| On March 1 the U.S. Congress did not meet its deadline to pass a budget making more than $1.2 trillion in cuts, mostly to social programs, over the next ten years. The cuts are known this time not as a "fiscal cliff," that had to be avoided, but instead a "sequester" (defined as a general cut to government spending). Now $85 billion in across the board cuts to social programs and defense are to take place by the end of the fiscal year in October 2013. As well, the failure to pass a budget is being used as further evidence that Congress is completely dysfunctional when it comes to budget matters. It is notable that in all the talk about how divisive things are in Congress, both sides agree the sequester is not in any way to harm troops engaged in war. While there is talk that defense cuts may harm military readiness, there is no talk about ending war funding and bringing all troops home as a solution, something that would more than cover the whole $85 billion and contribute to peace. Instead, the hundreds of thousands of civilian Pentagon workers are going to be the first and hardest hit, forced to take unpaid days off (furloughs). This is a direct attack on their wages, for some perhaps as much as a 20 per cent cut. It is also the case that Pentagon department heads can pick and choose who gets the furloughs, based on an arbitrary designation of who is "most needed" for "national security" reasons. The sequester is thus being used to undermine and effectively eliminate contracts, with defined wages and seniority, while pitting workers against each other. Similar furloughs are expected for federal workers in other departments. According to a union representative of federal workers, 82 per cent of respondents in a recent survey said they would have difficulty paying for rent, utilities and food expenses, while 63 per cent said they would need to take money out of savings or retirement accounts to make ends meet. Federal workers have already been forced to accept $103 billion in cuts in the name of "deficit" reduction, in the form of pay freezes for the past three years and reduced retirement benefits for future hires. In addition, according to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Report to Congress on the cuts required by the sequestration there will be a 2 per cent cut to Medicare and 5.1 per cent cuts to other non-exempt non-defense mandatory programs. Cuts to education are expected to cause as many as 40,000 teachers and staff to be laid off or fired. More than half a million women and children across the U.S. will no longer have access to food aid due to reductions in the Women, Infants and Children program. Overall it is expected that the most immediate attacks will be on the workers themselves and on the people who need the social services they provide. It remains to be seen whether plans to cut Social Security by changing the way cost of living increases are calculated, something supported by Obama and Republicans, will now occur. Attacking seniors by raising the retirement age to 67, and raising its corresponding eligibility for Medicare, may also be part of up coming deals. Will Obama Seize Control of Purse Strings? While Obama opposed the sequester and made various other proposals, all including significant cuts to social programs, he did not take executive action to block it. Instead he repeatedly made predictions about its impact on the economy and defense, with his administration using words like "harsh," "painful," "disruptive" and "destructive." While providing this groundwork of stopping "destructive," and "painful" cuts as justification to intervene, it appears at present that Obama is biding his time in moving more decisively to put control of the purse strings in the hands of the executive. Control of the budget is one of the few powers Congress has still retained, but their continued failure to actually pass a budget, beyond the separate bill needed for the Pentagon, which always passes, has further discredited them. The dysfunction of Congress is such that news reports in the week leading up to the March 1 deadline talked about both sides proposing "bills meant to fail." The sequester itself follows the "fiscal cliff," which followed the battle over raising the deficit ceiling in 2011, a battle that produced the cuts now required. That deal was said to be a means to force Congress to pass a budget with more measured cuts. Instead it was designed to impose one crisis after the other by requiring trillions in cuts for "deficit" reduction. Congress always comes out as dysfunctional and discredited while the notion that the deficit simply must be cut is endlessly repeated. At this point, the next crisis may be the end of March, when a bill providing emergency funding to keep government functioning is required. Or it may be in May, when yet another battle on the deficit ceiling will arise. Or the crisis may take the form of Obama stating, as cuts to the Pentagon are implemented, that they have created a threat to national security and as president he must act because Congress cannot. In this direction, Obama is continuing to develop his coalition of centrists while also appealing directly to the people to support him against Congress. Hagel, his pick for Secretary of Defense is considered a centrist. As well, speaking in Newport News, Virginia February 26, at the manufacturing plant where the Navy's nuclear submarines and other ships are built, Obama emphasized that he had two centrists standing with him. These were Republican Scott Rigell of the House and Democrat Bobby Scott of the Senate. Saying he is ready to compromise and that there is a "sensible way to reduce the deficit" Obama added, "There are leaders in both parties throughout this country who want to do the same. I've got to give Scott Rigell credit. He is one of your Republican congressmen who's with us here today -- and that's not always healthy for a Republican, being with me. But the reason he's doing it is because he knows it's important to you. And he's asked his colleagues in the House to consider closing tax loopholes instead of letting these automatic cuts go through. He's concerned about the deficit, and he's more than prepared to make some really tough cuts, but he wants to do it in a smart way. Bobby Scott -- same thing. Some of the cuts we've proposed, Bobby might not think are perfect, but he knows that we've got to make some tough decisions." In this manner, Obama continues to put in place conditions, including justifications, for people inside and outside of Congress to support executive actions to seize control of the purse strings. Such a move poses grave dangers to the peoples at home and abroad, as it provides unlimited funding for Obama's lawless state, with its drone warfare. It also goes against the requirement of modern democracy, which is that the people themselves are empowered to govern and decide the budget and all matters of the economy, war, environment and political affairs. |