An Argument for Sequestration

The list of institutions and individuals that will be hurt by the looming sequester reaches into every aspect of American life and commerce. Virtually every one of us will be negatively impacted by these cuts. From individuals dependent on public support through no fault of their own, to landlords waiting for their next tenant, to the men and women defending this nation and its ideals, there are costs that will be felt unevenly. None of this is a surprise; it is by design. 

When the sequester was first devised, the idea was to impose a deadline for resolution of a fundamentally unsound fiscal position. Given Congress’ repeated failures in reaching compromise, it was acknowledged that a deadline by itself would not suffice. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction was tasked with developing an economically rational, long-term solution that would cut $1.2 trillion from the budget over the next decade. That inaptly named Supercommittee conceded to gridlock in November 2011, kicking off the countdown to the current state of affairs. At that juncture, it was the President who stated emphatically that he would “veto any effort to get rid of those spending cuts,” perhaps hoping to incent the Congressional leadership.