To begin this sequester thing resulted because Boner could not bring home the Grand Bargain. He stood on politics and not solid fiscal policy when the Grand Bargain was a reality. The Grand Bargain had everything the Republicans cry about all the time. It even had more cuts that Senator Rand Paul states is something he would want. So, there is no reason for Boner to point to President Obama as the author of the sequester.
By JOHN BONER
A week from now, (click here) a dramatic new federal policy is set to go into effect that threatens U.S. national security, thousands of jobs and more. In a bit of irony, President Obama stood Tuesday with first responders who could lose their jobs if the policy goes into effect. Most Americans are just hearing about this Washington creation for the first time: the sequester. What they might not realize from Mr. Obama's statements is that it is a product of the president's own failed leadership....
Additionally, Boner and Senators like Paul actually expected the sequester cuts not to matter. They expected the puppet president Romney to be in the White House right now. In that reality are several facts. The first fact is that Boner and his Republicans were using the sequester for politics. If they were waiting for it to go away that is politics. Foolish politics while playing with the lives of Americans, but, politics just the same.
One of the other facts is the REALITY the puppet president was not elected and therefore on that basis alone there is absolutely no fact in stating President Obama has failed leadership. Many in the nation, including Ohio, would dispute that statement. Boner is lying. He is still playing politics.
The other fact is that failed leadership belongs to Speaker Boner. He has not had a consensus with any of his House votes unless it was for Post Offices that under his leadership will disappear anyway since the US Post Office is disappearing from the PROMISE of the USA Constitution.
...The sequester is a wave of deep spending cuts scheduled to hit on March 1. Unless Congress acts, $85 billion in across-the-board cuts will occur this year, with another $1.1 trillion (110,000,000,000) coming over the next decade. There is nothing wrong with cutting spending that much—we should be cutting even more—but the sequester is an ugly and dangerous way to do it....
The cuts this year are far less than the cuts in subsequent years. About $25 billion less. Yet, this year is a horrendous experience for the USA. The argument could be made that the recovering economy is more demanding than any subsequent year, but, won't be the case. With every annual installment for the sequester cuts, there will be contraction in the USA economy.
Realizing there will be annual contraction in the USA economy, it is a perfect opportunity for Republicans to rant on and on about the failed leadership of President Obama. Doing so is more a political agenda to defeat Democrats and shoot for a win in 2016. So, why the complaints, Mr. Speaker? This after all is what the goal of the GOP has been for years now.
...By law, the sequester focuses on the narrow portion of the budget that funds the operating accounts for federal agencies and departments, including the Department of Defense. Exempt is most entitlement spending—the large portion of the budget that is driving the nation's looming debt crisis. Should the sequester take effect, America's military budget would be slashed nearly half a trillion dollars over the next 10 years. Border security, law enforcement, aviation safety and many other programs would all have diminished resources....
That is a lie, Mr. Boner. The entitlements are paid for and currently supported though USA Bonds. The Congress has borrowed against the entitlements and replaced the money with USA Bonds. So, I am curious how the entitlements are the biggest part of the national debt. Unless, of course, the USA Bonds are rapidly going to become worthless with any and all role back of the sequester cuts.
I think the real issue is the resistance of the GOP to restructure the sequester cuts to more appropriate areas of government spending so the impact on employment of Americans are minimized. See, if that happens and we actually support the USA economic spending through employment, the cronies might actually have to feel the pinch. Here again the politics override the nation.
To return for a minute to the USA Bonds. The bond rating is important, so to simply disregard the sequester cuts as irresponsible for an economic recovery is out of the question. The cuts go forward, it is a matter of how they go forward.
...During the summer of 2011, as Washington worked toward a plan to reduce the deficit to allow for an increase in the federal debt limit, President Obama and I very nearly came to a historic agreement. Unfortunately our deal fell apart at the last minute when the president demanded an extra $400 billion in new tax revenue—50% more than we had shaken hands on just days before....
The point is rather mute, isn't it? There have been revenue increases, so here again the failed leadership was the Speaker and his House and the Senate Minority Leader and his filibusters. The politics was completely dysfunctional to the best outcome of the nation and the complaining about how and why the Grand Bargain failed is all too mute. The revenues were accomplished anyway. So, the failure is not President Obama's but the short sighted and draconian politics of the GOP. A tax by any other name....
The fact of the matter is the Grand Bargain should have gone forward with the increased revenues and we would not be at this juncture. This juncture and the ones in the future are about politics, not the nation. It is about the slippery political slope the GOP finds itself. It is about the FAUX knowledge base the GOP claims in their politics. The truth by any other name...
The plan called for immediate caps on discretionary spending (to save $917 billion) and the creation of a special House-Senate "super committee" to find an additional $1.2 trillion in savings....
The Budget Control Act is where the $1.2 Trillion and the Super Committee was written. and you proudly admit it was written by "...I immediately got together with Senate leaders Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell...". So, where is the President's role in that? The fact the Executive Branch was protecting the federal government from political directives? Gee, wasn't that too bad. I suppose President Obama's demand to end the brinkmanship of the House was too much of a political cost.
Speaker Boner needs to stop playing politics with the nation's treasury and the rating of our bonds. We are tired of it. The nation has many, many issues other than MONEY ISSUES to face. The list is enormous of which the House's calender rarely lends time to address.
If President Obama is demanding to end the hassle of debt ceiling increases and budget battles it is because we don't have time for it and need to move on. Just because the House and the GOP blew the chance to make MEANINGFUL reform to the federal spending is the problem. It is so much a problem it needs to be a re-election and election issue of 2014. You want to play politics, heck, let's do that. The facts are very, very clear. If the Grand Bargain was struck this disaster that the Speaker, the Senate Minority Leader and Senate Majority Leader authored would not exist. If that is not a reason to throw the bumbs out in 2014, don't ask me what is.
