Crying 'Hamster!': 'Sequestration' is a manufactured crisis
By George F. Will
Published: Saturday, Feb. 23, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Even during this desultory economic recovery, one industry thrives — the manufacture of synthetic hysteria. It is, however, inaccurate to accuse the Hysteric in Chief of crying “Wolf!” about spending cuts under the sequester. He is actually crying “Hamster!”
As in: Batten down the hatches — the sequester will cut $85 billion from this year's $3.6 trillion budget!
Or: Head for the storm cellar — spending will be cut 2.3 percent!
Or: Washington chainsaw massacre — we must scrape by on 97.7 percent of current spending!
Or: Chaos is coming because the sequester will cut a sum $25 billion larger than was just shoveled out the door (supposedly, but not actually) for victims of storm Sandy!
Or: Heaven forfend, the sequester will cut 47 percent as much as was spent on the AIG bailout!
Or: Famine, pestilence and locusts will come when the sequester causes federal spending over 10 years to plummet from $46 trillion all the way down to $44.8 trillion!
Or: Grass will grow in the streets of America's cities if the domestic agencies whose budgets have increased 17 percent under President Obama must endure a 5 percent cut!
The sequester has forced liberals to clarify their conviction that whatever the government's size is at any moment, it is the bare minimum necessary to forestall intolerable suffering. At his unintentionally hilarious hysteria session last Tuesday, Obama said: The sequester's “meat-cleaver approach” of “severe,” “arbitrary” and “brutal” cuts will “eviscerate” education, energy and medical research spending. “And already, the threat of these cuts has forced the Navy to delay an aircraft carrier that was supposed to deploy to the Persian Gulf.”
“Forced”? The Navy did indeed cite the sequester when delaying deployment of the USS Truman. In the high-stakes pressure campaign against Iran's nuclear weapons program, U.S. policy has been to have two carriers in nearby waters. Yet the Navy is saying it cannot find cuts to programs or deployments less essential than the Truman deployment.
The Navy's participation in the political campaign to pressure Congress into unraveling the sequester is crude, obvious and shameful and should earn the Navy's budget especially skeptical scrutiny by Congress.
The Defense Department's civilian employment has grown 17 percent since 2002. In 2012, DOD spending on civilian personnel was 21 percent higher than in 2002. And the Truman must stay in Norfolk? This is, strictly speaking, unbelievable.
The sequester's critics correctly say it is not the most intelligent way to prune government; priorities among programs should be set. But such critics are utopians if they are waiting for the arrival of intelligent government. The real choice today is between bigger or smaller unintelligent government.
Obama, who believes government spends money more constructively than do those who earn it, warns that the sequester's budgetary nicks, amounting to one half of 1 percent of gross domestic product, will derail the economy. A similar jeremiad was heard in 1943 when economist Paul Samuelson, whose Keynesian assumptions have trickled down to Obama, said postwar cuts in government would mean “the greatest period of unemployment and industrial dislocation which any economy has ever faced.”
Federal spending did indeed shrink an enormous 40 percent in one year.
And the economy boomed.
Because crises are government's excuse for growing, liberalism's motto is: Never let a crisis go unfabricated. But its promiscuous production of crises has made them boring.
George F. Will is a columnist for The Washington Post and Newsweek.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- State Supreme Court rules municipalities can limit what gas drillers can do
- Man ordered to trial on charges that he raped an 85-year-old nun
- Gateway’s Nicholson picks Michigan State over Pitt
- 2 plead guilty in Greensburg torture slaying
- Penguins winger Neal refining game, attitude
- Kovacevic: These Penguins an inside job
- Technology company to bring 500 jobs to Pittsburgh
- Del Monte to pursue pet foods, sell its consumer canned products unit to Philippines company
- NHL suspends Penguins’ Engelland 5 games
- Short-handed Penguins get win over Rangers
- Initiative aided by former Pitt star allows independent living for adults with disabilities