Share “Budget battle guide: Skidding into a...”

Budget battle guide: Skidding into a fiscal pileup

Published on NewsOK Modified: February 27, 2013 at 12:58 pm •  Published: February 27, 2013

WASHINGTON (AP) — America's leaders have threatened to shut the government down, drive it over a cliff and bounce it off the ceiling. Now they're ready to smack it with a "sequester." And it looks like they mean it this time.

Big, scary-sounding cuts in federal spending are set to begin Friday. Should Americans be worried?

A primer on the nation's latest fiscal standoff — how we got here, who could get hurt and possible ways to end this thing:


What, again?

Like life in a bad Road Runner cartoon, the United States has survived the New Year's "fiscal cliff," double rounds of debt-ceiling roulette and various budget blow-ups over the past two years. Now the threat is $85 billion in indiscriminate spending cuts that would hit most federal programs and fall hardest on the military. Pentagon programs are slated for an 8 percent cut; other agencies would lose 5 percent for the current budget year.

By law, these cuts known as the "sequester" begin unfolding automatically at week's end unless President Barack Obama and Congress act to stop them. Even after they've begun, the cuts still could be halted or reversed through legislation.

Why did Congress and Obama agree to automatic cuts they don't like? To corner themselves into getting the nation's deficit under control.


Isn't deficit-cutting good?

Obama, nearly all of Congress and plenty of economists say two things:

1) The budget deficit needs to be reduced.

2) The sequester is the wrong way to do it.

"Only a fool would do it this way," says Paul Light, a budget expert at New York University. "Primordial. It's beyond belief."

It makes him think of the movie "Dr. Strangelove," with Slim Pickens riding bronco on an atomic bomb, waving his cowboy hat.

The sequester was designed to land with a mighty splat — to create such a mess if allowed to occur that lawmakers would do the right and honorable thing and negotiate a measured, meaningful and discerning package of deficit reduction to head it off. But that didn't happen, so the sequester is about to.

And, yes, that should mean progress on the nation's debt. The sequester is one of several developments expected to restrain the nation's red ink after four straight years of deficits topping $1 trillion.



Are the cuts really that bad?

It's unlikely they will be as bad — or at least as immediate — as some overexcited members of the Obama administration have made out. But the cuts have the potential to be significant if the standoff drags on.

Early on, about 2 million long-term unemployed people could see a $30 cut in benefit checks now averaging $300 a week. Federal subsidies for school construction, clean energy and state and local public works projects could be pinched. Low-income pregnant women and new mothers may find it harder to sign up for food aid.

Much depends on how states and communities manage any shortfalls in aid from Washington.

Furloughs of federal employees are for the most part a month or more away. Then, they might have to take up to a day off per week without pay.

That's when the public could start seeing delays at airports, disruptions in meat inspection, fewer services at national parks and the like.

An impasse lasting into the fall would reach farther, probably shrinking Head Start slots, for example.

Much of the federal budget is off-limits to the automatic cuts. Among exempted programs: Social Security, Medicaid, food stamps, Pell Grants and veterans' programs.

Even so, officials warn of a hollowed-out military capability, compromised border security and spreading deterioration of public services if the sequester continues. It's "like a rolling ball," said Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano. "It keeps growing."

Continue reading this story on the...