Nikii Haley’s kids apparently have more common sense than many of the lawmakers in Washington.
On March 1, the sequester will automatically impose about $85 billion (2.4 percent) in “cuts” on the federal budget unless Congress and the White House work out yet another deal. President Obama and the Democrats want to raise taxes to avoid the sequester, but Republicans don’t.
Ever notice that whenever anyone tries to cut even a tiny, insignificant amount out of the massive federal budget, all the sky-is-falling scare tactics become immediately rolled out, in this case by the Obama administration?
Put the firefighters and police behind the podium for yet another finger-pointing political speech that will get everyone panicking and hold America psychologically hostage. Why any administration (and both parties are culpable in running up the debt) would insist on spending the county into bankruptcy is inexplicable. No business of any size or a family could function in that manner, could it? Morever, the private sector has had to collectively tighten their belts over the past four-plus years — why should the public sector be immune from marketplace forces.
As part of this political gamesmanship, Homeland Security — which already does not fully enforce the immigration laws — has even released hundreds of detainees, some of whom may be dangerous criminals, as a way to blackmail Congress and the American people into accepting higher taxes.
Look on the bright side; at least we’re not being bored to death with manufactured panic over the “fiscal cliff.”
Sen. Marco Rubio has already opined that the president is obsessed with raising taxes and expanding government spending programs despite a crippling $16 trillion debt.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal recently told reporters at a Republican Governors Association news conference that Obama is “trying to scare the American people” in order to generate a public outcry against the sequester.
This despite the fact that many government programs are wasteful, inefficient, and even fraudulent, and cutting back on them by a miniscule amount will no affect on public safety or essential services. Many of these runaway and counterproductive spending programs are about bureaucrats pushing paper from one end of the desk to another — the kind of workers that never have to report on snow days. In fact, we’d be far more prosperous as nation if America was less dependent on corporate welfare and personal welfare and the public sector employees who administer these handouts.
That’s where Rena and Nalin Haley, ages 14 and 10 respectively, come in.
Their mom, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley — whose husband just deployed to Afghanistan with the National Guard — met with the president during a private meeting on Monday with state executives, and afterward she told reporters that Obama refused to even consider a very reasonable two percent cut in the federal budget (which would likely be a cut in the rate of increase) without increasing taxes. Gov. Haley told reporters,
“I could not be more frustrated than I am right now.
“My kids could go and find $83 billion out of a $4 trillion budget. This is not rocket science.”
An editorial posted on the CNN website wondered about the sequester-driven horror stories about impending “deep” cuts:
“All this for a spending cut that the Congressional Budget Office estimates will be around $44 billion in 2013, a tiny sliver of the federal budget. Imagine the squeals if it included significant cuts.
“No doubt there will be those who find such fear-mongering persuasive. But for the rest of us, it suggests a rather pressing and relevant question: Just what, precisely, did we get from doubling the cost of the federal government between 2000 and 2010?
“If the bureaucrats can’t produce an explanation for the price increase of government, then they should not expect their budgets to be rubber-stamped by an already suffering public.”
Do you think the sequester, if it goes into motion, will have any actual impact on your life?