Senate Dems unveil $110 billion sequester-replacement package

The Hill ^ | 02/14/13 | Alexander Bolton and Erik Wasson

[Cheerio]

Senate Democratic leaders unveiled a $110 billion sequester-replacement bill at a closed-door caucus meeting Thursday that would replace $85 billion in automatic spending cuts set to hit March 1.

The Senate Democratic package is split evenly between spending cuts and provisions raising new tax revenues, according to a Democratic source.

It would raise nearly $54 billion in taxes by implementing the Buffett Rule, setting a minimum effective tax rate for wealthy individuals and families. It would raise additional revenues by changing the tax treatment of oil extraction from oil sands.

....snip....

On Thursday, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano testified that the sequester would lead to the equivalent of 5,000 fewer border guards and add an average hour delay for flights at busy airports.

[Cheerio]

There you go, have to gut border guards and throw the border open even more, but lay off anyone over at Dep of Health, or Education - NO WAY. Cut welfare payments - NO WAY.

The RATS obsession of raising taxes is breathtaking.

[JCBreckenridge]

There are actually worse policies than the sequester. Quel surprise.

“The Senate Democratic package is split evenly between spending cuts and provisions raising new tax revenues”

So, conservative sequester opponents - where do you stand on this? Sequester is far superior to this usual tax and spend approach.

[Vince Ferrer]

So far the only thing that has been implemented is tax increases. Now we are trying to stop the spending cuts. If we switch to another package that again raises taxes and cuts spending, we will take the tax increases, and then have a crisis again to "fix" the spending cuts. Whereupon we will raise taxes again, and forget about the spending cuts again.

We've got spending cuts now, let's just do it.

[Redmen4ever]

I thought airport security was paid for by a separate funding source (a fee on top of the ticket price). In any case, this is the typical Democrat approach to cutting that we see time and again at the local level: cut teachers, police and firemen first.

[UCANSEE2]

Hard to plan spending cuts when you don’t have a BUDGET to begin with.

[UCANSEE2]

I thought airport security was paid for by a separate funding source (a fee on top of the ticket price).

Here's a thought... we could save a ton of money if we got rid of the TSA and equipped Stewardesses with TASERS.

[SkyPilot]

America's response.

[DPMD]

$110 billion to replace $85 billion. Only in the minds of liberals. Anything less than that and they’ll squeal “cuts.” How much pork there?

Now it’s the sequester bailout. And, again, if it’s “cut,” we’ll have to see the sequester bailout bailout.

[what's up]

The $55 billion in spending cuts are evenly divided between defense and non-defense programs.

Funny how these MSM reports never tell us what the cuts are in non-defense.

I still don't know what the domestic sequester cuts are either. Why don't they tell? They don't want to tick off the liberal base.