Sequestration

Everybody has heard at least some of the commentary on the "Sequester," and for me to the point of ad nauseam.  I don't like being "played," and this is what is happening.

We are told the cuts are draconian, unfair, using a meat-axe, endangering military preparedness, hurting our security, denying healthcare, and won't allow us to feed the pigeons (just a little joke). Yet, when looked at as a percentage of the total budget, the cuts look infinitesimal. So, why this huge disconnect? The reason is simple--the cuts are designed to provoke public outcry, which in turn is supposed to rally the troops to one side or the other. In other words furthering the divide that already exists in this country. You will either end up wanting "no more tax increases" or demanding cuts to "entitlements."

The cuts are often said to be "across the board" when they are not even remotely so. A parade of public officials, including army generals, have loudly decried the "Sequester" and are predicting disaster. In fact the proposed cuts are NOT ACROSS THE BOARD. The executive order the president signed says that the sequestration "requires a 7.8 percent reduction in NON-EXEMPT defense discretionary funding and a 5.0 percent reduction in NON-EXEMPT nondefense discretionary funding. The sequestration also requires reductions of 2.0 percent to Medicare, 5.1 percent to other NON-EXEMPT nondefense mandatory programs, and 7.9 percent to NON-EXEMPT defense mandatory programs." It never define which programs are exempted. Also, the cuts are mandated to be implemented over a seven month period rather than twelve, making the cuts a larger percentage of the actual spending.

 So, what is the actual percentage of the cuts? $85 billion seems like a lot of money but when compared with the actual spending plan of $3.8 trillion, it comes out to be 2.24% of the total budget. If they were indeed made across the board every budget would be cut that amount--hardly debilitating. For those worried  that people way down on the food chain getting Social Security might miss $17 per month, remember SS shouldn't even be in the discussion. It's already paid for and isn't part of the budget nor does it affect the deficit. But literally no one wants to be cut so the reduction is designed to create chaos and adverse public reaction.

When I lived in upstate New York, a certain school district responded to proposed budget cuts by saying the football team would be the first to go--playing up to the predictable outcry. When I was in university life, the medical school met budget cut proposals by prophesying that "people will die!" Israel's supporters are now meeting in Washington to demand that the Sequester does not affect their annual stipend. The talking heads are having a field day but never seem to talk about those who are mandated to receive no cuts. And so it goes.

I'm totally amused by the reaction to military cuts. I have personal experience with waste in the armed forces. When the company I was assigned to needed a jeep, the commander ordered me to put in a requisition for five jeeps. He reasoned that the powers above would cut whatever he asked for and this way he might actually end up with two jeeps. There is an incredible amount of waste in the military budget, from defense contractors padding bills (I have experience with that as well) to unneeded new equipment ending up in storage or sold as scrap. Yet, if the military sustains any cuts, preparedness and national security will suffer. What a pile of horse manure.

Face it folks, our system of government has become so corrupt, so wasteful, so mendacious that in order to keep us suckers in line, the propaganda machine has to work 24/7. But then, think of how many people it employs?