Tweet
Most Americans support the basic idea of a five percent across the board cut in federal spending, which is effectively what the sequester is. According to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll, 61 percent support a 5 percent cut in overall federal spending, while only 33 percent oppose the idea.
Not surprisingly, after the leaders of both major parties spent years claiming that deficit reduction is super important,the American people are willing to support the general idea of cuts.
The poll also found that people oppose the idea of cutting the military. Only 34 percent support an eight percent across the board cut in military spending, while 60 percent oppose it. This question, though, says more about the wording of the poll than Americans’ budget preferences. Polling has constantly found that America support the general idea of cutting government spending but opposing cutting almost every specific program when they are named in a poll.
Obama designed the sequester to be blunt across the board cuts, so it would be an unacceptably bad policy. The idea was the generally stupid design of the cuts would force both sides to embrace his vision of a grand bargain.
Ironically, making the cut across the board may have made it much easier politically for Republicans to embrace the sequester. Instead of needing to defend unpopular cuts to individual programs, the GOP gets to defend the far more popular idea of just trimming the entire federal budget.
Image by DonkeyHotey released under Creative Commons License
18 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL Action
Jon, I am no under the impression obama did not blunder, he knew the sequester would come to pass, and the supposed “libertarians” were salivating at the gills
This is more redistribution of middle class assets, they couldn’t get it by vote so they made something up so they can say “I was forced into it”
this is a wet dream for the rober barons
Agreed. As I said when that poll came out, the pollsters should have given everyone they ask $20, and then taken $1 away for every “spend more” or “spend the same” answer. It’s easier to agree to spend “government” money, harder to spend your own.
what happened here is the antithesis for what we were hoping would happen with the supposed “bush tax cuts” (they were the obama tax cuts but who’s counting anyway”
we wanted everyone to just do nothing those “tax cuts for the rich” would just expire
so they used that very same strategy to insure more middle class assets goe to the wealthy, with a democratic president designing the scheme
spending government money is the best method for bringing dollars into the economy, far better then giving it to banks and begging them to lend it out, it simply cuts out the middleman
My thoughts exactly!
A wet dream. Indeed. I guess we need more unemployed to make anyone notice.
Not only the stupid design but the absolutely idiotic implementation,
Hw does this sound?? Cut out those White House tours that school kids have panned for months – and give the cash to Morsi. Its all the sequester. Or make it take longer to get through an airport – but buy all the TSA folks new uniforms.
Is that how it goes down in Chicago?
how does this sound;
“let’s give grover norquist EVERYTHING HE EVER WANTED but could not get without our help, find a way so nobody gets mad at the politicians, then make believe we didn’t want it too”
A comment on another site by hfojvt puts it like this :
“The Democratic Party represents the haves – those in the 80% to 99% group.
The Republican Party represents the have-mores – those in the top 1%. ”
The top 20%ers own 85% of the country’s wealth and that’s who congress plays to. Those that can afford to pay get to play. This really points out publicly financed campaigns are a non-starter. If a congressman couldn’t sell out the people in a publicly financed campaign how would have they a cushy job waiting for them when they retire ?
The sequester is NOT an across the board cut. It did not cut Social Security.
Republicans demand cuts to entitlements blaming the debt on entitlements we can’t afford. But Republicans refuse to cut entitlements now.
The Democrats must force Republicans to vote on entitlement cuts to balance the budget while Obama is president:
Sign my petition: http://wh.gov/wLed
WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO:
Give Republicans the Specific Entitlement Cut Bill They Promised and Demand President Obama Offer
Republicans campaigned on cutting the size of government and cutting entitlements to pay off the debt, and having won control of the House and Senate by filibuster, demand President Obama provide leadership with a specific plan to implement the Republican campaign promise.
President Obama should give the Republicans what they demand:
A bill to be introduced in the Senate and brought to floor by Majority Leader Reid and five Democratic Senators, and the Senate presided over by Senate President Biden to lead the debate and vote:
Beginning April 2017, Social Security payments will be reduced by 5%, with no change to benefit calculations, with the 5% directed to debt reduction. The reduction would increase 5% every other April.
President Obama would demand an up or down vote.
Sign my petition: http://wh.gov/wLed
If the sequester had included a 10% pay cut to the pay of members of Congress and their staff, then a bargain would have been struck weeks ago.
My take is that they represent the same people: the fraction of that 1% that hands out campaign money to buy favors. The difference is that the Democrats (1) make some small concessions to labor unions because the unions also give the Democrats money, and (2) understand that there is still some minimum they need to do for the country as a whole just to keep everything going. The Republicans hate labor unions and recognize no such minimum.
The biggest problem with the sequester is that it embraces the idea that our top priority in a depressed economy is to reduce the deficit.
I have to disagree.
If Obama thought the sequester was going to be enacted, he sure would have included his beloved SS cuts.
100% right!!!!
couldn’t have said it better myself.
Funnier maybe, but not better.
Agreeed. Maybe even in a “New York minute”. But woe is us who ain’t them.
Washington, Jefferson and Adams must be rolling over in their graves to see how the rich have “stolen” the fine country they built.
Yes, I do think Obama has been surprisingly stupid on his “Washington Monument” type cuts – it leaves Obama wide open to criticism when he does cuts that clearly aren’t across the board at the White House. Obama cuts things that hurt the public while he spends money on himself…it’s one thing if you’re doing it at a generic agency where something like that can be pulled off, but when you’re the one personally benefiting from the cuts you do, it just looks like Obama is being the Grinch out robbing kids and tourists of their Washington DC experience so that he can live lavishly.
The government taking your money and spending it for you simply cuts out the middleman?
Everyone gets what they deserve I guess.