Image 01 Image 03

Friendly skies of Sequestration

Friendly skies of Sequestration

The Obama administration’s implementation of sequestration has followed the classic firehouse or Washington Monument strategy. If no one felt the effects of sequestration, then he’d cancel White House tours; that would make citizens demand that Republicans cave to his demands. It didn’t work at first.

Jim Geraghty, in the beginning of March, noted that one aspect of the administration’s strategy was that the proposed furloughs of air traffic controllers would disrupt travel and elicit enough outrage against Republicans to get them to cave.

With furloughs of air traffic controllers looming, Sen. Pat Toomey took to the airwaves to point out the cynicism of the administration:

“The president and many in his administration were so shrill about this leading up to the sequester, they feel like they better make it painful or else look pretty foolish having predicted all the dire consequences,” the Pennsylvania senator said.

“They backed themselves into a bad position, where what they should’ve done is said, ‘Let’s work with Congress; let’s find the duplication, the waste, the excess, the low priority items.’ They can easily make due with the money that’s left over.”

Toomey said it was “really irresponsible to implement these modest savings in the most disruptive way.”

Apparently, Toomey’s argument won the day.

Brian Beutler is none too pleased.

The point of sequestration is supposedly to create just enough chaos that regular people — people with political clout, such as, say, business travelers — demand that Congress fix it. Or as the Democrats conceived it, to create the public pressure they need to knock Republicans off their absolutist position on taxes.

Well, they got their outcry…and then promptly folded. They allowed Republicans to inaccurately characterize the FAA furloughs as a political stunt. Then without any organized effort to cast the flight delays as part of the same problem that’s also keeping poor people homeless they assented to providing special treatment to the traveling class.

In the first paragraph, Beutler explains that the implementation of sequestration was supposed to arouse enough outrage to pressure Republicans to cave on their budget priorities. In other words, it was a political stunt. What was inaccurate about the Republicans’ characterization? By Beutler’s own description it was a political stunt. The Republicans called the administration on it and won the argument.

Of course, there could be some selfishness involved in the vote too.




Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


That’s not selfishness on the part of Congress-people! Their time is very important – after all, every minute they spend in the airport is another minute they don’t spend with a lobbyist or writing more regulations or passing new taxes…

Ah well, some creatures really are more equal than others.

Now if they would only sequester the TSA, we’d all be happy 🙂

great unknown | April 26, 2013 at 6:09 pm

The ultimate fail for the Democrats: the partying, vacations, and fundraising trips by the WH underline the hypocrisy. And Obama couldn’t refrain for even a few weeks.

I’m confused. Is the sequestration still going on?

This is an outrage against the American people, and failure to treat is as such will curtain our liberty for years to come. Remember, the lunatic in the White House has another 3 and a 1/2 years left in power to create this kind of chaos and — blackmail.

We need to act in kind. We need to create our own kind of chaos, and just boot the absolutely poor excuses for men that are hogging the GOP leadership and allowing our nation to be destroyed.

SoCA Conservative Mom | April 26, 2013 at 8:51 pm

The next tactic Dems are going to use… sequestration is hurting the unemployed by reducing unemployment benefits. In CA, the Federal extensions are being reduced by 17.69%. There is even a calculator on the website that allows you to calculate how much sequestration will cost you.

The administration is using the sequester to operate a political “slash and burn” campaign that will inconvenience the public rather than address budget issues in such a way that fraud/waste/abuse is reduced or eliminated.

Never will you hear words to the effect of simplification which alone could reduce the budget by 20% or more. No politician wants smaller government right or left…