Oh, that dreaded, awful sequester
With the automatic spending cuts known as the sequester set to kick in Friday (March 1) unless an alternative deal is reached, be ready to hear about all the terrible, horrible, unfathomable effects of cutting … less than 3 percent of all federal spending.
To put things in perspective, economist Dan Mitchell of the Cato Institute (and a double Dawg) prepared this graph from Congressional Budget Office data:
Note that, even after the sequester, spending continues to rise every year — in large part because the sequester doesn’t touch entitlements, which are the fastest-growing part of the budget.
Will there be an effect on some people? Of course: The only way there wouldn’t be is if the feds were simply taking tens of billion dollars a year and lighting them on fire. But as far as a modest measures for beginning to curb runaway spending go — and not even this White House is denying any longer that this country has a spending problem — we will hardly see anything more modest than the sequester. Anyone who says we can’t live with the sequester would probably say the same thing about any spending cuts whatsoever.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
276 comments Add your comment
Stephenson Billings
February 25th, 2013
5:31 pm
Obama Nov. 21, 2011: “I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending”.
Politico
February 25th, 2013
5:31 pm
Rush and Hanitty?
I thought those guys didn’t have any pull within the party. When someone on the left brings them up their names, many on the right downplay who they are……….. until they want to peddle their influence and what they said.
too funny
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 25th, 2013
5:32 pm
gitmo hasn’t torn himself away from cnn for decades. There’s a whole world out here he knows nothing about. If wolf blitzer hasn’t reported it, it would be like landing on another planet for getalife.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 25th, 2013
5:34 pm
I thought those guys didn’t have any pull within the party.
They must not if they weren’t able to stop Repug spending.
Try putting two and two together sometime.
Just Saying..
February 25th, 2013
5:34 pm
Well, that’s troubling.
I guess Jamie Dupree is also part of that Great Librul Conspiracy…
Stephenson Billings
February 25th, 2013
5:35 pm
Why is Wal-Mart worried? Payroll tax could cut consumer spending.
“Retailers are preparing for a triple whammy as the restoration of the payroll tax, surging gas prices, and stagnant employment and wages take a bite out of consumers’ disposable income, leaving them with less cash to spend on clothing, groceries, and eating out.
As a result, more than three years after the recession officially ended, American consumers might be preparing to downshift again, if only slightly, with low-income consumers hit the hardest. Sensing consumer trepidation, retailers are scrambling to adjust.”
http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2013/0222/Why-is-Wal-Mart-worried-Payroll-tax-could-cut-consumer-spending.-video?nav=87-frontpage-entryLeadStory
Politico
February 25th, 2013
5:36 pm
Aesop
At least unlike your buddies, Dusty and Aesop, you don’t cry about who blogs here as if you are the blog sheriff and welcoming committee.
But do blather on as usual
Politico
February 25th, 2013
5:38 pm
Or do you?
hahahahaha
getalife
February 25th, 2013
5:41 pm
Not just cnn.
C-Span, msnbc, fox, drudge, NYTimes, the list is long.
I am addicted to being informed.
Just Saying..
February 25th, 2013
5:41 pm
“I’ve seen women burst into tears over the most ridiculous things. That’s who they are, they can’t help it, no matter how much you libs freakishly wish otherwise.”
Just when you think he’d quit digging, he pops up to defend it.
No identity issues here…
getalife
February 25th, 2013
5:45 pm
All economists but the never right rw economists agree this is bad policy and government is in the way of free commerce. The dow is dropping, the majority is sick of it and we are falling behind thanks to the gop. Enough with this crap, get out of the way gop.
JDW
February 25th, 2013
5:47 pm
@Tiberius…”a little Constitutional education is in order, missy….The House is required to pass a budget (actually, the Congress is, but we’ll get to that later). ”
Indeed our resident self discribed “authority” is at it again.
Now strangely enough you must have your own copy of the Constitution because mine says nothing about a budget. All it says is that spending bills originate in the House, there must be an Appropriations bill passed before money is spent and each House of Congress makes their own rules.
Maybe you could point out the part where The Constitution requires an annual budget. While you are at it take a gander at the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 and the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 because that is how the process is governed outside of Tiberiusville.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 25th, 2013
5:48 pm
And, sure enough, here I am quoting cnn -
Because of ongoing contracts and the Byzantine labyrinth of federal budgeting, only $44 billion of that $85 billion will actually be cut from this year’s budget. The rest will be cut in future years, but attributed to this year’s budget. So, the real reduction in federal spending this year is just 1.2%. If the federal government can’t reduce spending by less than a penny-and-a-half on the dollar without throwing us into the dark ages, something is truly wrong.
Can’t argue with that.
JDW
February 25th, 2013
5:49 pm
@Tiberius…”I didn’t know President Incompetent’s Kool-aid was alcohol-based.”
It’s just math…I know you have issues with math.
Michael H. Smith
February 25th, 2013
5:49 pm
Anyone who says we can’t live with the sequester would probably say the same thing about any spending cuts whatsoever.
That would be every Big Gub’ment leftwinger on your blog and across the nation Kyle.
Truth is we can live with those spending cuts and a heck of a lot more federal spending cuts.
Aquagirl
February 25th, 2013
5:51 pm
I’ve seen women burst into tears over the most ridiculous things.
John Boehner says “what?”
Aesop just says this stuff to get attention, for some reason the cons here let him hang out and shoot everyone in the foot over his weird issues. Maybe he lends them his pristine hanky on election night in return.
Hillbilly D
February 25th, 2013
5:57 pm
“I’ve seen women burst into tears over the most ridiculous things. That’s who they are, they can’t help it, no matter how much you libs freakishly wish otherwise.”
Obviously, you’ve never met the women in my family, who’d just as soon jerk a knot in your ass as look at you.
Matz
February 25th, 2013
6:04 pm
“I’ve seen women burst into tears over the most ridiculous things.”
So, you admit to being in the immediate vicinity in each of these instances, then? Were you speaking to these women prior to these bursts? How many of them were you touching when the bursting occurred?
Stephenson Billings
February 25th, 2013
6:09 pm
“John Boehner says “what?” ”
Kamchak wants his infantile line back………..
Aquagirl
February 25th, 2013
6:12 pm
Kamchak wants his infantile line back……
Figured y’all wouldn’t like that reminder….Cry me an orange river.
Stephenson Billings
February 25th, 2013
6:16 pm
Creativity was never a lib strong point….
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 25th, 2013
6:16 pm
Quit blubbering, aq.
Michael H. Smith
February 25th, 2013
6:22 pm
in large part because the sequester doesn’t touch entitlements, which are the fastest-growing part of the budget.
Speaking of touch the so-called entitlements give these reform ideas a hard looking into Kyle…
Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us
By Steve Brill
http://healthland.time.com/2013/02/20/bitter-pill-why-medical-bills-are-killing-us/
Richard Stengel, MANAGING EDITOR comments on the Brill article
Brill, who will be talking about health care on CNN all this week, has worked on this story for the past seven months. “What I learned in doing the piece,” he says, “is what I always tell my journalism students: opinions and policy debates are boring and meaningless without looking at the facts, without doing the grunt work of real reporting.”
If the piece has a villain, it’s something you’ve probably never heard of: the chargemaster, the mysterious internal price list for products and services that every hospital in the U.S. keeps. If the piece has a hero, it’s an unlikely one: Medicare, the government program that by law can pay hospitals only the approximate costs of care. It’s Medicare, not Obamacare, that is bending the curve in terms of costs and efficiency. Brill’s story is resolutely nonideological, but it resets the terms of one of our most important policy debates. Both sides of the aisle are culpable, as our elected leaders refuse to rein in hospitals and health care providers. According to Brill, there are things that can be done. He argues that lowering the age of Medicare entry, not raising it, would lower costs. And that allowing Medicare to competitively price and assess drugs would save billions of dollars. Asking wealthy Medicare recipients for higher co-pays would make sense. Most of all, health care must be a market in which patients can help control costs by understanding them better. And make sure you look at your hospital bill.
Just Saying..
February 25th, 2013
6:26 pm
“Quit blubbering, aq.”
Well, when you think about how much oxygen you squander…
md
February 25th, 2013
7:23 pm
Geez, still arguing about which spouse charged the most on the credit card?
Fact….it doesn’t matter.
Now, the card needs to be cut up and the bills paid…..period.
bluecoat
February 25th, 2013
7:38 pm
I’ve heard that Oriental women treat their men better than the hillbilly women treat their men.I don’t think the oriental can shoot as good.just saying.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 25th, 2013
7:39 pm
Another manufactured crisis during the Obama reign of terror. Scaremeggedon, run for your life, children, you haven’t seen cuts like this before. The wailing and gnashing of teeth begin in only a few hours, get out while you can!
Tiberius is correct, this is what you get when you depend on government spending to carry the economy. Obama has set his economy up for failure by depending on the spending to keep it afloat. If you strategy is to spend, spend, spend and your opposition prevents you from confiscating money to spend, and you don’t have the authority to borrow indefinitely, you are eventually going to run out of money and crash the economy.
Cherokee
February 25th, 2013
7:47 pm
I realize rafe that me pointing out a fact to you won’t make any difference, but the President can’t spend anything that the Congress – beginning with the House – authorizes him to spend.
Seems that folks like yourself just can’t get a handle on that concept….
bluecoat
February 25th, 2013
7:47 pm
Manufactured crisis.Think Iraq,Iraq.Afghainstand..
Cherokee
February 25th, 2013
7:48 pm
oops worded it wrong – the Prez can only spend what Congress authorizes.
But i expect you know that….
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 25th, 2013
8:00 pm
how establishment Republicans were no better then Democrats on spending.
td is correct, with the House firmly in control of Nasty Pelosi and her entourage and the Senate under Hairy Reed, there were no votes to cut spending under W. The Dems were always in favor of increasing it sustantially. (Where are the jobs Mr. President? N Pelosi, (had to throw that in). She never asks that question anymore for some reason)
Before 2007, the GOP held slim margins in both Houses, and a large number of the GOP were “moderates” like Lugar, Snow, Collins, Chafee, to name four, that loved anything the Dems loved. We just did not have enough conservatives to take on Bush, and we sure couldn’t get any help from the Dems.
getalife
February 25th, 2013
8:06 pm
“Phil Gramm is the Forrest Gump of financial calamity. Time and again, his face appears at key moments in history. Unlike Gump, Gramm is usually planting the seeds of future disaster whenever he pops up.
Former Texas Senator Gramm is best known for his fine work dismantling financial regulations in the 1990s, which helped bring us the financial crisis of the mid-to-late-2000s. But he is also the intellectual father of the latest nightmare deviling the economy: the sequester.
Gramm was co-author of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, in which the idea of the “sequester,” or “sequestration,” was introduced as a fancy term for “nightmarish budget cuts.” In fact, Gramm was the guy who introduced the idea of using sequestration as a whip to goad policy makers into cutting the deficit, Marketplace points out.”
Get out and stay out of our economy gop.
If we want another collapse we will give you a call.
Politico
February 25th, 2013
8:08 pm
Rafe
Quit making excuses. Republicans as a whole have proven to be no better stewards of tax money than Democrats.
They do talk a better game. I give you that, but when they hold the check book and WH, they spend and spend just like the Democrats.
Don’t tell me what they say they want to do, but what they have done as a party not as individuals.
Nixon, Ford, Reagan and the Bush duo didn’t lower the National Debt. Bush 2 with a Republican Congress didn’t do it.
If the best you have is well Obama is worse, you might have a point, but looking at the big picture it means what? And explains Republicans own bs how?
getalife
February 25th, 2013
8:12 pm
Funny how the fiscal cons never showed up until they lost.
Get out and stay out of our economy gop.
They are another disaster waiting to happen.
Hillbilly D
February 25th, 2013
8:15 pm
I’ve heard that Oriental women treat their men better than the hillbilly women treat their men.I don’t think the oriental can shoot as good.just saying.
Orientals seem to have been historically good at warfare. So much for that theory.
Aquagirl
February 25th, 2013
8:15 pm
We just did not have enough conservatives to take on Bush, and we sure couldn’t get any help
Are you referring to some undefined group of people as an excuse, or just using the royal “we?”
Politico
February 25th, 2013
8:19 pm
Aqua
It is an excuse to demonize one side, while giving cover to a “phantom percentage” of the other side.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 25th, 2013
8:22 pm
Cherokee
Seems that folks like yourself just can’t get a handle on that concept…
Seems like folks like you continue to blame Bush for the spending and the collapse when the Congress was firmly in Dem hands from 2007 to 2010. Prior to that he did not have a governing majority, what with all the dang moderates and a large Dem minority. So, if Obama doesn’t control spending then neither did Bush.
Libs love to throw the Constitution requirement for the Congress to pass a budget around when you blame Obama, but not when you blame Bush for the spending.
People with working brains know the President sets the agenda, advocates for spending programs, i.e., things like Obamacare, and that spending is self sustaining, unless it is confronted. The only way to confront it is with leadership, demanding cuts and vetoing spending. Indifference to spending on the Presidents part, results in more spending, and if you base your economy on government spending, you are going way way way beyond indifference to advocacy.
Aquagirl
February 25th, 2013
8:30 pm
Prior to that he did not have a governing majority, what with all the dang moderates and a large Dem minority.
Well, there’s the clearly identified problem—not enough True Scotsmen.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 25th, 2013
8:37 pm
But, but, but, but bushie spent money.
Someone please give the liberals a pillow to clutch, cause this ain’t gonna be pretty…..for them.
For America? Jubilation, we finally lowered the rising……………..spending.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 25th, 2013
8:40 pm
Politico
I will admit the GOP spent too much during the Bush years, but as I noted in my 8:00, the money was going to be spent anyway, in the early years, Bush tried too hard to be liked with his compassionate conservative crap and he swooned over Teddy Kennedy and let him write the No Child Left Behind boondoggle. Then 9/11 and we had to ramp up the military and fight the wars.
After 2007, when the Dems got in power there was so much pent up demand to spend on Dem agenda items, he couldn’t stop them, too many RINO’s would have voted with the Dems.
Bush may have been conservative on social issues, but like his father he believes in BIG government conservatism and he was definitely a big contributor. Reagan, unlike Obama, realized in a divided government, to get some of his agenda approved, he had to give Tip O’Neill some of the things he wanted. O’Neill wanted social spending , Reagan Military spending and the result was too much spending. That has been Barry’s biggest failing. He wants it all and doesn’t want to give anything, and that is why we are in gridlock.
So yeah, GOP big spenders in the past when we were in much better shape, fiscally, and that contributed to our problem. No we are in dreadful shape and the Dems don’t seem to have noticed, but want to again ramp up spending, but the GOP is at least talking the right way, the Dems are talking like there is no problem with insolvency. Our fiscal condition has worsened since the GOP did their spending.
Rafe Hollister preparing for an Obamanist America
February 25th, 2013
8:45 pm
Are you referring to some undefined group of people as an excuse, or just using the royal “we?”
“We” being the folks who do not want our every selfish need and wish to be filled by the fed government, while the debt is passed onto our poor grandchildren and their children.
Cherokee
February 25th, 2013
8:46 pm
So hard for you, I know, Rafe, but I don’t recall blaming Bush… Try again, my friend…
But then that’s a well used right wing noise machine tactic – ‘folks like you’ – guilt by association – you’ve learned well from the masters of talk radio…
Cherokee
February 25th, 2013
8:50 pm
‘every selfish need and wish’
Yeah those folks on the government dole live so well, don’t they….
I guess I do selfishly wish that I could get through Hartsfield in less than four hours. And that our soldiers have the civilian backup they need in order to do their job.
So rude of me….
getalife
February 25th, 2013
8:57 pm
“Lindsey Graham Backs Compromise With New Revenue” HP.
Caved.
Told ya.
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 25th, 2013
9:00 pm
Lindsey who?
Cherokee
February 25th, 2013
9:07 pm
I’m sure the Republican senators know this would be a disaster for their party.
Even if their counterparts in the House aren’t so bright…
Aesop's Fables and other Lib Economic Theories
February 25th, 2013
9:08 pm
We need an intervention done on the liberals, it works on some addicts but not all of them.
But we have to try to save our country……….from them.
Lil' Barry Bailout - OBAMAPHONE!!!
February 25th, 2013
9:10 pm
As a con, I’ll proudly take credit for the cuts. You loser parasite progs should be embarrassed for being so frightened, but that’s how your Idiot Messiah wants you, and you’re only too happy to comply.
Cherokee
February 25th, 2013
9:16 pm
Good for you Barry, but you’re rare – if it’s going to be so wonderful, I wonder why Boehner – and many of the bloggers here – are trying so hard to pin the blame on Obama?