Yesterday the Republican sequester was welcomed by a cacophony of cheers from Republican politicians, despite their hypocrisy of blaming Obama at the same time. Perhaps, if the sequester was going to harm billionaires and corporate criminals, Republicans would not be cheering, but at least in the short term, the ones harmed will be the most vulnerable.
House Republicans were elated this week when their leader, John Boehner, made it clear that deep, automatic spending cuts would begin as scheduled on Friday. Incredibly, some consider the decision a victory.
As the cuts take effect, they will inflict widespread hardship. But some Americans will be hurt more than others, and the people who will be hurt the most are those who are already struggling. In the months ahead, an estimated 3.8 million Americans who have been unemployed for more than six months face a cut in federal jobless benefits of nearly 11 percent — or about $32 a week — all from the recent average weekly benefit of $292. And an estimated 600,000 low-income women and toddlers will be turned away from the federal nutrition program for women, infants and children, known as WIC.
It should not be this way. Deficit reduction should not occur on the backs of the poor and vulnerable. At the insistence of Democrats, most major programs that help the needy have been exempted from the cuts, including food stamps and Medicaid. Democrats also won exemptions for beneficiaries of programs that are not explicitly aimed at low-income Americans but that are crucial to keeping many retirees out of poverty or near-poverty, notably veterans’ pensions, Social Security and Medicare. Still, smaller, vital programs will fall under the knife, in part because they are in spending categories deemed dispensable under the unthinking rules for across-the-board cuts… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <NT Times>
I encourage you to click through for the rest of this article for more detail.
Ezra Klein discussed the Republican sequester with economist Jared Bernstein.
Note that there would not have been a sequester if Republicans had not walked away from the negotiating table, because they thought they could get it all without negotiating by winning the election, that would, according to the Republicans, decide the issue. The people chose to reject what Republicans want, but Republicans do not care about the election now, because elections count only when they win. They do not care how much suffering they cause, as long as the protect welfare for the 1%. The people, whom the sequester will hurt most do not include billionaires and corporate criminals.
We have one side who will negotiate and one side who will not. The Republican insistence that they have everything their way, despite having lost the election, makes this the Republican sequester, an act of sedition against America.