Battleland

The “Defense Reduction (Dys)Function”

  • Share
  • Read Later

Well, here it is. The guts of the Pentagon’s share of sequestration, as detailed in a letter late Friday to congressional leaders from Jeffrey Zients, the deputy director for management of the White House’s Office of Management and Budget.

“A year-and-a-half has passed, and the Congress still has failed to enact balanced deficit reduction legislation that avoids sequestration,” Zients writes, a tad disingenously. “As a result of the Congress’s failure to act, the law requires the President to issue a sequestration order today canceling $85 billion in budgetary resources across the Federal Government for FY 2013.”

Now that the White House has apportioned blame, the OMB deputy detailed the impact of the impasse. “This report provides calculations of the amounts and percentages by which various budgetary resources are required to be reduced, and a listing of the reductions required for each non-exempt budget account,” he wrote. “…the sequestration requires a 7.8 percent reduction in non-exempt defense discretionary funding and a 5.0 percent reduction in non-exempt nondefense discretionary funding…Because these cuts must be achieved over only seven months instead of 12, the effective percentage reductions will be approximately 13 percent for non-exempt defense programs and 9 percent for non-exempt nondefense programs.”

Check out the fine print for yourself.

The “Defense Reduction Function” dysfunction is here.

The full malfunction letter is here.

Read it, and weep.

3 comments
Don_Bacon
Don_Bacon

On March 1, SecDef Hagel walked away from Panetta's "catastrophic" and "disastrous" results if sequestration happened, and the U.S. being reduced to a second-rate military power.

"We will manage these issues. These are adjustments. We anticipated these kinds of realities. And we will do what we need to do to assure the capabilities of -- of our forces. . .adjustments are being made, and we've anticipated the required adjustments to our budget to assure the  capabilities and readiness of our -- of our forces."
http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=5196

roknsteve
roknsteve

@Don_Bacon Blah Blah Blah.  Cry Cry Cry.  Gripe Gripe Gripe.  Now it's time to cut a bloated toad of a military.  How many terrorist's do you have under your bed? 

Don_Bacon
Don_Bacon

The White House blaming the Congress -- that's rich.

Jul 27, 2011
Jack Lew, then director of Obama's Office of Management and Budget, and now up for Treasury Secretary, and Rob Nabors, the president's legislative affairs director, brought the notion of a "sequester" to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. As the idea rapidly evolved: A failure of Congress (via its "supercommittee") and the White House to agree on substantial deficit reductions would trigger automatic, across-the-board budget cuts. This would force the Committee (and Congress) to act, and deflect blame from the White House. It didn't work out that way.


Aug 2, 2011
Obama signed the Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA), better known as the debt ceiling compromise.  The act was a deal made  in government to cut more than $1 trillion in spending over a period of ten years. To do so, Congress created a joint congressional committee to produce deficit reduction legislation by November 23, 2011. If Congress failed to produce a deficit reduction bill with at least $1.2 trillion in cuts, then Congress could grant a $1.2 trillion increase in the debt ceiling but this would trigger across-the-board cuts ("sequestrations"as of January 2, 2013. The Joint Select Committee did not report any legislation to Congress, thus triggering sequestration.

Aug 7, 2012
Obama signs Sequestration Transparency Act requiring White House to detail budget cuts in 30 days

Sep 7, 2012
White House said it will miss deadline

Sep 14, 2012
OMB issues report without specific cuts -- "additional time is necessary"  -- This went until just recently.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,106 other followers