Obama to call for end of sequestration

Army Times — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 09:49:13 -0500

From: Army Times

WASHINGTON — President Obama will call for an end to the automatic series of budget cuts known as sequestration when he proposes a new budget next week, the White House announced Thursday.

Obama, who will outline his plans in a meeting Thursday with House Democrats, wants to "reverse harmful sequestration cuts," and focus instead on "middle-class economics" that includes new programs for child care, paid leave and community college, the White House said in a statement.

The White House says sequestration is hurting the economy and the military, and that the president wants to "fully reverse those cuts for domestic priorities, and match those investments dollar-for-dollar with the resources our troops need to keep America safe."

Republicans who control both the House and the Senate say they too want to eliminate the sequester, but the Obama budget includes too many tax hikes and too much spending.

"Republicans believe there are smarter ways to cut spending than the sequester and have passed legislation to replace it multiple times, only to see the president continue to demand tax hikes," said Cory Fritz, a spokesman for House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. "Until he gets serious about solving our long-term spending problem it's hard to take him seriously."

GOP members note that the White House signed off on the 2011 budget plan that called for automatic across-the-board budget cuts if the parties couldn't agree on a separate package of cuts.

Don Stewart, deputy chief of staff to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said that "previous budgets submitted by the president have purported to reverse the bipartisan spending limits through tax increases that the Congress — even under Democrats — could never accept."

The coming budget battles follow November elections that gave Republicans control of the U.S. Senate and a bigger majority in the House. Obama, meanwhile, feels emboldened by signs of a recovering economy and higher approval ratings in political polls.

Obama travels to Philadelphia early on Thursday evening to discuss his budget plans at the House Democratic Issues Conference.

During his appearance in Philadelphia, Obama will also call for full funding of the Department of Homeland Security. Under a Republican plan, the department is financed only to the end of February as GOP lawmakers protest Obama's executive actions on immigration and are trying to pressure him into making changes.

"The president believes we should end the era of manufactured crises and mindless austerity," the White House said.

The statement noted that a 2013 agreement "helped us end some of these arbitrary budget cuts," and allowed the government to "invest in key national priorities while helping to cut our deficits to their lowest level since 2007."

The proposed budget to be issued Monday will include calls for "new advanced manufacturing institutes," road and bridge construction programs, and "a new age of precision medicine" that emphasizes the fights against diabetes and cancer," the White House said.

The budget plan — some of which Obama discussed in his State of the Union address Jan. 20 — also features proposals on tax credits for child care, paid sick leave and two years of community college financing for qualified students.

These and other programs are designed to help the middle class "by making paychecks go further, creating good jobs here in the United States, and preparing hardworking Americans to earn higher wages," the White House said.

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/01/29/obama-to-call-for-end-of-sequestration/22517857/

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Jan 29 at 2015 9:51 AM

Capt Richard I P. — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 09:51:39 -0500

Shouldn't everyone be calling for an end to the 'meat axe' cuts?

Response by SFC Mark Merino made Jan 29 at 2015 10:27 AM

SFC Mark Merino — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 10:27:26 -0500

Can I have a job now? I'd like to think that you owe me since you killed my OH-58D scout helicopter.

Response by CSM David Heidke made Jan 29 at 2015 11:37 AM

CSM David Heidke — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:37:25 -0500

The government needs to be smaller...

It doesn't get smaller by giving them more money.

Do we still have and Urban Electrification Program? If we do, then we need an accountant in the White House.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 29 at 2015 11:41 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:41:03 -0500

If you want to talk about spending, here is a good place to start: https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/

Military spending = 16% of total federal spending, or 55% of discretionary.

What is really interesting to me is that tax breaks are now larger than discretionary spending. Since that doesn't appear in the federal budget, it is a handy way to disguise what it really is, SPENDING.

Federal Spending: Where Does the Money Go

In fiscal year 2014, the federal government will spend around $3.8 trillion. These trillions of dollars make up a considerable chunk - around 22 percent - of the US. economy, as measured by Gross Domestic Product (GDP). That means that federal government spending makes up a sizable share of all money spent in the United States each year. So, where does all that money go?

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jan 29 at 2015 12:48 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 12:48:35 -0500

President Obama has always been for sequestration until he was against it. Fortunately for us, it isn't his decision to make. (Keep in mind his history as a legislator - ducking issues by voting "Present".)

Sadly for the President, Congress will make any changes to sequestration and his only option is to enforce the law they craft or veto it. If he vetoes it, he'll have to live with sequestration because that is currently the law.

What an interesting predicament...

Response by SSG Stephen Arnold made Jan 29 at 2015 1:20 PM

SSG Stephen Arnold — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 13:20:07 -0500

For a "constitutional attorney" he sure seems to either not know or ignore what the document actually says.

Whose idea was sequestration, anyway? Lol

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 29 at 2015 1:53 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 13:53:28 -0500

I am a bit lost lost here. Didn't he sign it into law? If it was good then why isn't it good now?

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made Jan 29 at 2015 3:38 PM

Sgt Packy Flickinger — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 15:38:21 -0500

Think back to the late 90's. That's what happens when we work together.

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made Jan 29 at 2015 3:49 PM

Sgt Packy Flickinger — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 15:49:47 -0500

Did we forget, when Obama was a senator his record for voting for pork belly funding was the highest in congress. If I recall, Biden was #8.
This is why republicans fight his proposals, because of the crap attached to them not reported in the media.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Jan 29 at 2015 5:27 PM

SGT Bryon Sergent — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 17:27:39 -0500

I guess since he forced us out of Iraq and the stan we don't need the money we once did.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 29 at 2015 7:40 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 29 Jan 2015 19:40:06 -0500

Amen to that! Even if it's tied to another political goal, a proposal to end sequestration is good for the military.

Response by Lt Col Fred Marheine, PMP made Feb 1 at 2015 8:32 AM

Lt Col Fred Marheine, PMP — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 08:32:02 -0500

"The president believes we should end the era of manufactured crises and mindless austerity," the White House said.

YHGTBSM..."mindless austerity." A $1T budget deficit and $19T of fiscal operating debt is a "manufactured crisis and mindless austerity."

Sequestration was a "sword of damocles" hanging over Congress' head if they couldn't agree on how to reduce the federal budget. It was created as a compromise for one of the recent increases to the national debt and yes, was proposed by Democrats as a "sweetner" to get Republicans to approve the debt increase. As many have said, nobody ever imagined it would be invoked because it is such a stupid way to operate.

It is the only thing holding them back and, as such, is the only thing in Washington that is working. I would prefer the cuts were apportioned differently, but I'm at the point where I'll accept the cuts to defense in order to get the other cuts. We simply can't continue on this spending trajectory.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 1 at 2015 8:56 AM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 08:56:55 -0500

It doesn't matter if the "cuts" end or not. They are still going to spend. We can look forward to them raising the debt ceiling again while continuing to push us through an ever increasing public debt.

As of 1/29/2015: $18,085,063,837,781.82