Get PJ Media on your Apple

Dems Want More Anti-Sequestration Deals After FAA Save

Some opposed congressional agreement on air traffic controllers because it did not repeal Head Start cuts.

by
Bill Straub

Bio

April 29, 2013 - 12:57 pm
<- Prev  Page 2 of 2   View as Single Page

On the defense and homeland security side of the ledger, federal furloughs will mean the equivalent of 1,000 fewer FBI, Border Patrol, and other law enforcement agents on the job at least through Sept. 30. One-third of the nation’s combat air units are grounded.

“Sequestration is a mindless, across-the-board cutting of what we are now recognizing, and the Republicans are recognizing, of something that should not be cut,” said House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, of California.

Pelosi called out congressional Republicans, asserting it is “ludicrous” that they fail to understand that sequestration is hurting more than their local airports.

“Why don’t you (Republicans) understand that there is a great deal at stake including the efficiency and the safety of our airports but also, again, the education of our children?” she said. “How can we sit there and say, ‘Four million Meals on Wheels for seniors gone? ‘But that’s not important.’ Over 70,000 children off Head Start. ‘But that’s not important.’”

Obama also chimed in, using his weekly radio address to blame congressional Republicans for the “reckless cuts” forced by sequestration and urging lawmakers to work toward “replacing it before it causes further damage.”

Regardless, Obama signed the FAA legislation even through he earlier said he was only interested in a total reworking of the issue.

Senate Republican Whip John Cornyn, of Texas, maintained the administration and its Democratic cohorts used the FAA issue to generate opposition to budget cuts.

“The president and his administration traveled the country and tried to stir up anxiety and concern and fear over the imposition of the sequester, warning that the sky would fall like a modern-day ‘Chicken Little,’” Cornyn said. “Well, it’s been almost two months since the sequester took effect and the administration’s claims that the sky would fall have each proven to be false.”

Rep. Bill Shuster (R-Pa.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, accused the White House of intentionally creating a crisis for air travelers.

“They could have cut spending elsewhere,” Shuster said. “They could have taken into account air traffic patterns, and made sure controllers would be in place where they were most needed. Or they could have reached out to Congress and the airlines to have a plan in place ahead of time.”

Instead, he said, the White House imposed furloughs “because there are some in the Obama Administration who thought inflicting pain on the public would give the president more leverage to avoid making necessary spending cuts and to impose more tax hikes on the American people.”

But Republicans “kept the heat on,” Shuster said. “The pressure worked, and again we’ve seen that when the people speak out, government has an obligation to listen.”

<- Prev  Page 2 of 2   View as Single Page
Washington freelancer Bill Straub is former White House correspondent for Scripps Howard News Service.

Comments are closed.

All Comments   (20)
All Comments   (20)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Boehner speaking of the FAA and it supposedly possessing, '..flexibility..' - Hahaha

Yeah, a public sector union leviathan sucking on the government teet from the likes of the overpaid, overwhelmingly lethargic, unpunished employees of the FAA - Speaker Boehner, do tell another knee-slapper!

Man, privatize this federal entity already. Canada's ATC is privatized whereas the controlling companies MUST stay within/ under budget, the equipment is modern, more efficient and underperforming controllers are canned or imprisoned for their screw ups.

You know, like REAL companies function!

While Canada's flight corridors are far less numbered and less busy - their ATC's commitment in doing what's right by it's passengers, citizenry and nation takes precedence over their own selfish needs.

Again, something the Fed and it's tentacle-like self-serving employees can't/ won't grasp nor fathom.

President Kardashian had 2 years, 2 years before this MUCH NEEDED slowdown in Federal pay took root.

Never let a crisis, even one made by his very own hand - go to waste. Right President Uhblahblah?
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Hey, here's a great idea for the Dems: how about an annual budget!
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
didn't a certain president promise to veto any attempt to repeal or go around the sequester? i'm almost sure i heard words to that end. maybe it was just voices in my head. you know the ones.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
I don't imagine this will make anyone question the wisdom of over-dependence on the government. Doing without - not a concept Americans will accept easily. But it's what has to happen when money is tight (or rather, when you're trillions of dollars in debt).

An economy built on government largesse is as false as an economy built on slavery. Neither one is strong enough to stand on its own.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
NO legislative enactments ever survive without special interest cut-outs favorable to a groups cause(s). This has long been the corrupt policy of government from both sides of the partisan aisle. In the old days it used to work fairly for them with one side negotiating their special interest cut-out, with the other side negotiating a favorable cut-out in return. Guess it doesn't work that way anymore but........ what goes around comes around down the road in Washington.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Steny (can I call you Steny?), Nan, Barack et al....why don't y'all get a decent copy of the constitution, make a pot of coffee, sit down and read what it says - Sequestration wouldn't even be on the radar screen, if you eliminated things like Head Start, Meals on wheels, the EPA, Depts of Edukashun, redundant agencies, lifetime protection for former presidents, free airplane use for senators, and allow the states and constitution to work as intended...oh, and maybe limit vacations to 2 a year or less..??
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
I guess that's the trouble with democracy. Somebody's ox is always getting gored. We might think Meals on Wheels is a crock. Why can't some nice charity take care of those shut-ins? How about all those rich people and corporations who give money to PBS - couldn't they feed a few old people instead of funding endless re-runs of British TV shows?

But somewhere out there are people who think civilization will come to an end if you even look at Meals on Wheels funny. They cannot imagine a world without Meals on Wheels. Having Meals on Wheels is Progress. Not having it is Regress - a descent into the evil times when lonely shut-ins had to fend for themselves. To such people, Meals on Wheels isn't a "nice-to-have" item - it's an "essential" item. No cuts allowed.

For every bit of "excess" government spending, there's someone out there for whom it is not "excess" but EVERYTHING.

How do you deal with them?
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
With capitalism, the society has organizations (private) that do their best with donations and other help to provide for the poor.

The poor suffer.

With socialism, the government operatives choose to use other peoples' money to help the poor.

The poor suffer.

If there was ever an argument to not be poor and to learn to provide for oneself and compete so that one is not poor, it would be---being poor.

Now that poor is an accepted lifestyle like being gay or trans-lesbian or whatever the hell people all themselves, it would seem that it's filled with the trappings of any/every "victim" group there is. Hurray.

Hope everybody's happy. I'm all for taking care of myself, given the resources at-hand to do so. Being poor sucks. That's why I got an education and a job that keeps me from being so.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Now that poor is an accepted lifestyle like being gay or trans-lesbian or whatever..."

I don't know of any society that has had an economy in which all people shared equally. Certainly, there were times in which there was more equity and likewise times of less equity. From the 80s to present the less equity part of the equation has been in full blown exercise. Likewise, every society has its ratio of physically and mentally infirmed, the aged and the unemployable of the labor pool.

Fifty years of consolidating our economies lends to wealth and income inequity. it also lends to periods of excessive unemployment with every little economic blip. Now, expand these factors to a global market economy where cost competitiveness comes into play.

People today, who are working and think they have it made in soci-economic status don't have a clue that adjusted for inflation they're working for 1960s incomes while the top 20% are working and accumluating wealth at todays real value. In other words the working class sees depreciation while the top 20% see appreciation in income and wealth. Most people have a foot back on the plantation and don't know it.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
My sentiment exactly.

If there was EVER a desire, reason for not being poor, it's this and infinitely-like more examples.

For relying on an entity that is tens of trillions of dollars in debt (including present, future retired gubmint employees) whose mere existence and it's continued disgusting dependence is due to inevitable false promises, shortcomings.

All the while these gumbint heads demagoguing the very successful, innovative private sectors they pilfer!

Pathetically, ungratefully trying to encourage the public to rely more upon this self-serving, unchecked, economically imbalanced lifelong grifters.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
I wasn't implying that MOW or any of those things were not needed, just that the Federal Gov't has no right - literally - to take it upon itself to provide it..
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yep, when society fails its repsonsibilities the government steps in, lest you become a thrid world nation of poverty and starvation, etc. Todays generations continue to be consumed with survival of the fittest and disregard or discard the percieved unfit of society -- that is until -- they age or are disabled and become the unfit themselves. Most people don't have a clue they have a foot back on the plantations of the economic elite and those whom, in their delusion, think of themselves as economic elite.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Societies 'responsibilities' - spoken like a de facto statist supporter!

For ANYONE believing another citizen's shortcomings 'requires' other citizens to care for them, their children, their day-to-day living inevitably encourages government interventionism: statist policy. Why?

Caring for ourselves and immediate family is emotionally, economically exhausting in of itself. Taking on evermore others is craziness and bound for overload.

As noted above by Streeetch Pelosi, Uhblahblah and other grifters know it's far easier to sell empathy than say, 'Hey stupid, care for yourselves and your brood. Were ascended beings, start behaving as such'.

Nope, instead we tiptoe around that needed bluntness and instead think more Head Start/ monies, HUD homes/ monies, continued looking the other way in regards to the ridiculously high # of mostly questionable 'disability claims', continued fiction of the 'need' for FDA's 'food inspectors' (like another poster mentioned in another PJM article, watch 'Fat Head' - it's on YouTube or one can stream it elsewhere for free), etc'
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Your belief is common to todays genrations who are far removed for the relaities of the past generations. Generations in which were largely economically self contained with very low unemployment but for the normal large cancer cities of the nation. They were generations of stong family and community units -- even to the state level when there were natural disasters. Everybody in the community was family and treated everybody as such. Back then, the worst thing you could imagine was coming down sick. the community would bring you so much food, clean your house, run your errands, take care of the kids and hubby/wife and by the time you regain health you'd put on fifty pounds. Too poor to pay for healthcare the community jumped in and took care of it -- that was before healthcare insurance. The infirmed and aged was cared for by family and community alike. The unemployed was given jobs for which the people didn't need an extra employee muchless afford it but they did for the interest of the community family. Needed a doctor in the middle of the night, one came to your house. Needed a prescription filled in the middle of the night, the pharmacist went and filledit and brought it to your house. Running short on funds credit was given to everybody with never a phone call or letter reminding you, you owed somebody some money -- well a bank 'might' back then as today. The most wealthy always, when they died left sizable funds to the community for hosptial, economic and social services needs.

I could go on and one but I think you get the picture. The people of todays generations are 180 degrees separated for the standards of past generations with todays society having just as much social needs as ever before.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
It is not my responsibility to provide for someone who is capable, yet chooses not to, to provide for themselves.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
I'm tired...

- of the straw-man arguments posed by the democrats - that it was a republican idea. How the hell did any of them manage to figure out the sequester was pointed solidly at programs like WIC?

I'm also tired of the republicans who fail to point out the fallacy of the straw-man argument - but most of all I'm tired of the MSM giving cover to the democrats.

I guess I'm just tired of politics.

I think I'll go take a nap...
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Uh, whose Idea was sequestration again? And while we are at it how long did we have before the idea was even brought forth to bring spending down? How long after it was passed did these people have to come up with ways that would fit into sequestration that wouldn't cause so much pain? Gee, it must be hard to breathe through all that sand these id10ts have their heads buried in.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
It ain't sand that prevents them from breathing properly. Cranial-Rectumitis is the 'disease' - there seems to be no cure available.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All