If you’ve been following politics even just a little bit in the last little while, you must have heard about a little thing called sequestration. That term is early 2013’s new buzzword in Washington, just as the “fiscal cliff” was late last year’s buzzword (okay, technically, sequestration and the fiscal cliff are intimately related, and both are the product of 2011’s Budget Control Act). The whole point of sequestration that you should come away with is that both Democrats (led by President Obama) and Republicans hate to stop increasing the federal debt, which is harmful to the U.S. economy.
Sequestration is essentially the reduction of both discretionary and non-discretionary federal spending. Since the deficits are ruthlessly being jacked up by Obama, which results in a larger and larger debt that leads to economic woes and American job losses, sequestration should actually be a good thing. Conservatives assert that there’s a massive spending problem under Obama, so sequestration, therefore, should theoretically cut spending somewhat (technically, though, this sequestration will cut just a laughable $85 billion from the federal budget of $2.9 trillion that Obama’s asked for). Of course, Obama and the Democrats respond by contending that they’ll just raise taxes on the rich to keep funding their aggressive increase of the debt. In short, Democrats reject the idea that there’s a spending problem, believing instead that there’s a taxation problem.
With sequestration looming (it’s scheduled to hit in March!), the president doesn’t want even these miniscule cuts to take effect. Obama’s big concern with sequestration is that, apparently, a whole bunch of first responders (read: policemen, firemen) and teachers will lose their jobs. That’s deceptive because policemen, firemen and teachers are actually hired on the local level, regardless of federal budgeting concerns. To be fair, Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner seems to be buying into the questionable idea that sequestration is the end of the world, too, but he’s saying that it’s all Obama’s fault.
So how should you interpret this? Obama’s using fear mongering to pressure Republicans to cave in on these very miniscule spending cuts. However, back when George W. Bush was president, Democrats also accused him of fear mongering in order to get his way with policies he wanted regarding the War on Terror. What you’re witnessing is just more realpolitik between the two main political parties.
With both parties focused on this sequestration hype, which is just a distraction from the real crisis (read: the bad economy), the real problem is being neglected as usual since Obama’s come into power. That is the high unemployment (hovering near 8 percent for Obama’s entire first term and into his second term), the worsening debt (which leads to slower economic growth, job losses, hyperinflation and the U.S. dollar no longer being the world’s reserve currency), and high underemployment.
The debt keeps going up because the Democrats want it to. Now, the Republicans only claim that they’re fiscal conservatives and so are for reducing government spending, but, since the GOP took over the House in 2010, the debt has still gotten worse and worse. This means both parties are driving Americans over the debt cliff! In spite of all this, it’s sad, though, when you realize that more Americans probably care about Dancing With The Stars than about the horrid economy under Obama.