A more accurate view:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/22/us/politics...ester.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/22/us/politics...ester.html
Quote:Q. What is the origin of the sequester?
A. It emerged from the refusal of House Republicans to raise the debt ceiling in 2011 without significant deficit reduction. In response, the two parties agreed to the Budget Control Act, which cut domestic spending over the next 10 years by about $1 trillion. Democrats refused to agree to more cuts without additional revenue from taxes, and Republicans refused to agree to tax increases.
Instead, Congress set up a committee to find further deficit reduction. To push the committee to reach a deal, negotiators established a fallback mechanism meant to be so onerous it would never happen: $1.2 trillion in across-the-board, automatic cuts to both military and domestic programs, set to begin this year.
Continue reading the main story
Q. Why didn’t they take effect on Jan. 1?
A. The New Year’s Eve deal to head off automatic tax increases delayed the cuts for two months. The deal also reduced the size of the cuts by $24 billion, out of a total of $109 billion this year, with a combination of cuts and tax revenue measures.
Q. Why the word “sequester”?
A. In past decades, budget laws have periodically allowed the executive branch to make small across-the-board spending cuts to the levels initially appropriated by Congress. These cuts are known as “sequestration” because the government withdraws the money after Congress has released it.
The looming sequestration is much larger than previous ones, though. Over the full fiscal year — Oct. 1 to Sept. 30 — the cuts would equal roughly 5 percent of nonmilitary programs and 8 percent of defense programs. Because they would hit almost halfway through the fiscal year, the White House Office of Management and Budget estimates the true impact for the final seven months to be closer to 9 percent for nondefense programs and 13 percent for defense programs.
Q. Whose idea was it?
A. That is in dispute. Republicans say the White House came up with the idea. Democrats agree, to a point. But Democrats explain that the president proposed a mix of automatic tax increases and domestic cuts.
Republicans rejected that mix and said they would instead accept another idea they had traditionally opposed: military cuts. Regardless, the Budget Control Act, including the cuts, passed on a bipartisan vote that included almost all Republican leaders, and President Obama signed it.
Q. Can the federal departments and agencies choose which programs to cut, sparing those that officials consider vital?
A. No. Under the rules, the percentage cuts must apply to specific programs, projects and activities. Everything is subject to the same percentage cut. That spreads the pain, but it also prevents agency managers from focusing the cuts on programs that may be ineffective or inefficient — and protecting those that may affect public health and safety.
