I applaud House Republicans for voting to suspend the sequester which threatens to decimate military spending and replacing it with cuts to social welfare programs. But the Republican leadership knows their legislation has little chance of passage in the Senate. They are simply hoping to set the stage for negotiations later this year that would at least suspend the first stage of the sequester which could cut another $500 billion or so from the defense budget on top of $450 billion or cuts already set in motion last summer.
The question is whether those negotiations will succeed. The conventional wisdom in Washington is that the answer is yes, but I join Mackenzie Eaglen of the American Enterprise Institute in being skeptical of that consensus. She points out that there is no intrinsic reason to think Democrats and Republicans, who couldn’t agree on alternative spending cuts or revenue increases until now, will suddenly find some way to sing “Kumbaya” after the election–especially when the composition of Congress will be exactly what it is today. And there are many reasons to expect that an attempt to stop sequestration will not be a high priority item for Congress also grappling with expiring tax cuts and the need to raise the debt ceiling once again.
As the sequestration cuts fall disproportionately on defense (half the cuts slash defense spending even though it’s less than 20 percent of the overall federal budget), Democrats have every reason to sit back and allow the cuts to hit–unless Republicans cave on higher taxes, which they are unlikely to do. Thus, the odds grow of a “perfect storm” that will devastate the defense budget.
I am in the process of touring West Coast military installations–I was just in San Diego where I met with Navy SEALs and toured an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, a Navy aviation maintenance plant, and Camp Pendleton, the West Coast home of the Marine Corps. Everywhere I saw what I have come to expect when visiting our military installations–superbly trained and motivated men and women doing incredible, often dangerous, and usually unheralded work to defend our republic. It would be a tragedy not only for the U.S. but for the entire world if this first-class military, developed over decades and committed to expanding and preserving freedom around the globe, were to be wrecked overnight through a lack of political will in Congress. But that, alas, appears to be increasingly likely.
I hate to say it, but the Tea Party and John Boehner bear great responsibility for this upcoming debacle. The debt ceiling should never have been used to put defense on the chopping block. How the Republican leadership agreed that idiotic result is a deep mystery. Obama clearly bears the lions share of the blame, but the GOP should have known better.
BDZ, nThe existing sequester will cause painful spending cuts that hit gov't programs important to Democrats. n nIf both higher taxes and defense cuts are off-limits, what concessions do you suggest Republicans should be making instead? n n
Marcus, your question assumes a situation of good faith negotiations, where each party has to give and take. But this is not the case. The Democrats are not and have not in recent memory acted in good faith. They Republicans only goal should be to win power away from Democrats who are destroying this country with monstrosities like Obamacare. So, they should do whatever they can to unseat the Dems, then cut entitlements like crazy (there are many good ways to do this that are not politically suicidal). But they should not offer concessions to the Dems because it is like negotiating with terrorists.
BDZ, you do realize the most likely outcome of the 2012 elections is divided government don't you? Current opinion polls suggest neither political party is likely to score a big decisive win. Regardless of whoever wins control of the Senate, a determined minority of just 40 Senators will be able to block just about anything. The most likely outcome is 52-48 or 51-49 so the next Senate Minority Leader will not be forced to "play ball." n nWhat this means is compromise is ESSENTIAL for anything to get done at all. The alternative is the sequester, failure to raise the debt ceiling the next time, and other things like that. n nMARCU$
You are right: They might be forced into caving on other very very important things like lowering taxes or lowering spending elsewhere in order to prevent the even more important goal of protecting our national defense. My original point is that it was moronic for Republicans to put themselves into that bind in the first place. There was no reason to. And by the way, the "painful cuts" to Democrat programs are not nearly as large as cuts to Defense. This was idiotically conceived and structured from the get go.