Skip to comments.57 Terrible Consequences Of The Sequester
Posted on 02/21/2013 10:20:31 PM PST by blam
57 Terrible Consequences Of The Sequester
By CHRIS GOOD (@c_good)
February 21, 2013
If the heads of 20 federal agencies are to be believed, disastrous consequences await if President Obama and Congress fail to reach a budget deal, triggering the automatic, across-the-board cuts known as "sequestration."
Those cuts are slated to begin March 1, and earlier this month, the Senate Appropriations Committee asked agency heads to explain what would happen in such a scenario.
In separate letters to Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., they warned of terrible things: Greater risk of wildfires, fewer OSHA inspections and a risk of more workplace deaths, 125,000 people risking homelessness with cuts to shelters and housing vouchers, neglect for mentally ill and homeless Americans who would lose services, Native Americans getting turned away from hospitals, cuts to schools on reservations and prison lockdowns. There's also a higher risk of terrorism with surveillance limited and the FBI potentially unable to disrupt plots, closed housing projects, and 600,000 women and children thrown off WIC.
In short: Unless a budget deal is cut, the country will be in deep trouble, according to the Obama administration's highest-ranking agency officials.
The White House disseminated some of these projected cuts in a press release this month, and it seems possible that some alarmism is going on: No agency head wants to see his or her budget cut, and President Obama has lamented the sequester's unfortunate consequences while browbeating House Republicans to vote for tax hikes. Obama called them "meat-cleaver" cuts in a speech on Tuesday urging Congress to avoid them.
At the same time, some of the projected cuts would leave vulnerable parts of the population without vital
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
does anyone really think a 2.6% reduction in the rate of growth would do all that??
Ohhhhh nooooissse...the humanity!!!! Zombie Apocalypse!!!!!
How did we ever survive till before the feds took care of every need?
The other day at a press conference the President surrounded himself with first responders while he explained the horrors of sequestration.
I wonder why he didn’t surround himself with IRS agents...
ROFL!!! Great post, thanks!
Come on, you coward...grow a pair. Just walk out and say: “By Executive Order, the personnel budget of every agency within the Federal gov’t is cut by 10%, with the exception of the military and Social Security. If you cannot provide equal or better service after these cuts, I will replace you with someone who can. This goes into effect tomorrow. Have a nice day.” You’re so fond of Executive Orders, use this one.
57 consequences for 57 states?
Guess what Bambi, I don’t give a krap. Bring it on.
I triple dog dare you.
Do it. You coward. Do it.
I’m so sick of this petty manipulation. This is not what the founders fought for, and I’m not fighting it.
So do it you coward. Do it.
When I fight, it’s gonna be for good reason, it sure wont be because some union or government puke loses his job...and don’t bring the military cuts in it schmuck...you couldn’t wait for an excuse.
So do it. You feel froggy? Want to jump?
SOmeone should remind them, we got thru 2013 without the earth’s magnetic poles changing their locations - I think we can manage a few cuts in future spending.
We haven’t had a budget in 4+ years anyway, so what are the dems complaining about?
It seems to me that a lot of those examples are things the Federal taxpayer should not be paying for, anyway.
Thanks for the cross reference thread.
Since there are NO cuts in Federal spending on a year to year basis, why would there be ANY reduction in the workforce of those Federally employed?
Something is being covered up here !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BTW, what is the difference between Spendaholic Obama’s “Balanced Approach” and the failed policy of “Tax and Spend?”
“does anyone really think a 2.6% reduction in the rate of growth would do all that??”
Of course not, there won’t be time for any of that to happen.
The earth will spin off it’s axis and get sucked into the sun the second there is a 2.6% reduction in the rate of growth.
Why can't they be reduced to 5?
I love the sequester, so long as it does not affect programs funded entirely by payments from individuals and/or their private employers.
I would love to hear convincing and coherent arguments against this exception.
We’re alway prepared, but I will prepare further by buying even more MEAT this week, and I’m telling my family to do the same.
There was a story in the news tonight about a businessman, who raises chickens, who says he will have will have to fire workers, if they don’t allow them to sell this meat because of less meat inspectors. The news story reported that it could cost businesses $billions and workers $millions!
Newt Gingrich was saying today that Obama will try to make the sequester as painful as possible which is an abuse of power, but you and I, and countless other conservatives already knew Obama would do all he can to turn this sequester into a hardship.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.