Progressive Caucus: ” Just Cancel the Sequester”

Right on:

How to fix the sequester? Cancel it.

That’s right; Congress can just cancel the sequester. Anything Congress can do, Congress can undo. So Congress can undo the sequester. The latest to call for this solution is the Congressional Progressive Caucus (the CPC), which I’ve been writing about. From the office of the two leaders, Raúl Grijalva and Keith Ellison:

If Congress cannot come up with a replacement to the sequester before the end of the week, we should eliminate the sequester entirely. One million working Americans should not be forced to pay the price for Republican stubbornness. If this goes into effect, it will be one of the most irresponsible legislative failures in the history of the Republic.


  1. Why?

  2. Universally acknowledged we’re talking about $44 billion in expense cuts.

    Let it happen.

    If Obama is right and the world will hurtle off its axis, the Democratic party will be in the drivers seat for many many years to come. If Obama is wrong, you’re fucked.

    Funny how you’re arguing so hard that it not happen…..

    • Jon Geeting says:

      LOL no it definitely is not “universally acknowledged”. Maybe in winger world where you read your news. Bernanke just said yesterday it would cost 0.5-1% of 2013 GDP. That’s insane. Why would we do that?

      • According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in its February 2013 report on the budget outlook, “Discretionary outlays will drop by $35 billion and mandatory spending will be reduced by $9 billion this year as a direct result of those procedures [sequestration]; additional reductions in outlays attributable to the cuts in 2013 funding will occur in later years.”

        $44 billion Jon, signed by the CBO.

        • Jon Geeting says:

          It’s $85 billion, this year alone.

          • So you’re saying the CBO is wrong?

            And I’ll ask again – the potential for political gain here is enormous, the best opportunity the Democrats have had in decades. You’ve strongly advocating ruining people’s lives many times, and for alot less of an upside than this. Why is this different? Why all of a sudden are people more important than Party?

          • Jon Geeting says:

            I’m saying that you’re wrong. Everybody else is using the $85 billion number for 2013 cuts.

            I think the political upside could be big for Democrats, since people are primed to blame the Republicans, but I don’t see the point in playing games with the economy. It’s stupid. We shouldn’t be doing anything contractionary.

          • So you’re disagreeing with the CBO? Interesting, I’ll have to remember this when you cite them as an incontrovertible source.

            You’re not ethical enough to not want to crush people for Party control. I think you know that, at least for the first year, this is no big deal at all. And if all your scare-mongering doesn’t pay off, then Democrats look weak. You’d never take that risk.

          • Jon Geeting says:

            Every mainstream news source is saying there’ll be $85 billion in cuts in 2013. Why would I believe an anonymous commenter’s claim that it’s only $35 billion?

  3. Jon Geeting says:

    Because we shouldn’t lop 0.5-1% off GDP this year and throw a bunch of people out of work for no reason.

    • You’ve strongly advocated destruction of lives for political purposes before, in hateful disgusting terms.

      Why is this different? You’ll be in charge for a long time – if you’re right.

      • Jon Geeting says:

        I’ve had one position through the entire recession: more expansionary policy. Austerity is contractionary, and we shouldn’t let it happen, precisely because people’s lives are getting ruined, skills eroded, etc.

Speak Your Mind