Policy Round Up: Sequestration

Written by

Shanel Adams
Shanel Adams Shanel Adams is an editorial assistant with GlobalPolicy.tv. She is a public relations major, political science minor at Howard University originally from Detroit. Shanel is passionate about poverty alleviation and political participation.

To reduce the national debt, sequestration has once again been brought to the table. Sequestration would reduce U.S. national debt by implementing a series of cuts throughout the federal government.

Half of these cuts would affect the Department of Defense and other national security agencies while the other half would cut funding for domestic programs such as national parks, federal courts, and federal housing aid. As concerns about sequestration grow, experts of color have shared their opinions on this important policy matter.

U.S. Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver, Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, released this statement about the impact sequestration will have on communities of color:

“Although CBC Members voted overwhelmingly in support of this measure, our votes today are in no way an indicator of support for sequestration.  The CBC remains concerned about the impact sequestration will have on communities of color and other vulnerable populations.  The 2-month extension does nothing to assuage our concerns about these dangerous and detrimental cuts.  The Congressional Black Caucus remains committed to serving as the “Conscience of the Congress” and protecting the most vulnerable Americans.”

Read the full statement in Congressional Black Caucus Newsroom.

The National Urban League argues that enough cuts have been made to federal programs within recent years:

“Under sequestration, $54.7 billion in non-defense cuts will come from both mandatory (entitlement) and discretionary (non-entitlement) programs. This number is mirrored in defense spending cuts under the original terms of the Budget Control Act. Discretionary spending for those programs and services that provide a lifeline to Americans living in poverty, as well as programs important to low-to-moderate income families already sustained drastic cuts over the two-year term of the 112th Congress.”

Read the full policy brief in The National Urban League Policy Institute.

Nick Chiles writes that partisanship is to blame for this nation’s budget issues:

“Washington continues to find itself in these untenable budget situations because neither side is willing to give the other what it wants and they are reluctant to compromise. The president won the last two budget battles with Republicans, first getting Republicans to agree to raise taxes on Americans making more than $450,000 to avoid the so-called “fiscal cliff” that would have devastated American pocketbooks, then getting Republicans to agree to raise the debt ceiling without any corresponding budget cuts.”  

Read the full article in The Atlanta Black Star.

Jon Walker believes the country is not in the best state for sequestration to occur:

“With the economy still extremely weak, the best solution would be to eliminate or “indefinitely delay” most of the idiotic cuts. The last thing we need in a time of still-high unemployment is more austerity. Sadly, with Washington still in the grips of deficit hysteria this option is almost never even mentioned. One can only hope this might change in the next few weeks.”  

Read the full article in Fire Dog Lake.

LATEST FROM Shanel Adams