Obama Sequester Overreaction With Scare Tactics Is Fear Mongering
The Obama sequester overreaction with scare tactics intended to sway public opinion is merely political theater that can only be classified as fear mongering. Speaking on the sequester, Obama continually blames others, demands higher taxes via closing loopholes, and tries to make it sound like the world will end if the Federal government cuts spending.
As previously reported by The Inquisitr, the sequester is about $85 billion, or $1.2 trillion in 10 years, in automatic spending cuts that will hit both the Pentagon’s defense budget and domestic programs, which includes roughly $11 billion in cuts coming from Medicare. As a comparison, these spending cuts are a tiny 2.4 percent of the $3.6 trillion worth of federal spending that comes out of $15.7 trillion generated by the American economy.
Basically the message Obama has on the sequester is that “spending cuts are bad; look how they will affect you!” Obama cronies have lined up in unison as a chorus, with the FDA commissioner claiming the sequester may lead to less safe food. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano went so far as to release dangerous illegal immigrants even before the sequester was scheduled to take effect.
Seriously, how can a single digit percentage slowing of Federal spending growth be that horrible? The budget of federal agencies have increased by 17 percent since 2008, when Obama took office. The solution is supposedly to increases taxes more to cover the increased spending, but taxes were already increased by billions once before under the Fiscal Cliff agreements.
According to CBS News, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) agrees with this assessment:
“Look – the federal government is twice the size it was 11 years ago. What sequestration is, it’s a terrible way to cut spending – I don’t disagree with that. But to not cut 2.5 percent out of the total budget over a year when it’s twice the size it was 11 years ago? Give me a break.”
The Washington Post notes that Republicans have previously offered the power to Obama to control how the sequester spending cuts take effect, making such scare tactics even more egregious:
“Washington has reached a strange place indeed when the opposition party offers the president more control over spending — and he refuses it.”
I’m not saying that Obama and the Democrats must take all the blame for the sequester, but they do need to control the ridiculous way they’re presenting the debate. As the sequester timeline shows, Bob Woodward documented how the Obama White House conceived the sequester idea, told Senate Democrats about it, and then Republicans embraced the sequester as a middle ground. So obviously Republicans share the blame for this fiscal debt crisis.
The good news according to CBS News is that under the sequester “Social Security, Medicaid, veterans’ benefits, unemployment insurance, and food stamps will not see any reduction in funding.” The sequester cuts are also not automatic, and take effect over 10 years, so it’s possible that Congress can still act.
Some reporters feel that Obama’s fear mongering will come back to haunt him. As Glenn Kessler puts it:
“The administration may rue the day that it issued so many scary statistics with such specificity. If sequestration remains in effect for the rest of the fiscal year, reporters will certainly attempt to check whether the administration’s predictions came close to reality.”
Do you think Obama is using sequester scare tactics? Do you think this fear mongering will cause real harm to the nation by purposefully enacting damaging cuts just to make a political point?
http://twitter.com/Heminator/status/307482800158830592
OMG! Who in New York screwed this up!? Not even an hour in & now we have TWO #Sequester disasters!! pic.twitter.com/h3bw5qHPOC
— Tammy Bruce (@HeyTammyBruce) March 1, 2013
