# Any catastrophes from the sequester yet? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 1, 2013, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394 "2013-07-01T21:47:49Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/21 "2013-07-02T13:38:35Z")
I’ll take it that you concede the point then, and leave it to **Tapioca Dextrin** to explain whether more was implied than I stated. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/22 "2013-07-02T13:45:25Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > It hasn’t had any impact upon presidential travel..$100 million for the trip to Africa. The NERVE of that uppity black guy, acting as if he has the right to do what presidents do! The sequester is being felt by the voiceless members of society. Those dependent on Meals on Wheels, pre-K education, the unemployed. When Congress saw that they might get flight delays, they took money from airport construction. So instead of minor repairs to runways now, we might have to make major repairs later. They’ll spend a dollar tomorrow to save a nickel today. As the economy grows, the deficits are reducing on their own. If you’re serious about the debt, just repeal all the Bush tax cuts and increase the estate tax. If you’re not serious about it, then talk about making spending cuts. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/23 "2013-07-02T17:58:26Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Advantaged people are less likely to notice cutbacks that affect the disadvantaged. Let’s look at some of the examples that you mentioned. How about Head Start. [Study](http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/head-start-tragic-waste-money) after [study](http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/05/head-start-program-fraudulent-and-ineffective#_edn1) has shown that Head Start completely fails at its stated goal of improving education for the poor. Even [liberal Democrats](http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2081778,00.html) cite it as a program that obviously should get the ax. Why should we continue spending money on a government program when research by the government itself says that the program doesn’t work? Shouldn’t we be happy that less money is being wasted on this program? You also mention Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs) and imply that this somehow affects “the disadvantaged”. Would it surprise you to learn that a great deal of the money from CDBGs [goes to rich areas](http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/downsizing-the-federal-government.pdf)? CDBGs were created in 1974 to channel federal money to low-income urban areas for key services such as fire and police. But today, the program spreads taxpayer largesse widely to some of the wealthiest areas of the country, often for dubious projects. All urban areas with 50,000 or more people are eligible for the program, not just the needy ones. The federal budget noted that the program pays for such projects as the installation of traffic lights in wealthy Newton, Massachusetts. … CDBG spending subsidizes private businesses and pays for niceties that ought to be paid for locally, such as shopping malls and parking lots. … The CDBG program was instituted to aid low-income areas, but today a substantial share of its money goes to wealthy jurisdictions. In one year, Greenwich, Connecticut, received five times more funding per low-income resident than Camden,NewJersey. Yet Greenwich has per capita income six times higher than Camden’s. CDBG spending has been shifted from poorer to wealthier communities in recent years. The CDBG program has been rated ‘‘ineffective’’ by the president’s budget office due to its ‘‘lack of clarity’’ and ‘‘weak targeting of funds." It’s a classic example of how big-government liberals give money to the rich while pretending that they’re helping the poor. Once again, shouldn’t we be happy that this stuff is getting cut? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/24 "2013-07-02T18:09:47Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Once again, shouldn’t we be happy that this stuff is getting cut? Sequester cuts good programs by the same percentage as bad programs. Why aren’t you outraged that [insert name of what you think is the best government program out there] is cut by the same percentage as [insert name of the worst government program you can think of]. Shouldn’t bad programs be cut, and good programs be spared? ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/25 "2013-07-02T18:42:50Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I don’t think you understand the import of your block quote, much less the rest of the Washington Post reporting, if you think it vindicates your position. You do understand that the $300 million was not actually cut, right? You understand that the sequester did not affect whether that money was spent? The amount of money that was taken from government funds and given to the Justice Department was reduced by $300 million, compared to what had been budgeted at the start of the year. It sounds like a cut to me. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Sequester cuts good programs by the same percentage as bad programs. Why aren’t you outraged that [insert name of what you think is the best government program out there] is cut by the same percentage as [insert name of the worst government program you can think of]. Shouldn’t bad programs be cut, and good programs be spared? I am outraged that President Obama and Congressional Democrats have not proposed to completely eliminate Head Start, CDBGs, and other useless government programs. So outraged, in fact, that I don’t vote for Democrats. I’m sure you concur that my response is the correct one. ---
**Author:** ![nate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nate/32/13085_2.png) [@nate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nate)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/26 "2013-07-02T18:46:29Z")
650,000 DoD employees are going to start to feel the sequester cuts rather personally next Thursday. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/27 "2013-07-02T18:46:48Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > The amount of money that was taken from government funds and given to the Justice Department was reduced by $300 million, compared to what had been budgeted at the start of the year. It sounds like a cut to me. Then I guess my point is made. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/28 "2013-07-02T18:51:35Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > I am outraged that President Obama and Congressional Democrats have not proposed to completely eliminate Head Start, CDBGs, and other useless government programs. So outraged, in fact, that I don’t vote for Democrats. I’m sure you concur that my response is the correct one. No, you didn’t respond to the substance of my question at all. I ask why you support cutting programs you hate by the same percentage as programs that you think are useful (not sure if you think any government program is useful, though); and you respond with your voting habits. Go ahead, ask me any question about sequester. I’ll start talking about campaign finance reform. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/29 "2013-07-02T18:54:24Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > I am outraged that President Obama and Congressional Democrats have not proposed to completely eliminate Head Start, CDBGs, and other useless government programs. So outraged, in fact, that I don’t vote for Democrats. I’m sure you concur that my response is the correct one. It may be..but for an entirely different question than was asked. How you voted has nothing to do with how you feel about programs that you consider to be “good” being cut along with programs that you consider to be “bad”. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/30 "2013-07-02T19:03:04Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Looking through those impacts, a number of them estimate what would have happened if Congress froze all spending at 2012 levels and then instituted a sequester on top of that. When funding is frozen at prior levels, program-by-program adjustments are not possible, so too much money is available for some programs, and not enough for others. Some of the “not felt” examples were predicted before Congress passed an appropriations bill to fix those budget problems, meaning the “double whammy” of sequester based off inaccurate budget numbers just didn’t happen. Oddly enough, I do not recall hearing the President or any other Democrat saying in February that the predictions of catastrophic post-sequester events were not going to come true because of the appropriations bill passed in January. > [@](#): > > Let me ask you something: is it important to have 17 squadrons of Air Force aircraft ready to deploy? No. > [@](#): > > But let me ask you this: if making large cuts to government programs is really the answer, why hasn’t austerity worked out better for Europe? This thread is about the sequester and its effect on the USA. If you’d like to start another thread to discuss what’s taken place in Europe, I’d be happy to participate. > [@](#): > > And by the way, have you noticed that CBO has lowered its estimates for the deficit this year by more than $200 billion? Not based on budget cuts, but “mostly as a result of higher-than-expected revenues and an increase in payments to the Treasury by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.” If revenues are higher than expected, that would certainly seem to indicate that the economy is doing better than expected. Considering that many Democrats insisted that the economy would go into recession as a result of the sequester, I guess that means said Democrats were dead wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/31 "2013-07-02T19:14:52Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Oddly enough, I do not recall hearing the President or any other Democrat saying in February that the predictions of catastrophic post-sequester events were not going to come true **because of the appropriations bill passed in January**. The letters cited in the WaPo article were dated February 5, February 8, February 11, February 6, February 1, January 31, February 14, February 5, February 11, and February 7, if I captured all of them correctly. The appropriations bill was passed by the House on March 6, the Senate on March 20, and signed into law by the President on March 26. So, once again, I question your command on the matters being discussed here. ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/32 "2013-07-02T19:26:18Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > No, you didn’t respond to the substance of my question at all. I ask why you support cutting programs you hate by the same percentage as programs that you think are useful (not sure if you think any government program is useful, though); In the thread on the sequester back in April, I answered both of those questions, specifically, multiple times. Concerning why I support the sequester, rather than targeted cuts aimed at useless programs like Head Start, I said this: Okay, when can I expect the Obama Administration or Congressional Democrats to propose the elimination of Head Start or any of the other federal programs that have been classified as failures by government research? If the answer is “never”, then it seems I should take whatever cuts I can get, rather then holding my breath and waiting for the Democrats to cut federal spending in the proper way. Concerning whether I think any government program is useful, I said this: Let me be clear, just in case anyone tries to paraphrase me again. You ask whether I think any government program “is very important, successful, and an example of how taxpayer money ought to be spent.” Some programs fit part of the description but not all of it. For instance, we should have a military to defend our country, so the military is necessary. We haven’t been invaded lately, so the military is successful. But we could easily defend our country while spending far less on the military. Most of our military budget is spent on evil things (invading Iraq, torturing innocent people to death) or useless things (ferries that are never used and get sold for less than 1% of their original price, research on new types of beef jerky). So the military is not a good example of how taxpayer money ought to be used. Or to take another example, let’s look at the Department of Transportation. I would agree that we’d be a very different country if we didn’t have Interstate Highways, Airports, and some much-used bridges, tunnels, and so forth. So the Department of Transportation does some important things and, inasmuch as all of us can drive or fly nearly anywhere in the country without much hassle, it’s been successful. It also repairs abandoned, useless bridges in Ohio and and builds a bronze statue of Herbert Hoover’s wife. I don’t understand how a bronze statue of Herbert Hoover’s wife will transport anyone to anywhere, so I don’t see why the Department of Transportation is paying for it. Thus the Department of Transportation is not a good example of how taxpayer money ought to be used. ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/33 "2013-07-02T19:26:50Z")
No catastrophes that I’m aware of - and I never expected there to be. But I think it is getting to the point where folk are going to have to get used to a lower quality of services. Many folk outside of government do not realize the great number of retirements there have been over the past decade, and that retirees have either not been replaced or have been replaced with lower graded (less expensive and - oftentimes less qualified) employees. Or jobs have been combined with 1 employee doing what was previously done by 2. Nothing earthshattering, but I’ve worked for the fed gov’t for 25 yrs or so, and am seeing more and more instances where the institutional knowledge is terribly lacking. And I feel as tho I am seeing more frequent simple errors. Now it would be REALLY nice if spending were being cut in a rational manner, by weighing which programs/positions were expendible/critical. But slashing x% across the board simply lowers the quality across the board. Think of how the airline industry changed, when services disappeared and employees turned surly, and a cost was added for everything. I envision a similar future for government services. (No, I’m not suggesting government clerks were ever the model of cheerfulness! But the system as a whole had - IMO - an underlying competence.) And the tricky thing about government services is, you never really know when you are going to need them. I’m very concerned about the implications on infrastructure. Tiny example - tonight I’m going to be driving across a one-lane bridge. Well, there are 2-lanes, but the bridge is old, and needs repair. So it is cheaper to just restripe it and make it one lane. Scale that one bridge up to EVERY DAMN THING the government does. Not a future I’m proud of. But hey, so long as I have a few more coins in my pocket, it is someone else’s problem, no? ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/34 "2013-07-02T19:32:13Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The appropriations bill was passed by the House on March 6, the Senate on March 20, and signed into law by the President on March 26. Very well, I was confused about which appropriations bill was being discussed; I apologize. Nonetheless, I don’t recall the President or any other Democrat saying in late March that the predictions of catastrophic post-sequester events were not going to come true either. Our last thread on this topic was in April, after all, and prophecies of doom were still being made in large numbers. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/35 "2013-07-02T19:39:25Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Our last thread on this topic was in April, after all, and prophecies of doom were still being made in large numbers. In large numbers on this board? Where? ---
**Author:** ![ITR\_champion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/c67d28/32.png) [@ITR\_champion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ITR_champion)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/36 "2013-07-02T20:34:22Z")
In the [thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=687143) that I’ve already linked to and referenced. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/37 "2013-07-02T21:11:53Z")
> [@ITR\_champion](#): > > Concerning whether I think any government program is useful, I said this: > > Let me be clear, just in case anyone tries to paraphrase me again. You ask whether I think any government program “is very important, successful, and an example of how taxpayer money ought to be spent.” Some programs fit part of the description but not all of it. For instance, we should have a military to defend our country, so the military is necessary. We haven’t been invaded lately, so the military is successful. But we could easily defend our country while spending far less on the military. Most of our military budget is spent on evil things (invading Iraq, torturing innocent people to death) or useless things (ferries that are never used and get sold for less than 1% of their original price, research on new types of beef jerky). So the military is not a good example of how taxpayer money ought to be used. > > Or to take another example, let’s look at the Department of Transportation. I would agree that we’d be a very different country if we didn’t have Interstate Highways, Airports, and some much-used bridges, tunnels, and so forth. So the Department of Transportation does some important things and, inasmuch as all of us can drive or fly nearly anywhere in the country without much hassle, it’s been successful. It also repairs abandoned, useless bridges in Ohio and and builds a bronze statue of Herbert Hoover’s wife. I don’t understand how a bronze statue of Herbert Hoover’s wife will transport anyone to anywhere, so I don’t see why the Department of Transportation is paying for it. Thus the Department of Transportation is not a good example of how taxpayer money ought to be used. Here’s the thing: if you think a $77 billion Department of Transportation is seriously tainted by a $145,000 expenditure, you have an exceedingly high threshold for propriety that I don’t think any institution, agency, or person in this world could possibly meet. ---
**Author:** ![TruCelt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/trucelt/32/523_2.png) [@TruCelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TruCelt)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/38 "2013-07-02T21:18:37Z")
We’ll, if you’re willing to accept a very personal definition of “catastrophe” I got laid off last week. And although generally I have always had three phone calls within a week of word getting out that I’m looking, I’m actually turning up one hiring freeze after another. I did know it was a possibility, and have been looking for almost two months now. So it’s safe to say that this could be VERY BAD INDEED. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2013, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/39 "2013-07-02T21:25:50Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Here’s the thing: if you think a $77 billion Department of Transportation is seriously tainted by a $145,000 expenditure, you have an exceedingly high threshold for propriety that I don’t think any institution, agency, or person in this world could possibly meet. How much _did_ the measure cut from the DOT’s budget? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2013, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394/40 "2013-07-03T00:37:11Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > How much _did_ the measure cut from the DOT’s budget? Do you know and you’re asking me, or are you asking me to do some homework? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/any-catastrophes-from-the-sequester-yet/662394.md?page=3)