Author Topic: Deep budget cuts would badly hurt our military, all part of obamas plan.  (Read 217 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline powderman

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32823
  • Gender: Male
White House warns planned budget cuts 'deeply destructive' to military, other agencies  Published September 15, 2012
Associated Press    A new White House report issued Friday warns that $110 billion in across-the-board spending cuts at the start of the new year would be "deeply destructive" to the military and core government responsibilities like patrolling U.S. borders and air traffic control.
 
The report says the automatic cuts, mandated by the failure of last year's congressional deficit "supercommittee" to strike a budget deal, would require an across-the-board cut of 9 percent to most Pentagon programs and an 8 percent cut in many domestic programs. The process of automatic cuts is called sequestration, and the administration has no flexibility in how to distribute the cuts, other than to exempt military personnel and war-fighting accounts.
 
"Sequestration would be deeply destructive to national security, domestic investments and core government functions," the report says.
The cuts, combined with the expiration of Bush-era tax cuts at the end of the year, have been dubbed the "fiscal cliff." Economists warn that the one-two punch could drive the economy back into recession.
 
The across-the-board cuts were devised as part of last summer's budget and debt deal between President Barack Obama and Capitol Hill Republicans. They were intended to drive the supercommittee — evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans — to strike a compromise. But the panel deadlocked and the warring combatants have spent more time since then blaming each other for the looming cuts than seeking ways to avoid them.
 
The White House report continues in that vein, blasting House Republicans for an approach to avoiding the sequester that relies on further cuts to domestic programs while protecting upper-bracket taxpayers from higher rates proposed by the president.
In advance of the report's release, White House press secretary Jay Carney went on the offensive, blasting "the adamant refusal of Republicans to accept the fundamental principle that we ought to deal with our fiscal challenges in a balanced way."
 
In advance of the election, rival Democratic and GOP sides are dug in, unwilling to make the required compromises and unable to trust the other side. It's commonly assumed that there will be more serious efforts to forestall the cuts in a postelection lame duck session, though it may only be for a short time, to give the next Congress and whoever occupies the White House a chance to work out a longer-term solution.
 
If not, sharp cuts are on the way.
The report warns that the Pentagon faces cuts that "would result in a reduction in readiness of many nondeployed units, delays in investments in new equipment and facilities, cutbacks in equipment repairs, declines in military research and development efforts and reductions in base services for military families."
 
On the domestic front, the White House warns of dire effects as well.
"The number of Federal Bureau of Investigation agents, Customs and Border Patrol agents, correctional officers and federal prosecutors would be slashed. The Federal Aviation Administration's ability to oversee and manage the nation's airspace and air traffic control would be reduced," the report says. "The Department of Agriculture's efforts to inspect food processing plants and prevent foodborne illnesses would be curtailed."
 
Many big programs, like Social Security, Medicaid, federal employee pensions and veterans' benefits and health care would be exempted. Medicare would be limited to an $11 billion, 2 percent cut in provider payments.
 
Also cut would be $14 million to treat emergency responders and others made ill as a result of the 9/11 attacks; $33 million for federal prosecution of violent crimes against women; and $2.5 billion for medical research and other work by the National Institutes of Health.
Other cuts would include $5 million from Obama's own office at the White House; $140 million from financial aid for college students; $216 million from efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons; $471 million from highway construction and $1 billion from aid for handicapped and children with other special needs.
 
The 394-page report, however, simply lists the dollar amount of the cuts but fails to address their real-world impact. For instance, it would cut the number of food inspectors and air traffic controllers on the job. But when asked on a conference call, a top White House official wouldn't say whether such cuts would require closing meatpacking plants or shutting down smaller airports.
 
"The report makes clear that sequestration would cause great disruptions across many vital services, from cancer research at NIH to food safety efforts at the Department of Agriculture, and public safety at the FBI to lowered military readiness," said Rep. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the Budget Committee's top Democrat. "It's time to stop the political games and start working together to prevent the sequester, protect the economic recovery and get our fiscal house in order."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/14/white-house-warns-planned-budget-cuts-deeply-destructive-to-military-other/#ixzz26XluRNO2
Mr. Charles Glenn “Charlie” Nelson, age 73, of Payneville, KY passed away Thursday, October 14, 2021 at his residence. RIP Charlie, we'll will all miss you. GB

Only half the people leave an abortion clinic alive.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAiOEV0v2RM
What part of ILLEGAL is so hard to understand???
I learned everything about islam I need to know on 9-11-01.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDqmy1cSqgo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_u9kieqGppE&feature=related
http://www.illinois.gov/gov/contactthegovernor.cfm

Offline magooch

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6644
Re: Deep budget cuts would badly hurt our military, all part of obamas plan.
« Reply #1 on: September 15, 2012, 06:05:33 AM »
The problem won't go away without understanding that the federal government spends too much money.  The good thing is that it overspends by so much that enormous cuts can be made without causing the earth to stop.  Even the military can and should take really big cuts.  I'm a bit tired of having the United States be the main defense and deterrent for Europe, Japan, South Korea and a whold lot of other places.  We still fight wars with troops instead of missles and bombs; that has to stop.  The best use of our troops at the present time is on our southern border.
I have to laugh when it is said that the Republicans and Dumycrats can't reach a compromise on what to do about our uncontrollable deficit spending.  Compromise?  The only compromise that should be under consideration is whether to make drastic cuts, or draconian cuts.  Congress is locked up over whether to increase taxes on the already overtaxed upper incomers (the Dumycrat option), or to cut the rate of increase in spending (the Republican offer). 
The problem is that if the spending spigot is even turned down just a little bit, someone is going to feel it and our Congress critters are unwilling to take the heat, because they like their jobs.  The only foreseeable solution is to elect a leader who is dedicated to fixing the problem and not worrying about his/her popularity, or being reelected--maybe someone who selects a VP candidate that knows something about the budget and the economy. 
Swingem

Offline yellowtail3

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5664
  • Gender: Male
  • Oh father of the four winds, fill my sails!
Re: Deep budget cuts would badly hurt our military, all part of obamas plan.
« Reply #2 on: September 15, 2012, 07:04:55 AM »
don't worry, folks, we've got more guns bombs and ships than most of the world combined... a little austerity won't kill the military, though it might make it a little harder to be everywhere all the time (which we ought not be, most of the time)
Jesus said we should treat other as we'd want to be treated... and he didn't qualify that by their party affiliation, race, or even if they're of diff religion.