Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

White House has some flexibility in choosing $85B spending cuts
The Hill ^ | 03/02/13 06:00 AM ET | Erik Wasson, Jeremy Herb and Keith Laing

Posted on 03/02/2013 12:06:46 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach

The White House says its hands are tied by the $85 billion sequester, but budget experts counter that it will have some flexibility to choose what to cut and what to save.

The wiggle-room is inviting accusations from Congress that President Obama is mismanaging the cuts.

Critics also say the flexibility could allow the administration to make the cuts more painful, in order to pressure congressional Republicans to raise taxes as part of a sequester-replacement. Some of these critics point to the decision to not deploy an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf.

The White House has made the case it has almost no flexibility given the sequester’s requirement that it cut domestic discretionary spending by 9 percent and military spending by 13 percent.

“What happens is, OMB, we take this amount, this $85 billion that we have to cut, and we apply it to every account in government,” Office of Management and Budget Controller Danny Werfel told reporters.

Within each of those accounts are subaccounts known as “program, project and activity” which also are subject to specific cuts, he said. This limits the administration’s flexibility even further.

But budget experts say some nuances within the law do give the administration some room to maneuver, though they acknowledge it is limited.

For example, the administration has broad authority to define “program, project and activity,” according to Barry Anderson, a former budget official under President George H.W. Bush. He said this would allow it some flexibility in making cuts.

OMB said Friday that it will be issuing the sequester order on the account level and agencies will determine the program, project and activity definition.

“The thousands of PPAs government-wide change every year based on the appropriations acts, reports, and president’s budget, so there is no single, static list,” an official said.

Through apportionment, the administration could delay cuts for months, though they would still have to be done by Oct. 1. This would allow the government to put all cuts to the FAA, for example, to the month of September if it so wished.

Some accounts are so broadly defined they give the administration a lot of flexibility. For example, the Pentagon’s operations and maintenance account includes thousands of contracts and different activities from which to choose the cuts.

Republicans have argued the Navy’s decision to not deploy the USS Harry Truman aircraft carrier because of sequestration — which will save roughly $300 million — could have been avoided.

The Truman decision was made “for the purpose of adding drama to the sequestration debate,” charged Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) in a letter to Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter.

“This is the most over-hyped event…it is all for political purposes,” said Steve Bell, a budget expert at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Pentagon leaders have acknowledged they could have chosen to deploy the Truman and cut elsewhere.

“Could the money to pay for the deployment have been found somewhere else? Perhaps,” Carter wrote in the letter to Hunter obtained by The Hill.

But he said the Pentagon didn’t see a better option, particularly given an $8.6 billion shortfall in the Navy’s operations and maintenance accounts caused not only by the sequester but by the lack of a 2013 appropriations bill.

“Without the ability to transfer funds rapidly from other accounts, there aren't many places from which we could have taken these funds without a greater cost to readiness elsewhere,” Carter wrote to Hunter.

Carter told reporters at a Pentagon briefing Friday that the Pentagon was also using its flexibility in operations and maintenance to ensure that training is protected for units headed to Afghanistan.

In contrast to the huge DoD operations and maintenance account, the Health and Human Services Department’s Low Income Home Energy Assistance program provides just that — help to the poor for energy bills, energy crises and weatherization and energy-related minor home repairs. Experts agree there is much less flexibility for the administration to avoid the 9 percent cut.

Another example is unemployment benefits, where the Department of Labor has little option but to cut benefits.

Joe Minarik, a chief economist in President Clinton’s budget office, said the administration is likely to highlight cuts it sees as bad for the economy to make its political point. But he also said there is a risk for the administration in trying to amplify the perniciousness of the cuts.

“The administration is going to be torn, because on the one hand you don’t want to be accused of managing poorly,” he said. “On the other hand, your political ambitions might lead you to emphasize the other side has overplayed and put [the public] well being at risk.”

The administration has two additional powers under sequestration: transfer authority and reprogramming.

Transfer authority is explicitly granted by appropriations bills and each department has differing degrees of authority. It allows an agency to transfer money between specified accounts, which could allow an agency to save a little money in one area and cut more in another.

For example, if Navy shipbuilding costs rise due to inflation, the secretary of the Navy has the power to transfer up to $100 million into the shipbuilding account, said Shai Akabas of the Bipartisan Policy Center.

Still, in general, Akabas said transfer authority is very limited in legislation, since appropriators want to protect their prerogatives. And the authority is never wide enough to allow the White House to move money between departments.

Reprogramming occurs when an agency wants to shift money between programs within a specified account. For example, if the appropriations bill requires the Air Force to use an account to build five airplanes, the Air Force can request reprogramming authority to finish four, rather than delay all five, to meet the sequester.

By tradition, this requires the consent of the relevant House and Senate Appropriations subcommittee charmen and ranking members, and in the case of Defense the authorizing committee leaders.

The FAA budget appears to fall into a gray zone that is already leading to scrutiny from Congress.

The White House and Department of Transportation have warned repeatedly that the FAA’s $600 million sequestration cut will result in flight delays because air traffic controllers will have to be furloughed.

Republicans on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee say the FAA could make cuts in other parts of its budget instead. They say the FAA could cut the $482 million from its operations account, which includes air traffic controllers, through a combination of freezing hiring, cutting non-personnel expenses like traveling and banking savings from the pre-sequester first quarter of 2013.

The rest of the FAA's cut would come from reducing its facilities and equipment account by $142 million and cutting its reach and development account by $8.6 million.

FAA officials say the law requires them to make equal cuts across every FAA account.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has issued similarly warnings about the sequestration budget cuts, arguing that wait times at major airport security checkpoints would stretch to four hours long because TSA screeners would have to be furloughed seven days in 2013.

Republicans have cast doubt on those claims too, arguing that the agency has grown faster in recent years than the commercial airline industry and that lines should not be a problem.

“Once again, the TSA, you've seen [the number of] flight passengers have been flat in this country, but yet the TSA workers have increased by 3,000 members," Transportation Committee Chairman Rep. Bill Shuster (R-Pa.) said in an interview with Fox News.

"You've also got risk-based assessment and pre-screening that makes their job a little bit either, so we have the people in place," Shuster continued. "I do not believe properly managed that we will have any problems with the TSA or the FAA."


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: sequestor

1 posted on 03/02/2013 12:06:54 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
"The White House says its hands are tied by the $85 billion sequester"


2 posted on 03/02/2013 12:09:04 PM PST by darkwing104 (Let's get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

9% and 13%??? Where did those numbers come from? Those percentages of the federal budget would total a lot more than the claimed $85 billion sequester.


3 posted on 03/02/2013 12:22:06 PM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
I WISH someone would point out the tax hikes from the bush Tax cuts have already happened. I think around 85 billion more coming into the Government? And what did Congress do? They turned right around and voted 60 billion for Sandy Relief. Without taking out ANY of the claims that had nothing to do with Hurricane Sandy. I do believe that the victims of Sandy need relief and FEMA should have been more discriminating in their earleir allocation of funds.........but to use nearly all the funds from the recent tax hikes within a week......well, all I can say is that we should cut Government off from all but the essentials. They have proven that they will spend the money as soon as they learn they will get more.
4 posted on 03/02/2013 12:27:52 PM PST by originalbuckeye (Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Maybe they could cut a few hundred million off Queen Moochie's annual travel expenditures.


5 posted on 03/02/2013 12:34:50 PM PST by Iron Munro (I miss America, don't you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

It’s in the libard playbook..

Cut a couple of zars or other posts no one would notice is not acceptable.

GO after the things people would notice. Fire, police, military...


6 posted on 03/02/2013 12:51:42 PM PST by cableguymn (The founding fathers would be shooting by now..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

SOME flexibility? He is going to continue to funnel money into HHS and starve the Military. Or rather his lapdog generals are going to starve important missions and make it seem as though this were the result of the Sequester.


7 posted on 03/02/2013 1:18:54 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

Notice that Joe Biden is parking AF-2 and taking the train home. He knows how this looks and he has his sights on 2016.


8 posted on 03/02/2013 1:21:39 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: originalbuckeye

Be quiet, Buck, Congress doesn’t want the word out. Notice that the Republics just went along.


9 posted on 03/02/2013 1:24:23 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: darkwing104

Your meter needs one more category: Every one for themselves with a mushroom cloud as the symbol.


10 posted on 03/02/2013 1:30:43 PM PST by Howindependent (A Liberal has no concept of reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bob

the sequestration does not apply to all of the budget only the ‘discretionary’ parts. The vast majority of the budget is exempt, ie, social security, etc. When you divide by only those portions that the sequestration applies, you get these percentages.


11 posted on 03/02/2013 1:40:48 PM PST by DugwayDuke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

85 Billion. Big Whoop. Do you know how much aid was given towards Hurricane Sandy clean up?


12 posted on 03/02/2013 2:19:11 PM PST by Hildy (Did)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Eventually, some real cuts will be made in spending. The unemployed will still be fed, but most of the funding for social and regulatory programs isn’t about that.


13 posted on 03/02/2013 3:46:27 PM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of rotten politics smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
The problem the thieving politicians now have is Americans have been spoon fed the word TRILLIONS for quite a while now; a Billion? 85 Billion? Chicken feed. No one really cares because we are NOT slashing TRILLIONS.

It is going to be hard on millions of Americans, myself included, but I look forward to the federal government and the American economy crashing. A hard reset is needed and entitlements need to become a thing of the past for this country to survive in the long term. Americans simply are not free as things stand today, that needs to change.

14 posted on 03/02/2013 4:24:25 PM PST by Michael Barnes (Obamaa+ Downgrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
"Critics also say the flexibility could allow the administration to make the cuts more painful, in order to pressure congressional Republicans to raise taxes as part of a sequester-replacement."

I said from the beginning, that this is exactly what Obama would do. He's going to use the sequester like a sword, to draw blood and make his opponents squirm.

The man is an absolute monster without the slightest conscience or remorse. Winning is all he cares about. He'll drag the entire country through a field of sharp rocks over a mere 2% reduction in the government's spending increase.

Congress gave Obama $900 Billion dollars to 'stimulate' the economy four years ago. The money's spent, and not a damn thing came of it. Yet after such a monumental failure, here he is, threatening armageddon over less than one tenth that amount.

He should be impeached and locked up in Leavenworth for life.

15 posted on 03/02/2013 9:52:42 PM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; ExTexasRedhead

Bump for later read .................................................................................... FRegards


16 posted on 03/03/2013 11:05:13 AM PST by gonzo ( Buy more ammo, dammit! You should already have the firearms ... FRegards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; ExTexasRedhead

Bump for later read .................................................................................... FRegards


17 posted on 03/03/2013 11:05:18 AM PST by gonzo ( Buy more ammo, dammit! You should already have the firearms ... FRegards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; ExTexasRedhead

Bump for later read .................................................................................... FRegards


18 posted on 03/03/2013 11:05:18 AM PST by gonzo ( Buy more ammo, dammit! You should already have the firearms ... FRegards)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson