“Sequestration.” As of now, it’s one of the top search terms, high on the “Google Trend” list, save for Jodi Arias, Dancing With the Stars, Mediterranean diet, Wissam Al Mana, Michelle Obama Oscars, and Oscar winners. It’s a great place to be, at the Google Insight For Search 100, because just last week, Buzzfeed was lamenting that “Sequestration,” wasn’t generating much traffic, and comparing its importance as a search topic to “Mitt Romney.” (The real issue is Buzzfeed’s decision to focus its media business model on politicians rather than celebrities, but that’s another story.)
But “Sequestration” is front and center in the news, and that’s because on March 1st, unless the President and Congress take action, automatic cuts in various programs will take place – or should.
Many who talk about “Sequestration,” in the media act as though they’ve never read the actual bill. Well, this blogger did, and issued a blog post and vlog directed at the TV pundit who feels she has to wear a “conservative” label, (though I prefer the term couch-potato conservative), SE Cupp – this one:
What I blogged about The Budget Control Act Of 2011, was this:
At the final Presidential Debate, President Obama said that “First of all, the sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed. It will not happen.” He was talking specifically about the process of automatic spending cuts that is set to take place if, as the law reads in Section 251, “If, after June 30, an appropriation for fiscal year in progress is enacted that causes a breach the within a category for that year (after taking into account any sequestration of amounts within that category), the discre- tionary spending limits for that category for the next fiscal year shall be reduced by the amount or amounts of that breach….The President doesn’t have to present a plan, he just has to increase the debt ceiling. Moreover, the act specifically states on page 3 of the act “(3) MILITARY PERSONNEL.—If the President uses the authority to exempt any personnel account from sequestration under section 255(f), each account within subfunctional category 051 (other than those military personnel accounts for which the authority provided under section 255(f) has been exercised) shall be further reduced by a dollar amount calculated by multiplying the enacted level of non-exempt budgetary resources in that account at that time by the uniform percent- age necessary to offset the total dollar amount by which outlays are not reduced in military personnel accounts by reason of the use of such authority.”
It’s worth it to take time and read the bill:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s365enr/pdf/BILLS-112s365enr.pdf
The Question Is, Will Obama Protect Military Personnel?
The question raised here is will President Obama work to protect Military Personnel from Sequestration? Well, it’s a good idea to look at what the President did when this issue came up last year.
According to The Hill, the Obama Administration sent a letter on July 31st, explaining that he would do just that. Then Acting Office of Management and Budget Director Jeffrey Zients told House Speaker John Boehner and Vice President Joe Biden, the President Of The Senate.
While there’s no reason to believe President Obama will not do that this time around, there’s every reason to think POTUS is using the issue to turn Republicans against each other, and once again make the GOP look like its not working for the American People.
Just how long President Obama will keep this up is the question; he hasn’t much time at all to put the part of the 2011 Budget Control Act into play that allows him to, once again, protect military personnel. The clock is ticking.
Stay tuned.
Bill Carroll