Sequestration: The New Republican Game Plan.

Republicans are planning a new strategy which is a big gamble, but might benefit them nevertheless.  It is to cap total spending at the sequester level, but give the President authority to move funds around.

This would give them the opportunity to blame the President for whatever program cuts take place.  They could shrug and say, “Isn’t our fault. If we had the Presidency we would fund your favorite.”

On the other hand, it would give the President the opportunity to save his favorite programs.  Republicans would have to sit by and watch their favorites go down a rat hole and the ones the hate get the available money.  The outcome is fun to speculate about.

I would hope this Democrat President would spend more on health care and education and less on defense, highways, airports and concrete in general.  It would not be a bad thing  if all kinds of aid to local governments and communities would be cut back.  Many of these are supported by Republicans because local businesses make money off of them.

The trouble the President would face if he did what I’m suggesting is a lack of ribbon cuttings.  That’s what Republicans are good at, large public works projects, tangible projects people can see that give them ribbon cutting ceremonies.  A Democrat President would probably see this and need to get his share.

This Republican idea does make more sense than cutting all programs equally.  It is risky for Republicans, but may be their only choice.

http://www.businessinsider.com/republican-plan-sequester-2013-2

Avatar of Jon Lindgren

About Jon Lindgren

I am President of the Red River Freethinkers in Fargo, ND. I am a retired economics professor from NDSU and was Mayor of Fargo for 16 years.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Sequestration: The New Republican Game Plan.

  1. Ed says:

    ” Republicans are good at the ribbon cutting ceremonies?” Halarious Jon. Good to see you have your sense of humor. And what are democrats good at? More spending, more government programs, more debt, and more taxes.

    Hey Jon……your help promoting the gay agenda is paying off. Nice article in today’s Forum about the Park Board considering allowing gay couples to get a family golf pass. I predict there is going to be a wave of college age boys coming out this spring! Way to go Jon !

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Ed 1:58 “And what are democrats good at?”

      I’ll admit Democrats were the “ribbon cutters” back in the times of LBJ and Kennedy. Senator Robert Bryd just about covered all of West Virgina with concrete. But, I think of Republicans as the bigger advocates today of highways and airports.

      I was happy the Park Board allowed gay couples to get family passes. Gay couples pay taxes to support the Park District. Why should they pay higher fees than straight couples?

  2. buzz says:

    Truth be told, sacred cows of both major parties should be hauled to the slaughter house.

  3. Brad says:

    It seems to me that Republicans are simply against Obama no matter what the issue is. They have hung their entire existence on destroying Obama. It has failed so far because a majority of people know better by now. The gig is up with Limbaugh, Fox, and the rest of the conservative entertainment complex, and America just isn’t buying the right wing agenda anymore.

  4. Michael Ross says:

    Even if the budget really was being “cut” by 85 billion dollars, that only would only amount to a “cut” of 2.4 percent to federal spending. It would barely make a dent in the federal budget deficit for 2013. The U.S. government would still accumulate about as much new debt in fiscal year 2013 as it did in all the years from the inauguration of George Washington to the inauguration of Ronald Reagan combined. Our debt to GDP ratio would continue to soar. The sequester cuts would essentially only be a minor bump on the road to financial oblivion.

    If our politicians suddenly decided to go to a balanced budget today, our debt-fueled “bubble economy” would disappear and we would immediately plunge into a deep economic depression.

    Do the American people have the character to be able to handle that kind of an “adjustment” to our standard of living?

    Of course not.

  5. Henry says:

    Jon: “I would hope this Democrat President would spend more on health care”

    I bet you do. Medicare was gutted in Obambacare. It needs cash, lots of it in order to care for the retired generation of people that built this nation up while not having much for social programs available to them. The medicare reimbursement rates were low before Obambacare. They will have to be cut further in order to make due with Obambacare. Meanwhile, many of the non-working, working-age, nintendooers will be served up healthcare compliments of the sacrifice of others. Price control + free services = no/limited services.

    • Brad says:

      “Meanwhile, many of the non-working, working-age, nintendooers will be served up healthcare compliments of the sacrifice of others.”

      Ok, so who are these “nintendooers” you are referring to? What percentage of the population are these non-workers? Is it based on actual facts, or is based on myths and urban legends?

      • Henry says:

        Myths, urban legends, and generalities gave us Obambacare. i.e. “The Affordable Care Act will save [me] money.” That is the standard language we can operate on any argument concerning Obamacare. The template has been set.

        • Jeffrey Eide says:

          Yeah, great dodge Henry… Please get off the soap box and engage in human interaction. Answer Brads question, please.

          • Henry says:

            plurium interrogationum

            JE, have you stopped beating your neighbors yet? Please answer the question.

          • Jeffrey Eide says:

            You might want to check your fallacies…

            plurium interrogationum is a question that has a presupposition, such as the classic “if god didn’t make the universe, then WHO made it?”

            No the question from Brad does not qualify as a plurium interrogationum. He is simply asking you to identify who you refer to as “Nintendooers.” I also think the percentage of non-working working-age people is also pertinent. Before you throw these questions out, isn’t it important to identify who you are talking about??

          • Henry says:

            Of the many questions, one of the answers is self-evident. A nintendooer is a person that plays nintendoo and by extension any computer/video game. The percentage of non-working working-age people is more difficult to obtain. The demoncrats have the answer. They knew the “47%” was a wrong figure. I would have to draw upon their expertise.

            The fact is in the genius of Obambacare, the elderly are kicked down the stair and thrown under the bus for the sake of the young adults.

          • Jeffrey Eide says:

            I think you mean Nintendo, and I have to say, no I have never heard that term and I don’t think it was self-evident. What IS self-evident is your disconnect from the general population. Studies regularly take figures ranging from 63-91% of the US population plays video games (figures available upon request) , and even if that were not true, what does that have to do with the healthcare controversy??

            You see, the way you label the members of society who you do not associate with is no different then the “Makers and the takers” argument. By demonizing a specific group instead of trying to understand why they feel a specific way about an issue is just trolling and harassment.

          • Henry says:

            JE: “You see, the way you label the members of society who you do not associate with”

            Your presumption is incorrect.

            Any thing of value you have to offer in the conversation of Obambacare? So far, nothing.

          • Jeffrey Eide says:

            You know, I am not sure yet how I feel on the subject of The Affordable Care Act, however I have to say I love the socialized medicine as it is practice in so many different ways across Europe. Although the Affordable Care Act does move in the right direction, the effect of not going all the way will cost many people dearly, especially in higher premiums. The Best article out there is currently the TIME cover story. Riveting…

            http://healthland.time.com/2013/02/20/bitter-pill-why-medical-bills-are-killing-us/

          • entech says:

            Jeffrey, I live many miles from you and know nothing of the subject, however, good luck trying to get any sense out of Henry.

          • Henry says:

            JE: “however I have to say I love the socialized medicine as it is practice in so many different ways across Europe.”

            I don’t know your story, but I could see Europeon healthcare to be beneficial to certain people. Nomadic, non-citizens can tap right into the benefits without paying anything into the system after they wait for eight excruciating hours in the ER with their very sick child. Definitely a cheaper way to do things (for some).

          • Henry says:

            Furthermore, the Medicare gutting is a dilemma that will eventually need to be satisfied. As it stands, it will literally sacrifice the care of the elderly for the young.

            I am rather amazed at how poorly Obambacare treats the young adults. It treats them like children, allowing them to be on their mommy’s and daddy’s health insurance until they are 26. Give the young adults some respect. Give them a boot and let them get into the working world. Maybe they can make something of themselves.

          • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

            Henry 8:34 “..allowing them to be on their mommy’s and daddy’s health insurance until they are 26.”

            I’m afraid you are not a capitalist, Henry. When a child in his/her 20′s has no health insurance, or, in many cases even a job, the parents will most often pay for their child’s health insurance. It is a business decision–both parents and child are better using the family’s policy.

            You dire predicition about the future health coverage of senior citizens is not necessarily an accurate reflection either. Our Plan B just went down by $40/month. When more people are enrolled in the Affordable Health Act, the cost per person will fall.

            Medical costs of all kinds have been going up. I’ve always thought the entire current “private” system has the bad characteristics of socialized medicine without the good ones. It’s essentially “free” to enrollees once they have subscribed and are making payments. But there is little clout to bird dog the costs charged by the system.

          • Jeffrey Eide says:

            I don’t know what experience you have had with medical care in Europe, but in my experience there was never any waiting, nor messing with insurance, but simply genuine sincere medical assistance and a hassle free prescription.

            Was I ever utilizing something without contributing to the aforementioned system? Sometimes, but while it seems you are more concerned with the rugged-individualistic nature of the dilemma, as with so many other social programs, such as assisting with homelessness, unemployment, etc…. The benefit to society as a whole will always trump the individuals who take advantage of the system.

            Entech: Henry has an opinion as you do, and since I have a moment, and he is interested in describing why he believes as he does, I want to take the opportunity to call him on it. Professional debaters know they are not debating each other, but the audience. Henry also knows that everyone who sees this will make their judgements.

          • Jeffrey Eide says:

            Anyway Henry, this is not an appropriate place for such a debate, and perhaps would be much better “in effigy”

          • Henry says:

            Your experience with wait time is a different account than my rellies had.

            JE: “I want to take the opportunity to call him on it.”

            I am still waiting.

          • Jeffrey Eide says:

            I recant my statement, I actually DON’T have time to do it here. You will go uncalled today, sorry to disappoint. Either way, please come to one of the freethinker or Atheist meetups in the FM area and we can have a proper discussion…

          • entech says:

            Henry says: March 1, 2013 at 8:27 pm
            I don’t know your story, but I could see Europeon healthcare to be beneficial to certain people. Nomadic, non-citizens can tap right into the benefits without paying anything into the system after they wait for eight excruciating hours in the ER with their very sick child. Definitely a cheaper way to do things (for some).

            Henry says: March 1, 2013 at 8:47 pm
            Your experience with wait time is a different account than my rellies had.

            Luke 10 25,37

            Not Europe but I must say that my recent experience with a combined medicare and private insurance system was without delay or problem and not very much in the way of extra payments.

          • Henry says:

            JE, thanks for the invite. I am afraid I will be unable to find any other free thinkers there, so no. Sorry. Besides that, I am a poor speaker. I was an ironworker, and didn’t have sufficient training in public speaking.

          • Henry says:

            Jon: “You dire predicition about the future health coverage of senior citizens is not necessarily an accurate reflection either.”

            The medicare reinbursement rate to healthcare providers hasn’t been cut yet. It is scheduled.

  6. Avatar of seaofstories seaofstories says:

    My understanding of the Republican proposal to shift the cuts around is that the President would still have to come back to Congress for approval of any proposed changes. Naturally they wouldn’t agree to any of them. It’s just a ploy. An attempt to shift ownership of the cuts onto the President. At the end of the day the Republicans prefer these damaging across the board cuts. Cuts that were specifically designed for no one to like. Cuts who’s only purpose was to force Congress into passing something better. Republicans believe they’re a better option than any compromise plan that would include an additional cent of revenue.

  7. Michael Ross says:

    Forget it Jon. In one day the sequester is gone.

    U.S. Treasury gross public debt:
    2/27/13 $16,607,216,503,950.75
    2/28/13 $16,687,289,180,215.37

    $80,072,676,264.62 New debt added in one day!

    http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

  8. Brad says:

    At the end of the day, both the debt and the sequester and just about everything else regarding the economy being fed to us by the media is a huge sideshow.

    The fundamental problem is that most of the wealth is being sucked out of the economy by the top 1%. The money is being taken out of circulation and put into the economies of cheap labor havens like China, and/or socked away in offshore bank accounts (aka tax-free shelters). The right will claim that there is an unlimited amount of wealth to be had, but even if that’s true the working class is not able to generate enough wealth to make up for what is being sucked out and redistributed outside of our own economy. And the reason they are unable to generate enough wealth is because their wages and benefits are being butchered every way possible so the rich can even acquire more that can be taken out of the economy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>