Pat Toomey: "Bring on the sequester"


Toomey says sequester won’t be that bad

Congress designed the “sequester” – the set of across-the-board budget cuts set to take effect in March – to be so drastic it would force legislators to come up with a compromise.

That hasn’t happened. With a week to go, President Barack Obama continues to roll out previews of the unhappy consequences and unhappy managers of federal agencies to pressure lawmakers.

During a Thursday visit to Philadelphia, U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey essentially said, “Bring it on.”

“The fact is that any competent manager can find some savings,” Toomey said. “Most people in government will claim they can never save a dime. It’s just not true.”

The fiscally conservative Republican from Pennsylvania thinks cuts could be more targeted than those in the sequester, which spare a few large programs such as Social Security, but otherwise enact the same cuts to all. However, in his words, “A modest amount of savings in the various bureaucracies of government would really help a long way and get us on a sustainable fiscal path.”

He pointed out that the phased cuts in the sequester will not cause an overall reduction in spending next year, but simply put a dent in growth.

He has allies in his corner. A new poll from Pew and USA Today finds that 40 percent of Americans say they’re ready for the cuts to go ahead. About 50 percent want the sequester stopped.

Forecasters expect the sequester will slow the U.S. economic recovery. And the Congressional Budget Office has pegged the potential loss at 0.7 percent of GDP growth.
Toomey says to expect more “battles.” He identified three opportunities in the coming months to bargain for budget cuts.

“One of them is the sequester; another is the continuing resolution that funds the government; and the third one coming up soon is the debt ceiling.” he said.

The sequester scenario was created in negotiations over the debt ceiling back in July of 2011. The political wrangling led Standard & Poor’s to downgrade the country’s credit rating for the first time.


Toomey is right…and the 50% who don’t want the sequester consists of politicians, government workers and those who can’t spell “sequester”.


I want the sequester to happen.
Obama thought it up.
Both parties agreed to it.
And it is a start of cutting massive out of control spending.


Oh don’t worry, they will “save us” from all the nasty savings.




What passes for our political leaders are arguing over slowing the real GROWTH of federal spending, not cutting it. Spending and debt continues to increase year over year, sequester or no sequester. So, we end up in the same grave, it simply will take us a little longer to arrive at that destination.

In my opinion, at the VERY MINIMUM we should begin with an immediate freeze on spending at our current level, with the caveat that a maximum year to year spending increase matching the CPI would be allowed. Right now federal spending is increasing at a rate of 5% to 7% per year. Spending increases indexed to the CPI would put the increase at 2% this year, for example. At the same time we need to address Soc Sec and Medicare. The average American lives MUCH longer today than was the case in 1937. As a consequence, the 1937 funding/cash flow model does not work in 2013. We are going to have to index when one is eligible to collect benefits based on the increased longevity of our citizens. Phasing in such indexing would be the correct thing to do. The point is, we are going to have to make adjustments - IMHO.

These two adjustments - spending and entitlement - coupled with the administration standing down on its war on capitalism and job growth - would go a long way toward puting us on a more sound fiscal footing. Of course, there are further steps we would eventually have to take, but the minimul changes noted above would be important 1st steps. We must also realize that it is going to take a long time to clean up the mess - but, we MUST start.

Obviously, none of this is going to happen. Certainly not under this president and probably not under your typical Repub POTUS, either. And, as long as we have Obamacare about to EXPLODE on Americans it probably doesn’t matter much. A government that ensures that higher costs and fewer medical options are made available, while dictating the level of medical care, if any, that is to be made available to its citizens has its citizens by their proverbial genitalia.

Obama has been called a communist, a socialist, a fascist, a this and that. Regardless of the label one chooses to apply, what is clear is this: Obama’s deeds throughout his presidency have been geared toward a singular purpose - the purpose has been to increase the size and scope and power of the federal government to the maximum extent he is able to do so. That is the legacy he seeks. He has 4 more years to deliver Americans into the hands of his new utopia - a controlling, freedom robbing, centralized government.

God help us, because based on last November’s election, we seem to be incapable of helping ourselves!!