Start the conversation
Comment on This Story
Or to contact Money Morning Customer Service, click here.
Politics as usual has always been hard on the American people, but with the sequester, Washington has crossed the line this time.
All the sequester craziness has proven that our elected officials are not only inept, selfish, money-squandering bozos – they're also willing to actually inflict harm on the American people for political gain.
Virtually all of the problems created by the sequester, from the flight delays resulting from furloughed air traffic controllers to cancer clinics turning away Medicare patients could easily have been avoided.
But American citizens are suffering because Washington's warring factions – the Democrats and the Republicans – refuse to solve the nation's budget problems unless, like petulant toddlers, they can get their way.
A few Congressman – too few — have called out their colleagues.
"What we're showing is our incompetence, or our downright disdain for the American public," Sen. Tom Coburn, R-OK, said on the Fox Business program Varney & Co.
How the Sequester Has Needlessly Hurt America
Political sniping over the federal budget is one thing, but much of the sequester – the brainchild of President Barack Obama and approved by members of both parties in Congress – was purposely designed to hurt the American public.
In other words, Washington concocted a law diametrically opposed to their stated mission.
Take the crisis over the nation's furloughed air traffic controllers.
As with all federal agencies affected by the sequester, the law prohibited the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) from moving money around to avoid such disasters as forcing air traffic controllers to take days off.
Even more astounding is that according to a leaked internal FAA memo, the plan was to make the situation worse by ordering the controllers to take the same days off!
"How cynical, how un-American is that?" Coburn chided in a Senate floor speech.
And just to prove how avoidable the whole thing was, Congress "solved" that problem on Friday by granting the FAA the authority to transfer money from well-funded accounts to the one that pays the controllers' salaries. (President Obama has indicated he will sign it.)
While that fixes the problem of unnecessary flight delays at the nation's airports, it leaves dozens of similar sequestration problems unresolved. Even the FAA fix lasts only until Sept. 30.
Cancer clinics across the country are still turning away thousands of Medicare patients. Other people who work for the federal government are getting furloughed or are at risk of getting laid off. Aid to the poor has been cut back.
Meanwhile, at least one agency dear to the heart of the Obama administration, such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services – which is working on the implementation of the Affordable Healthcare Act, or Obamacare – have not needed to cut workers' hours or pay.
"So what we have is a contrived situation to make it very painful on the American public rather than live within our means and make the common sense changes," Coburn said on Varney & Co. "I know stupidity and really crass cronyism when I see it, and the fact is this is having real impacts on people's lives when it doesn't need to."
Sequester Brings Out the Worst in Washington
In an effort to force the other side to cave on budget issues, both Republicans and Democrats – but mostly Democrats – have taken every opportunity to twist the sequester into a political bludgeon.
For example, Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-MD, Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-CA, and other Democrats cited the Boston Marathon terror bombings as evidence that the sequester had undermined security.
The comments fit in with a Democratic theme started by the Obama administration warning of the consequences of sequestration in an attempt to strong-arm Republicans into agreeing to a budget deal that would include more tax increases.
Republicans accuse Democrats of having no true interest in spending cuts, and often repeat their ironclad determination to resist any attempt to raise taxes.
So the sequester – and all the pain that it brings — remains with us.
The tragedy of it all is that Washington could fix this problem if enough elected officials really wanted to.
The few who do are lone voices crying out in a wilderness political insanity.
"We have legislation that we have put forward that would provide flexibility across government so we could find savings, eliminate duplication and waste, make sure that we prioritize so that we still find savings and don't impact the public," Sen. John Hoeven, R-ND told Varney & Co.
Really – that doesn't seem so hard, does it?
Related Articles and News:
- Money Morning:
Sequestration Cuts Hit Cancer Patients While Billions Wasted - Money Morning:
Wasteful Government Spending: Duplicate Programs Squander Billions - Energy and Commerce Committee:
Air Traffic Controllers Furloughed, Obamacare Workers Still on the Job - Fox Business:
Sen. Coburn: America Learned to Live With Less, Why Can't Feds? (video) - Fox Business:
Sen. Hoeven: We Can Do Sequester Without Impacting Economy - Associated Press:
Congress approves bill to end airport delays
About the Author
David Zeiler, Associate Editor for Money Morning at Money Map Press, has been a journalist for more than 35 years, including 18 spent at The Baltimore Sun. He has worked as a writer, editor, and page designer at different times in his career. He's interviewed a number of well-known personalities - ranging from punk rock icon Joey Ramone to Apple Inc. co-founder Steve Wozniak.
Over the course of his journalistic career, Dave has covered many diverse subjects. Since arriving at Money Morning in 2011, he has focused primarily on technology. He's an expert on both Apple and cryptocurrencies. He started writing about Apple for The Sun in the mid-1990s, and had an Apple blog on The Sun's web site from 2007-2009. Dave's been writing about Bitcoin since 2011 - long before most people had even heard of it. He even mined it for a short time.
Dave has a BA in English and Mass Communications from Loyola University Maryland.
Dear Sir/Madam
I don't think Washington hates America. it's only corporate America Washington hates.
with there excessive love for money and power. the housing debacle some years ago and Enron
in this world there's all ways enough for the needy but never enough for the greedy
are just two of the many that corporate America manufactured. I'm not anti if i wear i would not be getting your wonderful Monday money which i think is a blast.
thank you for it Fred
You're funny. Washington hates corporate America? ROFLMAO!!! Who do you think is lining politicians pockets? Get an education on the American political system instead of drinking the swill our politicians/talking heads spew.
Politicians aren't America's only problem, blind acceptance of their behavior by people like you is a HUGE problem.
POLITICS
Republicans "often repeat their ironclad determination to resist any attempt to raise taxes". As far as I can see, Republicans are not "resisting" higher Federal taxes near as much as they would like the public to believe. I've noticed some new tax increases enacted by Congress that are effective beginning this year.
Now, how about the contents of Obama's proposed 2014 Budget. Guess what, more taxes. Heard we have not had a "budget" since 2009. Is that right? Nobody in Congress is truly serious about the spending side of the ledger, either. Why pay any attention to the ongoing circus? Circuses are for clowns and 'suckers' ( P.T. Barnum said a new one is born every day).
We got Obama but four failures doomed Romney
Why did the Romney and Ryan ticket lose the election? The reasons are fourfold, because any one reason wouldn't have been enough to cost the republican nominees the race. However, combined they became too big to surmount.
One reason is that Republicans are so myopic concerning economic issues. It often seems as though they only care about economic liberty for employers and job creators alone. They've forgotten to include employees in that picture. Employees would also like to have some economic liberty too. This has only served to create the impression that they are exclusive and disinterested in working Americans.
They often make derogatory remarks about those that have lost their jobs and have been forced to resort to various forms of public assistance. It's as if they believe that, all of a sudden, 23 million Americans decided that they just didn't feel like working anymore. Often forgetting that many of these so-called "trough suckers" and "takers" paid their part into these programs.
Is it any wonder that so many feel that Republicans are out of touch, favor the rich, or just don't care?
Another reason is, they tend to stick their self righteous noses into business that doesn't concern them. They cry about deregulation, smaller government and getting government out of our lives. Yet they pass laws that legislate morals, just so they can tell the rest of us how to live our lives and violate the intent of the US Constitution.
Unless "social conservatives" check their desire to control our lives, "fiscal conservatives" will continue to abandon the Republican Party for Libertarianism. We are tired of the waste, fraud and abuse that is the unending struggle to overturn "Roe v. Wade" and "defining marriage v. gay rights" and funding the "War on Drugs." Why is it so important to prevent people from smoking pot when many of our "Founding Fathers" smoked pipes filled with marijuana while they sat down to write the US Constitution, as well as many of our state constitutions?
To those religious zealots and nut cases that don't know where their rights end and mine begin, who want to push me around, I say this; "Had I wanted a bunch of hypocrites telling me how to live my life, I'd have moved to a Muslim country!" In other words, "Don't tread on me!" Quit alienating people and excluding them from the party, be more inclusive and leave it to the church to do it's job, and with it, the responsibility for addressing our moral issues and needs of the community.
This is what the Founding Fathers meant by separation of church and state; Not that we couldn't post the ten commandments, have religious displays, or pray in public places. They didn't want laws passed that impose religious/moral values that denies us the right to live our lives as we choose. They recognized that "choice" was a God given right, not man's to grant or take away!
The third reason goes back to deregulation, many small bussiness owners feel betrayed. Though given majority control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency for six years (2000-06), as well as majorities in most of the state Legislatures and Governorships, and even the Commissions and Counsels of local governments, Republicans have failed to remove any of the stupid nonsensical rules that prevent small businesses from thriving. This lack of meaningful reform has left Mom & Pop's and taxpayers with endless bureaucratic hurdles, and they are still being punished for their success today.
The only areas that Republicans have seen any success has been removing consumer safety and investor protections. Deregulation has left our retirement savings and homes vulnerable to greedy unethical dregs that prey on honest, hard working Americans. Recently we learned that deregulation is costing many Americans their very lives! As you read this column, Americans are sick and dying from fungal meningitis, because the pharmaceutical industry had lobbied (bought off) our representatives so that a process called "compounding" hasn't gotten the FDA oversight it used to.
Lastly, the republican elite, the leadership at the very top, including Grover Norquist, Karl Rove, and the Koch Brothers etc; snatched defeat from the very jaws of victory by ignoring republican voters during the primaries. These greedy robber barons had so little respect for their constituency and were only concerned with their own self interests. They chose to position their "Manchurian Candidate" to win at any cost and by whatever means necessary; even if it meant hijacking the election by gerrymandering the primaries.
They knew that bumping up the primaries of several key states, would require the electoral college votes to be awarded in an "all-or-nothing" fashion, thus ensuring that the candidate who won the popular vote got all the votes and didn't have to share them with any of the other candidates, as is the normal practice. This prevented the other Republican candidates from having the chance to get any traction.
It wasn't just Ron Paul supporters that were ticked off, but all of the other candidates' including; Michelle Bachman, Herman Cain, Steve Forbes, Newt Gingrich, Sara Palin, Rick Perry, Donald Trump and even Gary Johnson, before he switched over to the Libertarian Party. They were left wondering what sort of "banana republic" the Republican leadership was turning their party into. They did the same for McCain during the '08 race and that didn't go over well either!
To what end? Could it be that only those willing to help them gain control/access of, and to plunder, our nation's treasure, will be allowed to rise to high office in America? Why were they so afraid of Ron Paul, Herman Cain and Gary Johnson? Are they too "fiscally conservative" and therefore too great a threat to be trusted as President of the United States? Are they too "honest" to be allowed to get between them and our tax dollars? Hmm, I wonder…
Until they change their tactics, I, for one, will find it hard to place my trust in them. But who then?! Democrats are just as bad! I'll switch to a third party, maybe Libertarian…
I agree with H. Craig Bradley, take former President Reagan for example, here is my take on the man from a fiscally conservative angle. For my part Reagan and the Bushes were not conservative at all. I always get a chuckle when some one describes themself as a Reagan-conservative. I am amazed at how successful he was at putting the screws to the American people. He left us all with sore backsides and many still have a smile on their face, had I done what he did, I'd have to light up a cigarette afterwards. Mr. Reagan was a Trojan horse and not a conservative at all, and here are but a few of my 18 main reasons why; If you would like a copy of the entire text you may contact me at Notchkids@Juno.com. I will be happy to e-mail you a copy.
1.) Tax cuts:
Reagan did not always instigate hikes or agree to them willingly, but he signed off on them any way. As California's governor, Reagan signed the largest tax hike in that state's history ($1 billion in a $6 billion budget) as well as approving a bill legalizing abortions. One year after his massive tax cut in 1981, as President, Reagan agreed to a tax increase, the 1982 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, to reduce the deficit that restored fully one-third of the previous year's reduction, making it the largest peacetime tax increase in American history. Mr. Reagan then went about making speeches claiming that this three-year, $100 billion tax hike, the largest since World War II, was actually "tax reform" that closed loopholes in his earlier cut and therefore didn't count as raising taxes. Faced with looming deficits, Reagan raised taxes again in 1983 with a gasoline tax and again in 1984, with the Deficit Reduction Act that raised $50 billion over three years, mainly through closing tax loopholes for business. Then there was the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, The Tax Reform Act of 1986, and the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987. Despite the fact that such increases were anything but conservative, Reagan raised taxes a grand total of seven times between 1982-87. No other peacetime president has raised taxes so much on so many people, ever!
3.) Reduced income and capital gains marginal tax rates:
The Tax Reform Act of 1986 and its impact on the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT). The tax reform was ostensibly to reduce or eliminate tax deductions. This legislation expanded the AMT from a law for untaxed rich investors to one refocused on middle class Americans who had children, owned a home, or lived in high tax states. This parallel tax system hits middle class Americans the hardest by reducing their deductions and effectively raising their taxes. Meanwhile, the highest income earners (with incomes exceeding $1,000,000) are proportionately less affected thereby shifting the tax burden away from the richest 0.5%. In 2006, the IRS's National Taxpayer Advocate's report highlighted the AMT as the single most serious problem with the tax code. From 2007 on, the AMT has brought in more tax revenue than the regular tax which has made it difficult for Congress to reform. Additionally those Social Security surpluses that followed the 1983 Social Security reforms were made possible due to the increase in payroll contributions that partially offset any reductions in income taxes during the Reagan years.
9.) National debt:
In order to cover new federal budget deficits, the United States borrowed heavily both domestically and abroad, raising the national debt from $700 billion to $3 trillion, a 429% increase, and the United States moved from being the world's largest international creditor to the world's largest debtor nation. Future President George H. W. Bush, derided Reaganomics as "voodoo economics". Reagan's response when asked about his increasing budgetary deficits and the nation's debt was "Deficits don't matter as long as the economy grows faster than the national debt." Reagan later described the new debt as the "greatest disappointment" of his presidency. While Obama has grown the nation's debt from $10 to $17 trillion, a paltry 70% when compared to Reagan's quadrupling of the national debt!
Reagan gave many pretty and inspirational speeches that conservative radio loves to play over and over. He sure sounded conservative but that's where it all ended, just talk, talk, talk. When you cut out all the banter and measure him by his accomplishments alone, he was actually one of America's most progressive-socialist presidents ever. No wonder the Democrats threw their support behind him, even calling themselves Reagan Democrats! Reagan was himself once a Democrat and a Union negotiator and president who changed parties and claimed he was now of conservative ideology. He was really just a Trojan horse that went about saying one thing, then doing another.
A sober review of Reagan's presidency doesn't yield the seamless conservative record being peddled today. Federal government expanded on his watch. The conservative desire to outlaw abortion was never seriously pursued. Reagan broke with hard liners in his administration and compromised with the Soviets on arms control. His assault on entitlements never materialized; instead he saved and broadened Social Security. He repeatedly ignored the fundamental conservative dogma that taxes should never be raised. Rather than abolish the departments of Energy and Education, as he had promised to do if elected president, Reagan added a new cabinet-level department, one of the largest federal agencies, the Department of Veterans Affairs.
It's just sad that the Republican Party has passed water on the term "conservative" and betrayed the trust of the American people. The Republican Party establishment, maligned by their own brand of progressive elitism, political dynasties, and opportunists have proven themselves to be no better than their Democratic counterparts.
Blaming Democrats more than Republicans shows not only your bias, but your myopia. Republicans are forcing austerity through the sequester and refusing to close any of the myriad tax loopholes, shelters and dodges that unjustly favor the rich. If you still refuse to acknowledge that basic unfairness, you shouldn't be advising anyone on anything until you do.
Government-Approved Illegals !
Speaking of illegals, the government hasn't built the border fence high enough to keep out the un-American criminals who want to take away our freedoms.
Yes, the government hasn't built the White House fence high enough to keep out the un-American criminals who somehow got into the White House and who are now working hard to take away the religious, social, and economic freedoms of true American patriots!
Here are two slogans that Obama would rather not think about: "Unborn babies should have the right to keep and bear arms – and legs and ears and eyes, etc.!" and "Unborn babies should have the same right to be born alive that abortionists had!"
If Obama should ever happen to Google "Dangerous Radicals of the Religious Right," do you think he would feel guilty merely walking in the hallowed halls of that House where true Americans walked?
Is it safe to assume that Mecca Wafers are Obama's favorite candy? And is barack-coli a vegetable or a disease?
(Neither Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid nor any other DemocRAT approved of this message! For more info on Obama in Washingdumb, Google "Obama Supports Public Depravity," "Obama Avoids Bible Verses," and "When Obama Etc. Leave Office.")