“The “sequester” is the Washington word for the $85 billion in 2013 spending cuts set to hit starting March 1″ – FOX News

“It’s a series of automatic, across-the-board cuts to government agencies…” – CNN

“It’s a package of automatic spending cuts that’s part of the Budget Control Act (BCA), which was passed in August 2011.” – Washington Post

“…That would set off a chain reaction of automatic spending cuts” – Reuters


Every one of those news blurbs is incorrect.
The spending cuts are nonexistent.
In fact, spending will increase over time, whether or not the sequester happens.

Allow me to explain.

Should the sequester go into effect, spending will still increase, just not by as much as it would have WITHOUT the sequester.  In other words, the sequester involves cuts – not to the number of dollars that we will spend next year – but to projected budget increases.

I dare anyone to find me the “spending cut” in this graph.  But what about all the people who are predicted to lose their jobs if and when the sequester hits?  If we’re really going to lay off hundreds of thousands of government workers (perhaps not a terrible idea, depending on who they are and what they do), it’s not necessarily because the folks in charge have less money to work with.And even if budgets really were shrinking (as they should, in order to cut the debt) – good managers are able to do more with less.  If none of our managers are even slightly capable of this, the workplace culture is wrong and we probably ought to fire the CEO!The sequester shrinks our budget projections – not our actual budget –  by about 2% over 10 years. Does that sound “catastrophic” to you?  Does it look like it will “force” hundreds of thousands out of their jobs?  Does it sound like the Obama administration had no other choice but to release “waves” of illegal immigrants out into the general population?  Does it look like we’re flat out of money for safety services like air traffic control?  No?  Well, that’s fearmongering for ya.  And speaking of baseless fearmongering, here’s some more:

According to Forbes: “[President Obama has said that] the sequester would represent “a huge blow to middle-class families and our economy as a whole.” Obama’s White House has also referred to the sequester as “devastating,” saying its cuts would “imperil our economy, our national security (and) vital programs that middle class families depend on.”NewAngelaMorabitoIcon

This begs two crucial questions:Why is the middle class depending on government programs?  That’s not how freedom is supposed to work!

Every American worker just took a 2% cut to their paycheck on January 1st of this year.  Does he seriously mean to tell us that the government can’t deal with the exact same thing the American people have JUST been through? We can take it, why can’t the people who are supposed to be working on our behalf do the same?

Please answer these, President Obama.  Manufacturing crises is not a leadership strategy.  In fact, it’s deceitful.  We’re all waiting for truthful answers, for a change.

Angela Morabito | Georgetown University | @_AngelaMorabito