I intend to pay attention to this - will YOU?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by swizzlee, Jul 27, 2012.

  1. swizzlee
    Offline

    swizzlee RedWhiteAndBlue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    on a mountain
    Ratings:
    +124
    Given this situation is the fault of both parties, I will be interested in what kind of spin, if any, will be coming out of the Senate and the WH. It seems the Senate is in agreement with the House but one never knows. And it's clear the burden is falling on the WH. How will they react?

    July 24, 2012

    Senate must pass sequestration transparency


    By: Sen. John Thune and Sen. Jeff Sessions and Rep. Jeb Hensarling and Rep. Paul Ryan

    Our country is headed for a fiscal cliff. We’re also headed for a national security crisis thanks to one large component of this fiscal cliff — the $1.2 trillion automatic budget sequestration due to go into effect Jan. 2, which would disproportionately cut funding for our defense needs.

    The sequestration process was passed last August as part of the Budget Control Act, a last-resort measure to avert a fiscal crisis due in part to the Senate’s failure to pass a budget. Though defense spending makes up less than 20 percent of our budget, 50 percent of the cuts required under the act fall on programs and personnel charged with providing for our nation’s defense.

    Even worse, these enormous defense cuts would come on top of a $487-billion cut in defense spending put in place last year. Defense will be cut by nearly a trillion dollars over the next 10 years.

    The Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has stated that the sequestration cuts “would do catastrophic damage to our military and its ability to protect the country.” The assistant commandant of the Marine Corps has testified that this would leave the corps without “adequate capabilities and capacities to meet a single major contingency operation,” while the chief of naval operations has testified that it would cause “irreversible damage.”

    Despite this looming crisis, President Barack Obama and his administration have so far refused to level with the American people about the full impact of these defense cuts — though the cuts are due to take place in slightly more than five months. The White House has given conflicting reports on how the cuts will be implemented, and Congress’ requests for a clear outline of the administration’s plans are unanswered.

    Sequestration will have far-reaching effects on the lives of all Americans. As Panetta and our military leaders have made clear, U.S. national security is at risk if another round of draconian defense cuts is carried out. The president and his administration must understand this. So why would they not want to be transparent about the size and scope of the required cuts?

    The House passed our Sequestration Transparency Act last week by a nearly unanimous vote of 414 to 2.
    This bill would require the Obama administration to submit to Congress and the American people a detailed plan as to how sequestration will be applied to defense and non-defense programs within the federal budget. Members of Congress from both parties agree that this information is essential.

    The bipartisan support for our bill in the House should pave the way for a similarly strong show of support in the Senate, which recently agreed to a similar sequestration report requirement as part of the farm bill.

    Had the Senate passed a budget in recent years, or had Obama submitted a responsible budget to Congress, we might not be facing these devastating cuts to our nation’s military. Sequestration was intended to be an action-forcing mechanism to get Congress and the president to act to bring the debt under control. It was never the preferred option for achieving more responsible federal spending.

    Unfortunately, the supercommittee failed to reach an agreement on spending — and now we are left with the unbalanced and dangerous defense cuts under the Budget Control Act’s automatic sequester.

    Given the seriousness of the situation, the Senate should immediately join the House in calling on the president to enter the discussion; release a plan detailing the effects of sequestration, and begin a debate with Congress on the need to replace this sequester with deficit reduction through sensible reforms — not arbitrary cuts.

    Our nation’s security is at stake. The time to act is now.

    Sens. John Thune (R-S.D.) and Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) are the lead sponsors of the Sequestration Transparency Act in the Senate. Reps. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas) and Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) are the lead sponsors of the bill in the House. Thune and Hensarling serve as chairmen of the Senate and House Republican Conferences respectively. Sessions and Ryan serve as the ranking member and the chairman on the Senate and House Budget Committees respectively.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. ladyliberal
    Offline

    ladyliberal Progressive Princess

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2011
    Messages:
    1,253
    Thanks Received:
    291
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +291
    Between when the article you cite was published and when you posted it the Senate did indeed pass the transparency measure: Congress forces W.H. to lay out sequester cuts - POLITICO.com

    I think it is a very odd way of doing things. Rather than protecting its prerogative of deciding how federal monies are spent Congress is forcing the executive to take a greater degree of control over the process.

    The Republicans who penned this missive are being extremely disingenuous when they claim the cuts fall disproportionately on Defense spending. Defense and non-defense spending make up equal parts of discretionary spending and suffer equally under sequester. Cutting non-discretionary spending would involve things like reducing interest payments on the debt (which would destroy the credit rating and be illegal under current law).
     
  3. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    56,027
    Thanks Received:
    9,334
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,554
    Here's an idea.

    Let's pass a budget so the automatic cuts don't happen! Then we won't need to know what coulda woulda happened if those automatic cuts took place! We won't have to play political games like this "Let's Pretend" bill.





    I know...I know. That's crazy talk.
     
  4. amrchaos
    Offline

    amrchaos Pentheus torn apart

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    9,501
    Thanks Received:
    926
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    Miami
    Ratings:
    +2,573
    Tried that. It failed. Any other ideas?
     
  5. Wiseacre
    Offline

    Wiseacre Retired USAF Chief Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,025
    Thanks Received:
    1,192
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    San Antonio, TX
    Ratings:
    +1,194

    I think you are right in saying Congress should man up and do it's job. But I also think the Executive should be involved, even if he is acting in the best interests of his side rather than the country as a whole IMHO.

    But where you're wrong is in blaming the repubs, you saw the vote in the House and the unanimous consent in the Senate. And yet you only blame the GOP. Don't you think that's being a bit disingenuous too?
     
  6. Full-Auto
    Offline

    Full-Auto Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    13,555
    Thanks Received:
    1,614
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Ratings:
    +1,615
    Isnt it great............................

    Liberal or conservative.

    We just cant cut spending...............
     
  7. swizzlee
    Offline

    swizzlee RedWhiteAndBlue

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    727
    Thanks Received:
    124
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    on a mountain
    Ratings:
    +124
    I'm glad to hear that...........

    It's unfortunate that our media is much more inclined to ballyhoo innocuous remarks made by Romney in the UK rather than report on the more serious aspects of our government.

    But there is nothing disingenuous about the Pub remarks about the Defense cuts. While the sequester cuts may be identical for every department, did you miss the fact that DOD had already been hit with a $487B cut last year? That amounts to a double whammy on Defense. Or that very prominent DOD individuals, including Panetta, are lobbying against these cuts?

    Be aware, too, that the vote in the House was overwhelmingly unanimous telling all of us that members of both parties do at least take the defense of our country very serious.

    The burden is now on Obama to produce.
     
  8. cutter
    Offline

    cutter Silver Member

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,142
    Thanks Received:
    248
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +304
    We wouldn't have this problem to begin with if the democrats would ever pass a f'n budget. The law requires a budget be approved by a certain time each year. Let's put some congerssmen in jail for not following the law. It's the law. Harry Reid should go for one.
     
  9. ConservaDerrps
    Offline

    ConservaDerrps BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    3,525
    Thanks Received:
    296
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    No-Neg-Rep Town, USA
    Ratings:
    +298
    I think Obama should call their bluff and make a 15% cut to Defense spending. That'll open up their eyes. You know what's awesome? NONE OF THIS WOULD BE NECESSARY if the House approves the tax cut extension that the Senate handed them this week. Super easy, huh?
     
  10. Full-Auto
    Offline

    Full-Auto Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    Messages:
    13,555
    Thanks Received:
    1,614
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Ratings:
    +1,615
    So tax cuts pay the bills? Really?


    Can you manage to hold this opinion or can we expect another change?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page