The Best Sequester Plan in Washington

The Nation ^ | 2.6.2013 | George Zornick

[ExxonPatrolUs]

Let’s get this out of the way immediately: the Congressional Progressive Caucus’s plan to replace the sequester cannot pass the 113th Congress. But then again, Paul Ryan’s (in)famous “Path to Prosperity” had zero chance of being passed by a Democratic Senate and being signed by Barack Obama when it was unveiled in spring 2011, and yet it met with widespread (and often laudatory) press coverage.

So just because it won’t win a Congressional vote, it doesn’t mean the CPC sequester plan, unveiled Tuesday on Capitol Hill, should be ignored—especially because it has the notable advantage of being entirely sensible and “calculator-friendly,” as Steve Benen puts it. It evenly balances cuts and revenue, unlike every other plan out there; it cuts only from exorbitant and unnecessary defense programs and not badly needed government services like community health centers and home energy assistance, and most importantly—it makes investment and job-creation a goal.

[entropy12]

Sequester is the ONLY way the politicians will cut any spending. In reality it is not even a real cut, just reduction in rate of spending increase. The gubbermint will still spend more every year.

[asinclair]

OK, someone please explain this to me: why do budget cuts and "enhanced revenues" need to be balanced? And, why do we have real tax increases, when the "cuts" are in fact reductions in the increases to spending?

"Fair and balanced" would be to revert back to the last legally accepted budget, and the tax code at the time of the last budget.

Fat chance of that passing the laugh test.

[Venturer]

I would worry about sequestration right now.

It will be kicked down the road again until another 4 months or so.