Monday, February 25, 2013
GOP's Changing Sequester Strategy
GOP's Changing Sequester Strategy
This article talks about how at the creation of the sequester military cuts were put into the deal to try and force the GOP to be willing to negotiate the same way that social welfare programs were put into the deal to try and force the Democrats to be willing to compromise. Recently, as the wars in the Middle East have begun to come to their conclusion, the GOP puts less necessity into keeping military spending as high as it is. This means the GOP is willing to allow the sequester to be put into affect cutting large amounts of government spending over the next decade.
I think this could be potentially problematic because if only one side is looking to strike a deal then the odds of the sequester taking affect are fairly high. I personally don't think the sequester is good for the country. The cuts involved with the sequester, for the most part, are fine with me. The relatively short time period over which such large cuts will take place is where I think the sequester becomes most damaging.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think it's a good thing that these cuts are being made. This decision is moving beyond partisanship and doing what's actually best for the country. Now we need to move to make cuts in the other large budget items, like Social Security and Medicaid.
ReplyDeleteI think it is disconcerting that Lindsey Graham said that there's no way the party of Ronald Reagan should accept these cuts; Reagan was a great president, but I think it's going too far to glorify him in this way, as if every decision he made was right and should set the standard for modern conservatism.
I feel that, as much as these cuts are needed, they should not be made so hastily. It should be gradual, but not so slow that it takes forever. If the cuts are made too fast, it will be problematic because other companies or the military will not recuperate fast enough. On the other hand, if cuts are too slow, we will be where we are now.
ReplyDeleteThese cuts are harsh, sudden, and potentially very harmful. While I definitely see the need for government cuts (not in this manner), there is also a need for tax increase. Both parties need to come together to find a real solution rather than continuing to set worst-case scenarios and doing nothing to avoid them.
ReplyDeleteI think the government needs to cut spending, but not as harshly as the sequester. I think it needs to be a gradual process. I also think an increase in taxes needs to be done.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree, though I don't know if we can afford to space it out too much and too gradually. It's hard to find a balance, and yes increased taxes are necessary as well.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that while some of these cuts are necessary and essential, they need to be spread out more gradually
ReplyDeleteI feel these cuts are needed, and have been for a while. While it is not ideal that they are made with so much haste, at this point I don't think we can afford to push for the gradual approach, for we have been just kicking the can down the road with program cuts, and if we continue to do so nothing will ever get done.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lauren. We cannot afford a gradual approach. What happens needs to happen immediately so we can get back on track. This has gone on far too long, and the can has officially crumpled past the point where we even HAVE a can.
ReplyDeleteWell, someone is finally cutting the military. In my opinion, it is about freaking time. We have spent way to much money on our own protection for far to long. Americans need to learn to trust the rest of the world to have our back, even if we refuse to have theirs. It doesn't matter if we get attacked because the rest of the world should be able to see who the aggressor is.
ReplyDeleteI believe that these cuts are necessary. It is not for the best that they are made over such a short period of time. However, I am happy to see that progress is being made.
ReplyDeleteI agree that these cuts are the lesser of two evils. Not everyone will be happy with any final decision that is made, but Congress cannot let that deter it from taking action. The longer the stalemate continues, the more valuable time is being wasted.
DeleteThese cuts need to be introduced more gradually. Introducing them so abruptly will not do any good.
ReplyDeleteAs a few people have said, I believe the cuts are necessary but should be gradual.
ReplyDeleteI do think that if we are to have such large-scale cute then it should be widespread and gradual, yet Liz brings up the good point that we may not have that luxury of time.
ReplyDeleteI don't think we need such massive cuts so quickly; it needs to come slowly over time, btu not too slowly. A good balance is necessary to find and what is happening is certainly too fast.
ReplyDelete