How Congress Came to Love the Thing It Hated Most

Sequestration was designed to attract Congress’s wrath. Now, with few other options available, it’s becoming Congress’s favorite tool.

Sarah Mimms
Feb. 14, 2014, midnight

It was sup­posed to be im­possible. The as­sump­tion by the pres­id­ent and by mem­bers them­selves was that the ab­om­in­able, in­dis­crim­in­ate spend­ing cuts known as “se­quest­ra­tion” would nev­er be­come a real­ity.

Two and a half years later, the cuts are alive and do­ing a little bet­ter than well. In the last three months, Con­gress has signed it­self up for an­oth­er three years of se­quest­ra­tion, man­dat­ing across-the-board spend­ing cuts to man­dat­ory pro­grams through 2024.

How did we get here? To put it simply: There isn’t any money.

That isn’t strictly true, of course; Con­gress just passed a $1.012 tril­lion budget and al­loc­ated those funds to the vari­ous de­part­ments and agen­cies of gov­ern­ment in a fol­low-up spend­ing bill. They even raised the debt ceil­ing through March of next year.

But after years of cut­ting spend­ing in the wake of the tea-party wave of 2010, with no al­ter­a­tions to man­dat­ory-spend­ing mor­asses like Medi­care or tax re­form, Con­gress is run­ning out of areas to cut back and find avail­able fund­ing for new pro­grams. On the dis­cre­tion­ary side of the budget, mem­bers are es­sen­tially left turn­ing over seat cush­ions look­ing for change.

“We’re get­ting to the lim­it, frankly — and I’m not sug­gest­ing we’re there yet — of where you’re go­ing to cut dis­cre­tion­ary spend­ing,” said Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho, who chairs the Ap­pro­pri­ations Sub­com­mit­tee on En­ergy and Wa­ter De­vel­op­ment, as he wrapped up work on his spend­ing bill last month.

“A lot of people don’t real­ize un­less you ac­tu­ally sit and work the budgets, the first year when we re­duced dis­cre­tion­ary spend­ing it wasn’t too tough be­cause we were com­ing off of the money that had come in for the stim­u­lus and we could cut back. The second year, a little more pain­ful. Third year, get­ting really ugly. So we’re get­ting to where — if you want to get down to where [the House Re­pub­lic­an] ori­gin­al budget was, it gets pretty damn ugly,” Simpson ad­ded.

Spend­ing bills brought to the floor last year un­der the Re­pub­lic­an budget fig­ure couldn’t even get a ma­jor­ity of Re­pub­lic­an votes, much less Demo­crats, Simpson noted.

Ap­pro­pri­at­ors like Simpson are in a tough po­s­i­tion this year. They’ll have to pass their bills be­fore Septem­ber, just months be­fore the midterm elec­tions — when Re­pub­lic­ans will be push­ing for deep­er spend­ing cuts and Demo­crats could push for fund­ing new pro­grams to elab­or­ate on their elec­tion-year theme of in­come in­equal­ity.

But Con­gress will have just an­oth­er $2 bil­lion to deal with in the ap­pro­pri­ations pro­cess — a re­l­at­ively small fig­ure when it comes to dis­cre­tion­ary budget­ing — and there won’t be much room for large-scale al­ter­a­tions to this year’s spend­ing bills without a ma­jor over­haul of the na­tion’s tax sys­tem or ser­i­ous changes to en­ti­tle­ment pro­grams. Neither is likely in 2014.

“There’s really little more we can do on the dis­cre­tion­ary side. And the pres­id­ent and Demo­crats make it clear they don’t want to do any­thing on en­ti­tle­ments. So we’re just locked in a dif­fi­cult po­s­i­tion,” said Rep. John Flem­ing, R-La.

In the in­ter­im, mem­bers are show­ing a pen­chant for re­turn­ing to se­quest­ra­tion as the ul­ti­mate off­set for new pro­grams and changes to old ones. Sen­ate Budget Com­mit­tee Chair­wo­man Patty Mur­ray and her House coun­ter­part Paul Ry­an ad­ded two years of man­dat­ory se­quest­ra­tion cuts in or­der to cut spend­ing in their budget agree­ment in Decem­ber. And just this week, mem­bers ad­ded an­oth­er year to re­verse un­pop­u­lar cuts to mil­it­ary pen­sions. The le­gis­lat­ive cuts will now ex­pire in 2024.

As Mur­ray headed in­to the Sen­ate cham­ber to vote in fa­vor of adding an­oth­er year of man­dat­ory spend­ing cuts, she was asked wheth­er se­quest­ra­tion will be the go-to off­set in the fu­ture. “Let’s take it one day at a time,” she laughed.

But with so few oth­er op­tions for spend­ing cuts and off­sets, Con­gress could eas­ily add a few more years of se­quest­ra­tion in 2014.

That’s con­cern­ing for mem­bers, who worry about the po­ten­tially dev­ast­at­ing ef­fects of 10 years of hack­saw cuts to Medi­care and So­cial Se­cur­ity in par­tic­u­lar. But the con­cern is par­tic­u­larly acute among con­ser­vat­ives, who are anxious over adding new spend­ing pro­grams in ex­change for off­sets 10 years down the line, which could eas­ily dis­ap­pear by the time they’re set to take ef­fect. Part of the Ry­an-Mur­ray budget deal, after all, was re­du­cing some of the se­quester cuts for man­dat­ory and dis­cre­tion­ary pro­grams.

Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., cited those con­cerns earli­er this week when House Re­pub­lic­ans con­sidered at­tach­ing an­oth­er year of man­dat­ory se­quest­ra­tion to the debt-ceil­ing deal. An off­set that is delayed for 10 years, he said, “is no off­set at all.”

What We're Following See More »
LEGACY PLAY
Sanders and Clinton Spar Over … President Obama
1 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama became a surprise topic of contention toward the end of the Democratic debate, as Hillary Clinton reminded viewers that Sanders had challenged the progressive bona fides of President Obama in 2011 and suggested that someone might challenge him from the left. “The kind of criticism that we’ve heard from Senator Sanders about our president I expect from Republicans, I do not expect from someone running for the Democratic nomination to succeed President Obama,” she said. “Madame Secretary, that is a low blow,” replied Sanders, before getting in another dig during his closing statement: “One of us ran against Barack Obama. I was not that candidate.”

THE 1%
Sanders’s Appeals to Minorities Still Filtered Through Wall Street Talk
2 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

It’s all about the 1% and Wall Street versus everyone else for Bernie Sanders—even when he’s talking about race relations. Like Hillary Clinton, he needs to appeal to African-American and Hispanic voters in coming states, but he insists on doing so through his lens of class warfare. When he got a question from the moderators about the plight of black America, he noted that during the great recession, African Americans “lost half their wealth,” and “instead of tax breaks for billionaires,” a Sanders presidency would deliver jobs for kids. On the very next question, he downplayed the role of race in inequality, saying, “It’s a racial issue, but it’s also a general economic issue.”

DIRECT APPEAL TO MINORITIES, WOMEN
Clinton Already Pivoting Her Messaging
3 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

It’s been said in just about every news story since New Hampshire: the primaries are headed to states where Hillary Clinton will do well among minority voters. Leaving nothing to chance, she underscored that point in her opening statement in the Milwaukee debate tonight, saying more needs to be done to help “African Americans who face discrimination in the job market” and immigrant families. She also made an explicit reference to “equal pay for women’s work.” Those boxes she’s checking are no coincidence: if she wins women, blacks and Hispanics, she wins the nomination.

THE QUESTION
How Many Jobs Would Be Lost Under Bernie Sanders’s Single-Payer System?
11 hours ago
THE ANSWER

More than 11 million, according to Manhattan Institute fellow Yevgeniy Feyman, writing in RealClearPolicy.

Source:
WEEKEND DATA DUMP
State to Release 550 More Clinton Emails on Saturday
11 hours ago
THE LATEST

Under pressure from a judge, the State Department will release about 550 of Hillary Clinton’s emails—“roughly 14 percent of the 3,700 remaining Clinton emails—on Saturday, in the middle of the Presidents Day holiday weekend.” All of the emails were supposed to have been released last month. Related: State subpoenaed the Clinton Foundation last year, which brings the total number of current Clinton investigations to four, says the Daily Caller.

Source:
×