magically appear"? Good luck selling that pile of horse manure.
Obviously you don't see the difference between good government jobs, and those jobs.
Yeah, I admit that is my blind spot. I foolishly equate jobs at fraudulent and corrupt defense contractors the same as any other job. Don't get me wrong, I hate to see a single working person lose their job, as it seems it's always the working stiff who gets the shaft when management screws up or does something illegal or immoral. However, I still want to see the Pentagon be forced to get its act together, and the astounding failures and frauds perpetrated upon the taxpayer for weapons systems that are overpriced, behind schedule, and so full of problems that they don't function need to be dealt with NOW. We've heard since the days of Reagan that there is plenty of waste in the defense budget, and we have been promised it will be fixed, but no one ever does a thing about it, and the problem grows worse every year.
This is why they are going to push this...not because it gives them leverage but because they are going to push for more cuts anyway...they want as many cuts as deep as they can possibly get them...not because of anything to do with the budget the debt or the deficit but because they want the programs to be cut into extinction...and if it means they have to cut defense spending in the short term they can always put it back later...they want the New deal Gone and this is their shot
I'm really getting sick of the phrase "needed entitlement cuts". First, "entitlement" does not mean "people feel entitled to free stuff"; it means "people are entitled to these programs because they've paid into them".
Second, why are the cuts needed? How many cuts have already gone through? The Repubs always want this tit-for-tat exchange; what the hell have they given up lately? Oh, yeah, sanity.
Third, why do they keep defending levels of defense spending that make no sense, even to the people running the defense dept.? They're trying to retool the military for modern warfare, trying to cut costs, but because of jobs in the districts of various lawmakers (which couldn't possibly transition into new factories, or infrastructure building), they won't let go of their big toys.
Fourth, they also talk about closing loopholes... but as soon as specific loopholes, e.g., Big Agra, etc., are targeted, suddenly closing THOSE loopholes isn't a good idea.
I guess what I really want is for the bastards to admit they have no interest in government or public service, and only in enriching themselves and their cronies.
It is simple,the Republicans have mantra,that the gov't is bad and thus can't do anything or can even be trusted.The new deal brought another and new understanding of what the gov't is all about,So it's in their interest to undermined those programs,hence proving to the adept of the cult of small or no gov't that they can exist and have a good life at the state of nature.
All this is nonsense,but the modern American Conservatism was built on that ideology.
Do you remember the president of the USA Ronald Reagan saying uttering these words? "The gov't is not the solution,it is the problem."
The Illuminati Polka
Words and Music: © 2002 by Tom Smith
You've heard that everyone is six degrees from Kevin Bacon,
But do you know the Six Degrees of Grand Exalted Mason?
For everyone and everything has around it curled
The tentacles of the Secret Masters who control the world.
For several thousand years now, they've worked behind the scenes,
They laugh when we buy Dockers -- we've all got designer genes!
They know if you'll get the girl or pass the S.A.T.,
It's kinda like The Truman Show combined with D&D.
Everybody's bank account is serviced by the Gnomes,
The Masonic Temple gets the mortgage payment for your homes,
Commander Weisshaupt keeps Saddam from being killed too soon,
While Crowley and Blavatsky run Wall Street from the moon.
The Media say "Everything is awful but it's okay",
It turns out that Fox Mulder is really Keyser Soze,
If Men In Black are in your tub, or birds consult your cat,
Duck your head, try not to think, and wear this tinfoil hat.
The entertainment industry just got the Atom Bomb,
Dick Cheney and Al Qaeda run Enron with your mom,
Your DNA's on CD-R, so heads up, P.D.Q.,
You may not have a hope in hell, but at least you've got a clue!
One of the quotes that was in a presentation packet when I hired a "government relations specialist" ( IE: Lobbyist) was this:
"Reality isn't Real inside the Legislature"
This is a perfect description of the GOP, or anybody that resides in Washington.
"Why would Republicans support a measure that threatens national security and thousands of jobs?"
1) They're ticked that the public rejected them and put that man back into the White House.
2) Bonehead thinks that whining and pointing fingers makes him look good on camera.
3) Because the "tea-potty" base is clue-less about governing and have been ginned up to believe that "compromise" is a 4 letter word.
4) Because the GOP don't want to be "primaried" by the reich-wing zealots.
5) Because "real leadership" is hard to when you caucus with 13 yr. old know nothings - and you have NO REAL alternatives.
I think Boner and his cohorts are awaiting further information on bengahzi before proceeding
They want the government to admit that it seeks to confuse and hoodwink the terrorists by a public admission? Immediately after the attack, CIA officials in the area wanted to conduct clandestine intelligence to discover who and where these terrorists were in anticipation of a counterstrike. So, they wanted to disarm them by saying the the United States only believed it was a spontaneous public protest of a video insulting their Prophet. Then Mitt Romney blows this cover by saying we know it was a terrorist attack and accusing the White House of trying to hoodwink and confuse the American people. Well, the terrorists melted away into the population of Benghazi or out into the desert, and no retaliatory strike was feasible. And these Senators want us to admit that we will lie to our enemies?
I think somewhere in their lizard brains was imbedded when they were young the notion that "Girls like Bad Boys." They grew up as political nerds, so never got to be Bad Boys and get the girls who like Bad Boys. But lately they've discovered how to be the biggest baddest Bad Boys of them all - playing chicken with the whole damn world.
Sadly, for them, they are not likely to get the girls, unless they are doing this to impress Ann Coulter.
That assumes Ann Coulter is a female, which seems to be a stretch at best.
Ann Coulter claims Dems hate this nation,
And loves being the center of sensation...
I can't tell if this witch
Underwent gender switch,
Or just flunked her high-school education...
Yeah, we're getting pretty close to that moment when only the stupid will not be able to recognize the stupid coming from the Republican party! -Kevo
I'm sorry. I am a progressive Democrat, but the sequester is the only way we are ever going to get even 1/10 of the war cuts we need. The Executive Branch will be in charge of how the cuts are administered. If all cuts are made in hardware, many, if not all of the 100,000 jobs can be saved. In important domestic matters, military and non military personnel from the War Department can be brought home to take care of many of these areas. Cutting is done department by department across the board, but there is no reason that within each department, cutting cannot be done with intelligence, getting rid of unneeded high priced administrators and keeping all of the real workers. This will only happen if Obama enforces it himself. If not, the administrators will lay off all the people who actually do the work. Cutting should always be done from the top first. By the way, I hope the Sequester includes getting rid of at least 20 percent of Congress and 4 or 5 Supreme Court Justices.
So you are not content with a reasoned democratic solution to our defense. You want something forced on us to force cuts in what you personally find reprehensible. This is not the right way to get these cuts. The cuts are across the board, it matters not who or what is cut. That's not rational. Getting your cuts this way will not protect a lot of scientists' jobs and research projects; teachers jobs; national parks closures; etc. And you think the persons who will make these cuts within each department will have the same values you do and eliminate only the things you abhor? Can we send you a salesmen. We have a Bridge in Brooklyn to sell.
The GOP has been committing ECONOMIC TREASON against this country ever since January 20, 2009.
More specifically since January 3, 2013. ---That's when the Kochs took over the House of Representatives and began calling the shots.
As for Boehner, he is like the French lieutenant following the crowd as it was storming the Bastille during the French Revolution. "Why are you following the crowd?" he was asked. "I have to, I am their leader." Boehner has to deal with the T.E.A. Republicans because he is their leader and has to wait until he can get something passed that is good for the country.
Now, if only the Kochs will allow the Senate Republicans not to filibuster when they agreed not to and enable the Senate Democrats to pass a balanced debt reduction bill and send it to Boehner to get a bi-partisan vote on it in the House.
DON'T TRUST THE KOCHS! THEY ARE LIARS OF THE FIRST ORDER!
Correction: More specifically since January 3, 2011. ---That's when the Kochs took over the House of Representatives and began calling the shots.
Hello, the sequester will hurt business, including those small businesses that the Repubs give lip service to all the time. Think of all those thousands of furloughed employees trying to make ends meet. They certainly won't be spending money on anything they don't have to have. They may not even be able to spend money on things they absolutely need. You know, food, rent, utilities, medicines, that sort of thing.
Sequestration was agreed upon by both sides and all parties knew when it would take effect... and only NOW it's a big emergency that requires throwing together a last minute watered down solution?? Please... always the Republicans fault if they try to step back from crisis mode half baked "compromises".
What was the Senate's response to the House's passage of HR 5652 Sequester Replacement Reconciliation Act of 2012 (May 10, 2012)? or the Rigell Amendment to the National Defense Authorization Bill (May 17, 2012)? or HR 6684 Spending Reduction Act of 2012(December 20, 2012)?
What has been offered as an alternative by the Senate over the past year? Really... I would like to compare the different pieces of legislation so please let me know.
The easiest and right thing to do is for Congress to come back from recess and simply repeal the sequestration bill. Then we can take up the debate from there. Holding the nation hostage includes the TP in the hostage pool. Not only may they be defeated at the polls for letting this happen (and the President at this point cannot stop it; only Congress can), many of them may lose their jobs--maybe not when the government jobs are cut, but when companies have reduced demand for their goods and services and cut back because the government employees laid off (hundreds of thousands of them) aren't buying theirs. And it can spiral downward. Which should alert neoclassical economists that the market place is not immune to the influences of irrational forces and can go into depressions.
The damage that will come from the sequester will do more than the Storm Sandy but there will be no bills from Congress to help out after it hits. If a Republican would have been President during the dropping of the A-Bombs on Japan they would have dropped them on the USA instead.
omg hello.... does anyone here on msnbc even know.... it was obamas idea for sequestration.... its his plan... I don't see one single person on this blog anywhere that is willing to just admit it was democrats who came up with sequestration.. Obama signed the bill himself.... hello... all Obama wants to do is tax tax tax.... remember last year it was Obama who said no to closing loopholes to republicans and wanted to just raise the taxes on the rich... and he got what he wanted.... now he wants to close the tax loopholes now... bet no one on msnbc will comment on that... and bet no one will comment on one the presidents choice of people he likes to hang out with... like the wonderful and moral and great family man... Tiger woods.... yea you go mister president... I wouldn't want my wife with me either on vacation if I was hanging out with tiger woods...