GOP should pass sequester transfer authority bill

Charles KrauthammerYesterday, this column denounced President Barack Obama’s extreme fear-mongering attacks on the supposed consequences (including the action he has already taken in delaying the deployment of the usual second aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf) of the automatic across-the-board “sequester” spending cuts totaling less than 3% of the federal budget, scheduled for March 1, 2013.

At no time during his 19th Hole demagoguery did the Chief Executive demand that Congress grant him “transfer authority” that would allow him to move available funds between defense and non-defense accounts in order to avoid the supposed draconian cuts made inevitable by the sequester that he proposed to Congress in 2011 but now denounces as irresponsible and extreme.

We don’t believe that spending cuts so puny mandate reductions in national security, emergency response, air traffic safety or any of the rest of the litany of horribles spewed forth by the Commander-in-Chief yesterday. But to “know” for sure what is and is not the state of budget affairs before and after the scheduled 2+% cuts, one would have to devote oneself to a study of the equivalent of Egyptian hieroglyphs to follow the rat holes one has to travel down in budget bills and executive branch accounts.

But luckily, Charles Krauthammer has time on his hands:

Conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer says President Obama could easily reduce the fear and panic engendered by the looming sequester if he would simply push Congress to pass a bill allowing a transfer of funds from less important federal accounts to more important federal accounts.

“And the president is the one who ought to propose it,” Krauthammer told Fox News on Wednesday. “He won’t, of course, because he is looking for a fight, and not a solution.”…

…Douglas Holtz-Eakin, the former head of the Congressional Budget Office, said unless Congress gives federal agencies transfer authority — and lawmakers could pass a bill to do that — layoffs may happen, because agencies won’t be able to shift money from less important accounts to more important accounts.

Holtz-Eakin told Fox New’s Brett Baier on Wednesday that the sequester requires indiscriminate, across-the-board reductions in the growth of spending, half of them affecting the Defense budget and half affecting non-defense spending.

“But when you get underneath the surface, the federal budget is divided into thousands of different accounts,” Holtz-Eakin explained. “Each account gets cut by the same amount, regardless of what’s in it. So, we have some accounts that are payroll, some accounts that are conferences, travel, whatever it may be. They’ll get the same cut, regardless of what’s in there.”

Without transfer authority, “you can’t shift the money around…There’s no ability to ship money to high priority projects, and you know, low priority takes the cut. Everybody gets a cut regardless.”

Fine, House Republicans should go ahead and pass a transfer authority bill to better defend themselves from the sure-to-be media-assisted blame game after the sequester. They should not wait in silence for President Obama to ask for it. Of course, the GOP House has already passed  legislation with specific spending cuts to replace the sequester that eliminate the ability of the President to claim impending disaster. But, again, of course, the President is refusing to let the 24/7 crisis aka his presidency go to waste and using the impending sequester as yet another opportunity to demand that “the rich” pay more in taxes. No word yet on why the tax hikes already passed this year are no longer their “fair share”.

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

Thursday, February 21, 2013 at 12:28 PM

4 comments

  1. If, as you point out, “the GOP House has already passed legislation with specific spending cuts to replace the sequester that eliminate the ability of the President to claim impending disaster.”

    Then of what utility is your assertion that, “House Republicans should go ahead and pass a transfer authority bill to better defend themselves from the sure-to-be media-assisted blame game after the sequester. They should not wait in silence for President Obama to ask for it.”

    As Krauthammer points out, he’s not going to ask for it because he’s looking for a fight.

    Why is he looking for a fight? Because his strategic goal is to regain democrat control of the House in 2014. His tactic is to use fiscal ‘crisis’ in the blame game of republicans that you point out.

    He wins either way, either the republicans cave and he gets higher taxes to fuel ever greater deficit spending for the entitlement state or more jobs are lost, the economy gets worse and he, with the assistance of the MSM places all the blame on the republicans and evil rich, which results in more political gains for democrats.

    Obama has rightly judged that enough Americans have drunk the left’s kool-aid long enough, that no matter what happens, no matter what the republicans do, they get the blame. So, Obama is confident that even if the House republicans pass a transfer-authority bill, he can still credibly (in the minds of a public shaped by duplicitous MSM coverage) blame the republicans and get away with it.

    And the 2012 election proves that he’s right…

    Like an investor that’s bought a bad stock headed for the cellar, voters can’t bite the bullet and cut their losses because they’re emotionally invested in the outcome.

    Since Obama could care less about the economic health of the nation, we’re all going to get badly burned and that is intentional too.

    “Crisis is the rallying cry of the tyrant.” James Madison

    As is obvious, it’s all about advancing the left’s agenda.

    • I think its best to remove any claim Obama could make that any of these draconian cuts in emergency and other vital services are de facto required by across-the-board cuts to specific accounts with a clean transfer authority bill. But yes, given that we have passed at least one other budget bill to replace the sequester, we do have some cover.

  2. Once upon a time we had a game called “pin the tail on the donkey”, then PETA got involved (and I was corrected once that the acronym DOES NOT stand for “personal enjoyment of tasty animals”). Kind funny when you think about it, what with the donkey and all…

    It’s rare to be able to stick blame on our “white glove” fraud in chief. In this case his fingerprints are all over this one. I say extract as much “gloat” as we can, then cave (I know we’ll cave but for once make sure everybody knows the facts before we do).

  3. Say everything goes Obama’s way. He has threatened the loss of police, fire, and teaching personnel, air traffic controllers, and on and on. What happens when people find out the feds do not pay teachers, police and firemen? What happens when there is no noticeable change in their lives? I think, as usual, the democrats are over reaching and it could backfire.

Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>