From Congressman Brian Higgins
Here's a List of How The Cuts
Would Hit Western New York:
Conservative estimates suggest that sequestration will cost Americans more than 1 million public and private sector jobs.
Automatic budget sequestration will trigger spending cuts of $1.2 trillion over 10 years, including $109 billion in 2013. Sequestration cannot be viewed in the abstractions of Washington. Its real consequences will be felt hard by real people in real communities throughout this nation, including Buffalo in Western New York.
Cancer Patients: The 8.2% or $54 billion in domestic spending cuts funding to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) that supports clinical trials for new cancer treatments. If you're a patient at Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo and you're diagnosed with late stage cancer you don't have the luxury of time that these cuts demand. Lost lives & lost time - that's what sequestration means to cancer patients in Buffalo and throughout the nation.
Defense Industry: The 9.4% or $55 billion cut in defense spending. MOOG, leader in motion control technology, with a thriving defense unit, a $2.5 billion company that employs 8400 people takes a major hit. Lost jobs & lost technological advances - that's what sequestration means to the defense industry in Buffalo and throughout the nation.
Our Military: If Congress does not act to prevent the sequester the Air Force will be forced to delay construction of the $6.1 million flight simulator at the Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station. There would also be a real impact on jobs - 2,300 Air Force civilians in New York State, including workers at Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station, will be furloughed, causing $17.7 million in lost wages across the state. Lost investment & lost jobs - that’s what sequestration means for Niagara Falls and local military.
Border Crossings: Facing more than half a billion dollars in cuts, the Department of Homeland Security would not be able to maintain current staffing levels which would not only impact safety but increase wait times at our Nation’s land ports of entry, including the 4 local border crossings, and the Buffalo & Niagara Falls airports. Secretary Napolitano predicts sequester could cause 4 hour waits at our busiest land ports. Less security & a slower economy - that’s what sequestration means Western New York and local businesses and residents dependent on the efficient flow of traffic across our borders.
Local Economy: In 2011 $23.6 billion in NIH-supported medical research generated $69 billion in other new economic activity, creating and supporting nearly 433,000 jobs. Based on an analysis by United for Medical Research, in New York State alone sequestration could result in over $101 million in cuts to biomedical research and 1,600 job losses. Halted research & lost jobs - that’s what sequestration means for the Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus.
Other Consequences of the Sequester:
Health Care via Centers for Disease Control Grants
from Jill Schlesinger
"19 months after it was originally conceived, sequestration week has finally arrived!
Unless a last-minute deal occurs in the days ahead, the government will implement the first phase of across-the-board spending cuts, which will amount to $85 billion in 2013.
My favorite news producer calls sequestration the U.S. version of European austerity. Of course, things haven’t worked out too well across the pond, where drastic eurozone budget cuts have slashed economic growth and caused unemployment to spike. Last week, the European Union said it expects that the 17-nation eurozone bloc is likely to contract by 0.3 percent this year amid 11 percent unemployment. It would be the second year in a row and the third year in the last five that the region has been in recession.
The results of European austerity should be a warning to those who think that sequestration wouldn’t be that big of a deal. The blunt cuts are likely to slow economic growth by 0.5 percent and cause job losses of 750,000. While sequestration is not likely to derail the economy enough to cause another recession, real people will suffer direct effects and many others will encounter indirect effects (note to travelers: airports are likely to be a mess in the aftermath of sequestration!)
It is either amusing or annoying to consider that when the sequester was conceived in August 2011 during the debt ceiling negotiations, it was thought to be a deterrent -- a plan so absurd and dangerous that it would force both sides to come to the table. Obviously there is nothing too absurd for politicians!
Meanwhile, sequestration has become accepted as a fait accompli among investors, who have built in the ensuing slowdown into their 2013 forecasts. The economy is expected to sputter along at about 2 percent annualized growth, which nearly matches the pace seen in the last two years. But it was not sequestration that caused the first signs of anxiety in markets last week.
Prof. Peter Morici
Economist, University of Maryland
Morici is a recognized expert on economic policy and international economics. Prior to joining the University of Maryland, he served as director of the Office of Economics at the U.S. International Trade Commission. He is the author of 18 books and monographs and has published widely in leading public policy and business journals
Prof. Morici writes:
President Obama has taken the middle class hostage in a thinly veiled bid to hike their taxes.
Having refused to work with Congress to reduce spending by $1.2 over ten years, as he agreed when drafting the Budget Act of 2011, the President must now implement $85 billion in across-the-board cuts to defense and non-entitlement government spending.
House Republicans have offered ease burdens on the public-by increasing Administration flexibility in implementing those cuts in the continuing resolution to keep the government funded passed by March 27-but the President wants no part in that.
Instead, he campaigns across the country, painting the dire consequences sequestration will impose if new revenues are not raised, as he proposes, by limiting tax deductions benefiting the wealthy. That is a cynical ploy-Mr. Obama talks like President Truman but taxes like King George.
Taxes imposed at his insistence on January 1 eliminated 80 percent of the benefits of tax deductions-mortgage interest, state income taxes, local property levies, and the like-for wealthier households. Any substantial gains from further tightening deductions must come from similarly limiting their use by middle-class taxpayers.
Already, by hiking social security tax rates, the majority of $155 billion in additional revenue obtained on January 1 was extracted from the working poor and middle class families, and federal revenues share of GDP will now substantially exceed its average for the last 40 years.
And the President is unwilling to acknowledge the government is spending is flying out of control. Over the last five years, outlays are up $1 trillion-three times the amount required by inflation-and tax revenues are short because high rates and burdensome regulations are choking economic growth and jobs creation.
Instead, the President threatens furloughed meat inspectors, food shortages and streets without police. His cabinet secretaries threaten three hour waits at airport security, reduced embassy protection and border patrols, and the list goes on ....
Appropriation legislation does limit President's ability to allocate cuts among departments. However, even without additional legislation, he has considerable discretion in allocating the 10 percent spending cuts within departments, but the President has refused to entertain options that would limit the pain in his pursuit of higher taxes.
For example, the Agriculture Department has one of the largest staffs of economists in the world-surely, safe food is more important than yet another dull research paper. Military bands could stand down to maintain Marine guards at embassies.
Repeatedly, the President has exclaimed if Congressional Republicans don't cooperate, spending cuts now could derail the hard won recovery. It puzzles why he believes $85 billion in spending cuts could make such a difference, when avoiding those cuts through higher taxes would not.
Whether a second recession occurs is already baked in the cake. Mr. Obama's $150 billion January tax hikes, and similar rate increases imposed by Democratic governors from Maryland to California, have forced consumers to trim purchases. Retailers and wholesalers are reporting weaker traffic and are trimming inventories, and corporate leaders have announced plans to cut new investments and hiring owing to weak demand and more burdensome health care costs and regulations.
When Americans can't get hamburger at the supermarket and unemployment rises this spring, the President will blame on Republicans for permitting sequestration, but it is the American people that bear the burden of his inflexibility, disregard for the facts and neglect in undertaking the responsibilities of his office.