Posted on 03/19/2013 6:53:32 AM PDT by SkyPilot
Rep. Bill Enyart might be a Democrat and Rep. Rodney Davis a Republican, but the two rookie lawmakers in Southern Illinois share one fear.
Sequestration could cost them their seats.
Enyart and Davis are three months into their new jobs — representing next-door districts — and constituents already are blaming them for not doing enough to stop the automatic spending cuts.
This week, 4,500 civilian workers at nearby Scott Air Force Base will receive furlough notices — a troubling reminder for Davis, who won his seat last fall by just 1,002 votes.
Enyart’s no better off: He pledged to protect Scott during his 2012 campaign, but at last weekend’s St. Patrick’s Day parade in his hometown of Belleville, several people shouted, “Stop the sequester!” as he walked by tossing green beads to children.
“Certainly, in my district, we’re in crisis stage,” Enyart told POLITICO after marching in the parade.
This tale of two districts is a reminder for some in Washington who still think about sequester as an abstract political fight. On the ground, the cuts are real — and so are the political consequences.
(PHOTOS: How sequestration could affect you)
Davis, who holds a part of Abraham Lincoln’s old district and the state capital of Springfield — is considered one of the best pickup opportunities in 2014 for Democrats. After all, he had the narrowest margin of victory last cycle for any successful Republican.
To Democrats, the thinking is that Davis’s constituents in rural Illinois and the college towns of Champaign, Normal and Springfield will be so upset with Republican leadership over the spending cuts that they will send him packing next November.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
I never click on links when I can’t see the url. Just a thought, as I would guess that I am not alone.
That does not change the fact that:
A. The Republicans agreed to this Faustian bargain known as the 2011 Budget Control Act that devastates the US military
B. The Republicans have refused to stop Sequestration; on the contrary, they believe it is a "victory" and have embraced this betrayal of our military
Let me ask you something, and I want you to give me an honest answer.
If I took 20% of your income by tomorrow, would you have a problem with that? If the Government announced that Social Security recipients were to suddenly have their checks reduced by 20%, do you think they would be satisfied by telling them they still have a check?
We can do whatever semantic dances you want to regarding whether those checks are "deserved" or "already paid for" - the bottom line is when you cut income by that deep an amount that quickly, it is almost financially unsustainable for some families.
I have posted this here before but I will repeat the story. I know a single mother who is a low paid GS worker. She has a child with severe medical issues. She works hard - she does not take Food Stamps or hand outs. She pays her Federal, State, and property taxes.
She works, and for a Constitutional, worthy agency (Dept of Defense).
She, and thousands of others is going to be cut off at the knees.
This is not moral, it is not right.
When I posted that, I got a lot of Freeper hate posts and hate mail. Everyone has a hard luck story that they think is worse, or....the hatred for anyone getting a Federal paycheck runs so deep that the wombats come out of the woodwork.
People like that cannot make the moral distinction between someone working to better themselves and the fine institution of the US military, and an obese TSA agent feeling up your wife in Atlanta airport.
I cannot help people like that. If they do not have any discernment, I cannot give it to them through keyboard osmosis.
“Furloughed”
Furl’O’d
I’d be happy if the sequestration cut ALL of congress’ salaries to zero. Then maybe they’d go home and stop bothering us. Nah, wouldn’t happen. Plenty of lobbyists would pay them.
AS i recall the sequestration was suppose to be across the board, not spesfic to the military. If Obama has put it all on the military that is his doing not ours.
Either way the Sequestration needs to stand forever.
“If I took 20% of your income by tomorrow, would you have a problem with that? If the Government announced that Social Security recipients were to suddenly have their checks reduced by 20%, do you think they would be satisfied by telling them they still have a check?’
Of course I would have a problem, but as all of your income comes from my pocket, and I nether require nor desire your services I think the scam is that your still getting 80%.
That being said were it up to me I would much prefer to get rid of other programs and personals whom i find far more costly and undesirable to me. Starting with the ATF, DEA, FBI, Department of Education, ect..
The Federal army may be a threat to my rights but only in the long term, in the short term theses other Federal agency’s are a very much more imedead threat to the rights & liberties of every living american.
Droping them from the pay roll would return to us much, much more than a mere salary.
However, I agree with you concerning the alphabet soup agencies and our precarious freedoms.
Im glad to hear you have been able to find 3 jobs in 5 years, Under Obama’s rules there are many that cannot reach his new bar so offend.
I am sorry but that is not correct.
The Republicans overwhelmingly supported and voted for the 2011 Budget Control Act, which brougth us Sequestration. Boehner, Ryan, Cantor, and all of the other GOP heroes knew the language burdened the military with 50% of the cuts, and they also knew they had already cut the military by $487 Billion before Sequestration.
Boehner bragged that he got "89% of what I wanted" with the 2011 "deal."
I have no illusions of what and who Obama is. However, it is my own party that allowed the military to be screwed over and who will not lift a finger to stop this madness.
Well if that is true, I can’t say i care all that much. As I mentioned before the Federal military is a long term threat to our liberty.
Particularly if we are to take any serous efforts to halt the progress of this evil the Federal Military will be used by said tyrant against us.
Been around a long time, and I have learned when data comes out this way, mish mash, upside down etc . . . a whole bunch a people have different agendas and most lie to further that agenda.
Undoubtedly, as was forewarned, the DOD has a more proportional hit than other departments.
However, the issue is actual dollars being spent. And "initially" I see possible apples and oranges being mixed here in the numbers being presented.
It appears some presenters are using "cuts" in sequester that was already budgeted in 2011. Typical double counting that we see all the time.
Allow me some time to digest your point of view.
Here is the OMB letter.
The difference between the 9% and the 13% when discussing Defense across the board cuts (and why it is really worse at 13%) is as the letter states: these cuts are now crammed into only 7 months for this fiscal year. Then the madness starts all over again....for another 9 years.
One last article explains why all of this is so destructive:
Sequester Insanity: Why the Pentagon budget cuts are far worse than you think
Both Rush, but to a greater extent Hannity (who is really not that bright) think they have discovered the secret to Nirvana because some Congressman explained to them once that in Baseline Budgets there is a projected increase per year to year.
Well, I hate to break it to them, but most budgets work that way, including company's budgets. There is this thingy called inflation, and many other factors involved.
I could throw the entire Navy and Air Force O&M budgets into reverse for an entire fiscal quarter simply by increasing the cost of oil per barrel by 15%.
I once asked an expert at the Defense Logistics Agency why the Dept of Defense simply build more storage facilities, buy massive quantities of fuel when prices were low, and then sell the excess as needed.
He said that would amount to hedging, and it was prohibited by Congress.
I pressed further, and he explained to me that the the Government does not run the government - K Street lobbyist do.
It was a bit of an oversimplification, but he had a point.
By the way, love your screen name.
“The Federal army may be a threat to my rights but only in the long term, in the short term theses other Federal agency’s are a very much more imedead threat to the rights & liberties of every living american.”
@Monorprise Excuse you ?
The very fact that you have the Freedom to say something as ludicrous as this came from the sacrifices of our veterans.
Keep that in mind.
Zients writes . . .
The Joint Committee sequestration is a blunt and indiscriminate instrument. It was never intended to be implemented and does not represent a responsible way for our Nation to achieve deficit reduction.
Wow, you lay cards on the table, you better be ready to play. If not resign and leave town. Further proof of this administration immaturity
Zients continues to write . . .
On multiple occasions, the President has proposed comprehensive and balanced deficit reduction plans to avoid sequestration.
REALLY? What might that be . . . oh yeah, more tax increases. Very disingenuous. Again not serious minded.
Seriously, If I presented that tone of letter to my CEO in a crucial board meeting, thinking I would have to explain why I still work there.
Again Zients "appears" and I will check to see, he "appears" to be double counting non exempt and non exempt non defense spending. I hate when smart ass bureaucrats do that. Thats why they would never last in the private sector.
Yes, I will keep an open mind and look for the truth. Thank you for sharing
““The Federal army may be a threat to my rights but only in the long term, in the short term theses other Federal agency’s are a very much more imedead threat to the rights & liberties of every living american.”
@Monorprise Excuse you ?
The very fact that you have the Freedom to say something as ludicrous as this came from the sacrifices of our veterans.
Keep that in mind.
“
I have no dispute with the sacrifices of current or past veterans.
I simply believe that the day will come when future “veterans” will levy war upon our States & people in the interest of securing & extending the power of Washington.
Then they will not be sacrifing for my freedom of speech or any freedom at all for that matter. Merely Washington’s power to rule without the consent of the governed.
Zients or his staff writes . . .(page 1, Basis of Calculations)
As provided by section 101(b) of the CR,
whenever an amount designated for OCO/GWOT (Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO)/Global War on Terrorism (GWOT)pursuant to section 251(b) (2)(A) of BBEDCA in either the Department of Defense Apropriations Act, 2012 (division A of Pub. L. 112-74) or in the Military onstruction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2012 (division H of Pub. L. 112-74) differs from the amount in the President’s FY 2013 Budget request, the annualized level equals the amount in the President’s FY 2013 Budget request. The CR levels are also adjusted for any transfers mandated by law.
You know your article is from slate?
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.