The political, social networking site that integrates politics with popular culture.
The political, social networking site that integrates politics with popular culture.

Profile photo of Jordan Bosstick
Jordan Bosstick @jordan-bosstick

I personally haven’t noticed the catastrophic events promised from many government officials. Here is a good link that shows what cuts were actually made, state by state:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/sequestration-state-impact/

Profile photo of nathalie
nathalie @nathaliedacosta

I think that the sequester was almost a mixed blessing — sure, its bound to do slight damage, but it did force action when congress was failing to come up with another plan, and some form of budget cuts were desperately needed. Its doubtful that there would have been any bipartisan plan as effective as the sequester.

Profile photo of Brandon Killian
Brandon Killian @brandonkillian

We haven’t seen the full effects of Sequestration. But there will definitely be implications. I see in the link posted by @JordanBosstick, that there are a ton of cuts to education which is extremely disappointing. Especially the cuts to special education. These individuals need our resources to help them the most, and these are the cuts we make first? It doesn’t make sense. The cuts to our military DO make sense. Our military is far too expansive. We need to be investing in education, and slowing the growth of our military. We are not the world police anymore, the International community does not need a United States World Police. These sequestration military cuts are exactly what we should be doing to handle our debt. But the cuts to education are very disappointing.

Profile photo of Danny Foster
Danny Foster @dannyfoster

I think that we have yet to see the full effects, but a better solution could have been found if there had been more communication between the white house and congress

side note:
I do think the Obama admin handled the situation rather poorly by attempting to intimidate governors, going state to state and playing off peoples fear of the cuts, when they should have been looking for a solution.

Profile photo of

It has not, the sequester didnt even decrease spending, it just reduced the increase from a lot to still a lot but not as much as intended. The sequester doesnt even reduce spending levels to the levels that the bush admin had and that was outrageous so no effect whatsoever

Profile photo of Kelly Martin
Kelly Martin @ktmart1n3

Spending will still be out of control, and the economy will only be hurt by this administration’s lack of budgeting. I agree that it is sad to see our education being hit hard in the sequester, but there are plenty of programs that shouldn’t exist that we can take money out of (besides the defense budget) and give to education. We are a free-market enterprise, the only reason our economy would be hurt is because of the socialist-program implementations that the Obama administration has made.

Profile photo of

@dannyfoster

The Obama Team\’s strategy of highlighting the cuts by ending White House tours, flight delays, etc seems to have been a pretty poor strategy. Especially considering everyone mostly knows that the cuts themselves were just a drop in the barrel of the federal budget.

Profile photo of Isabelle Granter
Isabelle Granter @issabell

@dannyfoster @coopersmith

Lets not blame this on the white house entirely. You cannot deny that congress was incredibly difficult to deal with as well!

Actually, as a liberal I was curious about conservative opinions towards Boehner and the way he handled negotiations (throughout both the sequester and the fiscal cliff). I thought he was too rigid, but republicans seem to think that he gave up too much! any thoughts??

Profile photo of Andrew
Andrew @smittyboss1

I haven’t noticed anything. This cut is only 1/35 of the budget, but in the long run 85 billion could make a difference. I think that we must wait for a while, and we can see in the long run what the difference is.

Profile photo of linda
linda @lulubelle

@Isabelle Granter
” I thought he was too rigid, but republicans seem to think that he gave up too much”
When the GOP refuses to cave to Liberals it is seen as rigid. There is no such thing as negotiating anymore, especially with this administration, it is all or nothing. I’m pleased that the GOP finally had the spine to stand firm and give nothing. Obama wanted this game of chicken. And so far I see no ill effects.

Profile photo of Isabelle Granter
Isabelle Granter @issabell

@linda

your comment projects a refusal to cooperate! They don’t want you to “cave,” they want you to give up a little so that they can give up a little. Everyone “caves” to each other — thats the idea behind a bipartisan effort.

I’m not saying the democrats are perfect, we should be willing to work with republicans as well; but I think that it should be congress’s role to present demands to the white house first, and the white house should respond to them in a way that can partially appease both sides.
It shouldn’t be the sitting president’s responsibility to try and think of ways to appease an upset congress during fiscal negotiations.

Profile photo of Sam
Sam @unclesamiam

Republicans do not like big government. And you look at the decay of our government which is now something like forty-percent larger… It’s hard for the right to really want to support a government in growing.

On immigration reform yesterday one senator made a good point, we can’t handle what they were claiming as an increase in applications.. yet we should have 12 million or more people processed for amnesty? All while trying to add benefits to everyone? How can we afford or handle that…

Profile photo of Zakery Daniel
Zakery Daniel @conservativezak

Sequester may be damaging in the short run but in the long run it actually will be helpful. More cutting will be necessary while more tax revenue is necessary as well. In the short run it will lower GDP slightly and cause temporary pain but in the long run it will slightly help control the deficit, which will ultimately lead to an increase in consumer confidence and an increase in consumer spending. Austerity is not the best way in the SR but in the LR it is actually helpful.

Profile photo of Christopher Chesny
Christopher Chesny @chrischesny

I haven’t really felt a thing myself. As Joe Perticone said, it is mostly a cut in the rate of growth of government, not much of a cut at all in current spending.

Profile photo of Danny Foster
Danny Foster @dannyfoster

Is it just me, or does any article on the sequester effects seem to be jam-packed with pathos while holding very little statistics/hard facts? what’s new…

@ @joeperticone @ktmart1n3 @smitttboss1

Profile photo of Gary
Gary @grand-vizier

A sequester that doesn’t actually reduce spending by a dime!
A shutdown of “non-essential” functions.
Oh my! Armageddon is surly upon us.
They should PERMANENTLY end “non-Essential” functions till the National Debt is paid off,which will be never.
The sequester needs to be ten times larger.
They could do it and you would never even miss it unless you were getting the money yourself doing “non-essential” make work crap.
Government has absolutely NO idea where it wastes money and doesn’t give a damn.
Every politician in memory has promised to go through the budget “line by line”
Voters keep falling for that one,time after time. This is a non-partisan promise. they must go out in the woods where no one is watching and laugh till their sides ache.
If you put ANY credence in any of this you are just one of the sheep.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

In order to comment you must:
SIGN IN

or

CREATE A PROFILE
VIEW SIMILAR TOPICS