What to Know About The Defense Budget Sequester
By Lauren Moore | 07/19/2012 | Budget, Headline, Issues | 6 Comments
Today, the House took their first steps at resolving the looming defense budget cuts by drafting legislation requiring the Obama Administration to plan out how and where massive government cuts will take place in a report to Congress. The vote was 414-2.
Every year a business needs to plan a budget for the following fiscal year. Government is no different and the United States has begun its yearly debates regarding spending for the upcoming year. While no exact budget has been drafted yet, important steps have already been taken, and it is necessary to understand what is going on and what it means to the every day person.
What is the defense budget?
The defense budget is the amount of money that the US government allocates to any defense-related spending. This includes any military salaries, training, healthcare, weapons, equipment, facilities, and operations for all five branches of the military will be covered by the budget allocated this year.
What makes this year’s budget proceeding so special?
This year, Congress will have to address sequestration. A sequester is defined as “the action of taking legal possession of assets until a debt has been paid or other claims have been met,” and with regards to the budget, it means that Congress will now be forced to make cuts to make up for the $15.8 trillion debt that we have currently accumulated. This is a result of the Budget Control Act of 2011, which would allow for a sequestration if the debt was not controlled. Both Republicans and Democrats supported the bill, though neither party is especially happy with the overwhelming cuts they now need to face.
What is getting cut?
The Budget Control Act requires that $1.2 trillion be cut across all the government department budgets. The Department of Defense itself is required to cut $487 billion in the next ten years. Nothing specific has been set as of yet, as Congress makes moves to avoid across-the-board cuts as required by sequestration.
What repercussions will the cuts have on citizens and the economy?
Reports released this week have concluded that if the government goes through with the sequester cuts it could take away 2 million jobs from the American economy, which could then reduce GDP by $215 billion. If the Pentagon is to follow the required steps by the Budget Control Act, it is to cut spending by $56.7 billion in the first year, which would then directly cut 325,693 jobs and then indirectly cut 764,666 jobs.
Stephen Fuller, an economist at George Mason University and responsible for the stats says:
“The results are bleak but clear-cut. The unemployment rate will climb above 9 percent, pushing the economy toward recession and reducing projected growth in 2013 by two-thirds.”




Leave Your Comment →
6 Comments
Brad R. Schlesinger
07.19.2012
@bradschlesinger
If the argument for not cutting defense is that people will lose jobs and unemployment will go up, then that is no argument at all. It just goes to show that the military industrial complex is truly a government sponsored make work project — that just so happens to bring mass destruction and death in so many places around the world. The defense should be cut in half, at least.
Craig D. Schlesinger
07.19.2012
@craigschlesinger
Scare tacticts about unemployment resulting from cuts in the defense budget are downright laughable. Ending slavery made unemployment skyrocket to the tune of…every freed slave! What an economic nightmare! Quick, bring back slavery to fix the economy. Sounds pretty absurd, eh? Maybe if we stop the mass murder and destruction we will actually see PEACE & PROSPERITY. How novel…
Brad R. Schlesinger
07.21.2012
@bradschlesinger
“If every worker was staffed in the army and fleet, we’d have full employment, and nothing to eat.”
Michael Higham
07.19.2012
@michaelhigham
Cuts to research and development should be considered first. I believe that’s where a lot of unnecessary spending is, upgraded already advanced weaponry. It’s hard for me to advocate cuts in military personnel because my family and friends are effected by that. A lot of my friends go into the military who don’t have anything else to do. I even have a couple of friends trying to get into OCS and friend who just got commissioned as a 2LT in the Marines but is on hold for over a year.
I definitely see the “make work” argument by Brad. These are jobs, but jobs that indirectly result in destruction of others. There’s so much money flowing through the military industrial complex, and I believe it needs to be stopped. I have little faith in it happening though.
Brad R. Schlesinger
07.21.2012
@bradschlesinger
I certainly understand where you’re coming from — having family and friends in the military. I imagine I’d be more hostile to cuts if that was the case for me. You’re absolutely right about all the money flowing through the MIC though. And I agree, it doesn’t seem like there’s any chance of turning off the faucet.
Faith McVey
07.22.2012
Having been raised military, military myself, and married to military, budget cuts affecting basic pay and allowances is insulting – these people already get paid little enough. Research and Development, at least a great portion of it, is a big part of the problem. However, I believe that a great deal of the problem lies in continuing to pay govt contractors (at their standard high rates) whether a project meets a deadline or not. If this practice alone were addressed, at least some impact would be made on this ridiculous budget, along with a little more common sense used in choosing which Research and Development projects to pursue. Respectfully.