Check out my latest on the Truman Project’s Doctrine Blog, discussing Congress’ impending decision (or non-decision) on sequestration.
A few excepts below…
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle agree that sequestration in its current form is flawed, but the argument has remained largely political. Rep. Adam Smith outlined the irony of the current conservative position on sequestration, saying they “ignored both their own role in creating sequestration in the first place and the fact that their stubborn resistance to any increase in revenues is the biggest reason why sequestration is even a possibility… as much as these Republicans like to claim they’re deeply concerned about cuts to our defense budget, their votes for the BCA proved they care much more about blocking any increase in revenue, no matter how small or no matter the source.” Smith adds, “They prioritized protecting even the most outlandish tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations over protecting our defense budget. And they continue to do so.”
[snip]
In an obvious move to disregard not only sequester, but also original caps set by the Budget Control Act, the House recently passed a fiscal 2013 National Defense Authorization Act which was nearly $4 billion over the administration’s request, and $8 billion over the level set in the Budget Control Act. As Rep. Loretta Sanchez stated in The Hill, “Republicans were unwilling to accept all of the cuts that were carefully vetted through the system and considered by our top military officials — so how can Republicans say that they are serious about reducing the nation’s deficit?”
[snip]
We must begin to deal with our debt soon, or risk jeopardizing not only national security, but health care, transportation, education, and the many industries we depend on for a strong economy.
