Today, Washington is abuzz with wonky discussions on potential mandatory budget cuts that will hit on Jan. 2. The process is called “sequestration.” It is so technical that right now you may be tempted to move on to another article. After all, this is merely “inside Washington baseball,” right? Sadly, it isn’t.
The Department of Defense (DoD) budget is set to absorb the lion’s share of the New Year’s cuts, which will go into effect if steps are not taken to stop them. DoD makes up about 11 percent of federal spending, but will eat 47 percent of the cuts. That’s a pretty sizable chunk.
Several concerned congressmen and senators have begun to do “road shows” to raise awareness of the issue. Their main focus is on the communities that will be most directly hit, those around the big federal military facilities. Think Fayetteville, N.C., San Diego and Norfolk, Va. The message to these folks is primarily an economic one, and one that focuses on the dangerous effects on the defense industrial base.
What about you? What about all those Americans who don’t live near a fort or a base, or have jobs that support defense? No big deal, right? Unfortunately, you would be dead wrong.
Two prominent experts in the field of homeland security — one a former assistant secretary of defense, the other a retired three-star general from the National Guard — discussed this issue recently at The Heritage Foundation. They pointed out an overlooked effect of the cuts. That would be the ability of DoD to fund the National Guard when they’re under the command and control of their state governors.
The Guard (Air and Army) can serve in three different manners under present law. One is State Active Duty (funded by the state, and under command of the state). The next is Federal Duty (funded by DoD, under DoD command — called Title 10, the equivalent of the regular federal military).
The third one is called Title 32. This is funded by DoD, but still under the command of the state to which the troops belong. This is currently the most prevalent way to use the Guard when you have a problem. It allows the cash-strapped states to use their assets as they see fit (which is normally the most effective way), but to allow DoD to pay the salaries of the troops.
Wildfires? Call out the Guard, ask for Title 32. Floods? Title 32 again. Major catastrophic event across multiple states (such as a big earthquake in the Midwest, or a series of coordinated terrorist events)? Title 32 is still the way to go. It leverages the local know-how and connections with key local assets, but allows the cost to be handled by the feds.
If sequestration hits, the ability of DoD to provide these Title 32 funds will go away. All that discretionary ability to help your governor to use your state’s National Guard assets will evaporate. The governor will be forced to make the call to send help or not, based on his or her own very limited budget. You could be left waiting a long time before help arrives.
Sequestration is not a “Washington” issue. It will hit any one of us, regardless of where we live or what we do, and it will hurt. These cuts must be reversed. This is no longer an academic or theoretical discussion, but one that will have potentially devastating effects on every American.
• Bucci is senior research fellow for defense and homeland security at The Heritage Foundation.
Comments (48)
Add commentUh, it's not President Obama
NewLife, it was not President Obama that passed the sequestration bill - it was both houses of Congress, with most Republicans and Democrats voting in favor.
But I get it. Haters just gonna hate.
oh noes,
a US president made a decision that would help his reelection bid? Oh noes!!!!!!! The treason! The horror! The treachery! Blast!
This must be because the administration is... gasp... liiibbbeerrraallllll.
Aaaaaaaand these things happen every election year.
Don't let me rain on your parade. Carry on. What was it, Obama is satan, or something like that? Obama created world hunger, maybe? Hisssss.... booooooo.....
So they will put all the cuts
So they will put all the cuts on the local US based aspects of the military, who are already strapped. Why not start closing some of the bases on non-US soil? I don't think Germany or Japan are going to rise again. We can scramble fighters to any part of the planet in a matter of hours. Leave 10-20 strategic bases around the globe, but close the remaining hundred or so. That should absorb a lot of those cuts...
for NewLife
You said, "Obama doesn't want anyone to know that the liberals" actions are gonna raise unemployment." It was not "the liberal's actions, it was both Republicans and Democrats that past sequestration.
But thanks for letting me know what the world looks like from inside Rush Limbaugh's colon.
Conservative think tanks - spreading fear in an election year
Not much here except it may affect the voters in disaster prone southeast states. I guess they mean to tell us that the U.S. won't open up its coffers for local disasters if we don't fully fund the Military Industrial Complex.
Desperate times call for desperate measures I guess.
Need more National Guard in Afghanistan?
Title 32 is the way to go.
It's lack of policy, not lack of $$$
the govt will find a way to come up with the $$$ to ensure that TS Isaac doesnt leave a wake of havoc, or that Colorado doesnt burn down next summer. That's not a concern. Cuts this deep in defense are going to leave a mark across the DoD, and we're in no position to enjoy a peace dividend.
I have a novel idea to get more bang for the defense buck.
Reposition non-tactical troops and resources scattered over the globe to where we actually need them. Want to save a military base (and its economic value to Americans)?
Close bases left over from W.W.II, Korean War, Cold War.
"...other than Obama who has
"...other than Obama who has KILLED more jobs, destroyed more families, more communities, more states. Name one, I dare you!"
Really? Ok... George W Bush.
"Distract, Destroy, Denounce.
"Mission Accomplished" "
Like WMDs? And the mission accomplished was George Bush's slogan.
"I have a "novel idea to get more bang for the defense buck",,,Reposition all the America haters on the front lines to hug and give a flower to their comrades who are trying to kill real Americans!"
Really? The America heters that live in America? I'm sorry, but your level of stupid is undebatable.
@NewLife
Oh, don't get mad newfy.....I didn't mean to hurt your feelings.
defense
We need to stop the wars that GWB stared, and got in the financial straights that we are in now! NOT Obama! Look at the war in Iraq got us. NOTHING but the death of US Men and Women. THe ones coming back are minus body parts and suffer from PTSD
GWB is a distraction
GWB and his Congressionally-sanctioned actions against Saddam have nothing in common with BHO's cabalistic management of the economy and deficit spending. What's more, cleaving the DoD's budget nearly in half doesnt align with the Quadrennial Defense Review of Feb 2010 that identified the trouble spots & helmet fires we can expect thru 2014.
AKlife? Who is that?
Normally, I would post critical question to Aklife, but since AKlife is a pseudonym, he-she is most likely just a troll.
My question would have been "What right(s) have you lost since Obama has been President?"
Nobody on these forums should get worked by trolls who do not post their real names.
D. Copenhaver
Juneau, AK
The big picture here and the
The big picture here and the most important is the fact that Skippy will be delivered his own personal pink slip come November. Romney has already stated that he will overturn the defense cuts along with other screw ups that BO has implemented. If not I believe there will be some 200k plus non-working American’s on Skippy’s welfare plan starting January 2, 2013.
@MIlspec
Dream on, because Obama loosing is NOTHING but a dream!
typo or lingo?
I think you mean "losing", bilb; Obama's been loosing since January '09.
cheesypoof: slow down a bit before your responses...
apoplectic keystrokes are not healthy for you.
Keep the faith Billb, it’s
Keep the faith Billb, it’s all you have left. The man is nothing but a screw-up. I can’t think of one thing he has done to improve this country in the last 4 years.
"GWB and his
"GWB and his Congressionally-sanctioned actions against Saddam have nothing in common with BHO's cabalistic management of the economy and deficit spending. "
haha, that's funny. Like how?
Conressionally-sanctioned... I like how you threw that in there like it adds something of value to your argument. It does not.
By the way, GWB's actions are directly linked to our current situation. A fool would believe otherwise.
milspec
"I can’t think of one thing he has done to improve this country in the last 4 years."
People who aren't paying attention would say this^
The fact that the economy has shown improvement in every sector during the last 3 years, during a world economic meltdown, is proof that you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.
You don't have to attribute anything of benefit to Obama, just like you don't attribute anything negative to republicans. You still should be willing to admit that our current situation is far better than it was three years ago. If you are unable to at least do this, you don't have the maturity to vote in November.
to cheeesypoof
A fool? I've been called worse, and by worse. But what bothers me is that no one can articulate BHO's foreign policy objectives, nor add clarity to his strategic posturing (recall his "flexibility" promise to RS President Medvedev); and these 2 nuggets are cause for concern when it looks like his agenda is to starve out our military at a time when the weasels are starting to circle. What's the PLAN, man?
@cp
what was price of fuel 3 yrs ago? I think it was lower than what you see today. I am commfish type. I pay about 40% more for diesel now vs then, so I need good intel before I go out looking for sketchy fish.
Milk & bananas -- that's what I watch in the grocer, and they are about 25-30% higher than 3 yrs ago. I think your info is tainted. Fuel, fish, milk and bananas tell me different.
“BHO's cabalistic management
“BHO's cabalistic management of the economy and deficit spending." I like that poofy, cabalistic - having a secret or hidden meaning; fits well with Skippy’s agenda.
Just read your last post, wow, who's head is up who's butt?
Pull it out Poofy come up for air and get down off that alter before you hurt yourself.
Facts Mean Nothing
Republicans who think they can balance a budget that averages 20% of GDP while collecting less than 15% of GDP. It's just one more example of how facts mean nothing to the GOP.
Republican's don't need to refute the fact that the lion's share of the debt was run up by Republicans. They simply blame it on Obama, round up the size of the stimulus to have a number to throw around, and move on. Bald assertions, not facts, are the stock in trade of Republican discourse.
I get the biggest kick out of
I get the biggest kick out of everyone arguing "The republicans did this" or "The democrats did that" when both parties of Congress voted for all these items... The President didn't do anything, either GWB or Obama. Congress did, by majority. Take an American Govt class!
milspec, newlife,
"WOW! I just read your response to Milspec...
Not only are you a moron but you and incredibly STUPID too!
You have been spending to much time on the river "D-Nile", and I don't mean the river in Egypt!"
Thanks for the incredibely insightful feedback. Go away now.
"Just read your last post, wow, who's head is up who's butt?
Pull it out Poofy come up for air and get down off that alter before you hurt yourself."
ok... cool.
Grendel, did you know milspec and newlife share similar views as you? Probably something you should find concerning, considers these two dingbats are without a doubt completely ignorant on most anything that comes across the JE.
As far as being a fool, if you don't think Bush had a hand in our current situation, then you are a fool. Your statements suggest this is true.
BHO's foreign policy is the issue now? I thought it was his "cabalistic management of the economy and deficit spending." Could you not come up with any specific evidence to support your original claim?
His agenda to starve out the military is laughable. You weren't serious in suggesting this, were you? Obama's not gutting the department of defense. He had a hand in cutting back military spending over the next 10 years, back in January, but in no way has he shown any intent to starve out the military. He hasn't even cut military spending. He cut the rate of increased spending... It's time to be serious on this matter and quit forwarding chain email claims. In case you haven't figured it out, those chain emails filling your inbox are not correct.
The price of fuel hit a record high in July of 2008. We still haven't seen gas prices as high as they were under Bush, so your gas price indicator is garbage.
As for other commodities, what do you expect when a global economic downturn occurs, along with one of the worst droughts in US history? Do you expect commodities to cost more? So, let me further explain my point. You can't take specific key components of a specific period of time for a specific consumer, and say:
"Look, these three things were better under bush, as far as my memory goes, so therefore times were better under bush!"
And for the record grendel, if you believe what you just posted, you are a fool.
cp
you may recall that last time you were feeling sporty and engaged me I said you were incendiary. You still are. The only question you've asked me this time around is “like how?” (@12:36) Take a look at that question and figure out where you went wrong.
If you cant see the connection between foreign policy and national defense, I’m not the one to help you out. If you cant see the impact of executive mismanagement at ground level –again, I cant help you.
And learn some manners.
BS
What a lotta BS. Scare tactics (no National Guard fire protection) are always so easy to use. This has been the "conservative" tactic for 10 years.
We could cut military spending, seriously cut military spending and still spend more than most other countries combined. When you have to cut government spending...all areas should be cut. Not just roads and schools. This 11% reduction in increased spending is a good start.
It has always been the
It has always been the progressive agenda to gut America's military. Now we've got the washed up hippies from the 60's calling the shots in congress and their puppet in the White House signing the bills.
If these latest cuts kick in our country could be in a world of trouble when Iran or Russia or China or North Korea or Venezuela start lobbing bombs our way.
But the left just laughs and talks up America's presently strong and dominant military like they're experts on the subject.
Guess who'll be the first to scream, 'daddy, make them go away' when a missile lands in a school yard or downtown New York?
If the proposed $45B in cuts take effect in 2013 there will be a million or more workers added to the unemployment roles from direct and indirect job loses in the defense industry and all the way down to the grocer.
Is it possible for liberals to look past their noses and get over the emotional drama to see what's down the road? We live in a really dangerous world and personally, I'd like for America to have the biggest gun.
Seriously? The Cold War is
Seriously? The Cold War is over... Who's going to lob missiles at us? Canada? France? BULGARIA?
Calypso's programming has evidently been updated to perceive extreme cowardice in the face of remote, highly unlikely threats.