President Obama has assembled his troops to whip up a hysteria over the upcoming budget sequester. If you can manage to translate all the ‘financialese’ surrounding this issue you will understand why President Obama, who is the actual ‘father’ of this sequester, is now so against it.
The sequester, if the Republican Congress does not ‘wuss out,’ will accomplish “some” of what politicians with economic savvy have been trying to accomplish since President Obama took office: it will somewhat reduce the size of government and to some extent reduce spending. In spite of what you have been hearing from the “Obama Media,” the military will not be crippled (perhaps handicapped but not crippled) and the country will not go into a full recession.
The following points were made in an article in Human Events, written by financial guru Lawrence Kudlow:
The $85 billion so-called spending cut is actually a cut in budget authority, not budget outlays. “According to the CBO, budget outlays will come down by $44 billion.” [The main point is the amount of money the government is ‘allowed’ to spend (their budget authority) is being reduced.] There is a reduction in the budget outlay (the amount is is currently being spent) but “that $44 billion outlay reduction is only 1.25 percent of the $3.6 trillion government budget.
“And please remember [Kudlow points out] that these so-called cuts come off a rising budget baseline in most cases. So the sequester would slow the growth of spending. They’re not real cuts in the level of spending. (Not that a level reduction is a bad idea.)”
“Looking at the sequester in this light,” Kudlow continues, “its clear that it won’t result in economic Armageddon. In fact, I’ll make the case that any spending relief is actually pro-growth. Thats right. When the government spending share of GDP declines, so does the true tax burden on the economy. As a result, more resources are left in the free-market private sector, which will promote real growth.”
We’ve been through four plus years of reckless spending by an administration that either has no clue about how the economy works or does not care; and a budget (Constitutionally mandated) has not passed the Democratic-controlled Senate in those four years. The country has been driven in the direction one man wanted to drive it and that one man apparently has no real regard for the nations econonomic health — his only often-stated concern is fairness; and his attempts at fairness have never been really fair to all Americans, only to the poorest. That may sound noble but it’s a sure way to destroy a country’s economic foundation; it is also self-serving; think about it: as the unemployment rate rises, more and more people are forced into that “poor” category and the president has a better argument for a larger and ever growing government.
The sequester probably (hopefully) will go into effect on March 1st. No doubt, it will bring lots of pain but it will be a healing and needed pain.
Make no mistake, however, even a harsh cutback will not set the country back on the correct course; in the end, the only thing that will set the country back on that course is getting someone with economic sense, a clear vision and a true respect for America in the Oval Office to replace President Barack Obama who displays none of those qualities.