James Q. Lynch, CR Gazette –
A last-resort measure approved a year ago to avert a federal budget crisis is forcing a choice between a “hollow military” and “the whole array of programs that undergird the middle class,” according to Iowa’s U.S. senators.
Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley and Democratic Sen. Tom Harkin (pictured) agree the debate over sequestration, which mandates cuts in federal spending, is shaping up to be a battle over protecting defense spending and maintaining the human services, education and workforce programs.
They don’t agree on which argument should prevail, but seem to think there has to be an alternative to forced spending cuts if Congress does not enact a plan before Jan. 1 to reduce the national debt by $1.2 trillion.
Although defense spending makes up less than 20 percent of the federal budget, 50 percent of the cuts required under sequestration would affect defense personnel and programs.
Non-defense spending would be hit, too, Harkin warned earlier this week. Education and other agencies would be forced to make “mindless across-the-board cuts.”
Iowa, he said, stands to lose $2.7 billion for just three key education programs – Title I, special education grants and Head Start.
“Sequestration does not have to happen,” Harkin insisted. “We need to put ideology aside. We need to come together to produce a balanced agreement, one that has both spending cuts and revenue increases that will reduce the deficit, avoid sequestration and protect federal investments that are critical to the middle class.”
Grassley agrees there should be a middle ground, but is puzzled by what he sees as a lack of leadership from the president because to Republicans “it’s to (President) Obama’s political advantage to find an alternative to sequestration.” That’s because defense industry leaders say without a reprieve from cuts in defense spending they will begin sending lay-off notices to employees shortly before the Nov. 6 election.
Under labor regulations, Grassley explained, the lay-off notices are required to be sent to employees 60 to 90 days prior to a lay-off.
“Why would the president want hundreds of thousands of lay-off notices going out to defense contractors and their suppliers just before election because he didn’t make a decision on adjusting sequestration so it didn’t fall so heavily on defense?” Grassley wondered.
His concern, which Grassley said is shared by the president’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, is that the cuts would create a “hollow military.”
“Let me make very clear, I don’t think a single Republican isn’t saying that some money can be saved — and has to be saved — on defense,” Grassley said. However, in the past three years Congress has identified between $400 million and $500 million worked in some 4 or 500 billion in defense savings. “So you’re talking about another $50 billion a year on top of that.”
Harkin is warning against making deeper cuts in non-defense spending to spare the defense industry. Some cuts make sense, such as reducing funding for the F-22 stealth fighter, which he called a “Cold War relic.”
He doesn’t want to see cuts in support for veterans, especially those who have been wounded, as well as troops in the field.
However, a George Mason University report showed that under sequestration, Iowa’s veteran and service-disabled veteran businesses would lose more than $6.9 million in revenue.
It’s not as if non-defense programs won’t feel some pain as a result of the Budget Control Act, Harkin said.
In Iowa, 4,677 fewer people would be admitted to substance abuse treatment programs, 496 fewer veterans would receive employment assistance, and 1,588 fewer students would receive Federal Work Study financial aid as a result of sequestration, Harkin said.
He released a report showing the impact of the cuts in both dollars and jobs lost. Job losses would include 156 in Head Start program, 105 jobs in Title I programs and 1,470 K-12 teachers.
The George Mason study projected more than 11,000 jobs in Iowa lost as a result of sequestration – slightly more than half as a result of non-defense cuts.
That reinforces the argument for finding a balanced approach to deficit reduction that prevents sequestration, but protects the middle class, Harkin said.
“Some members of Congress warn that defense contracting firms will lay off employees if sequestration goes into effect,” he said. “They say nothing of the tens of thousands of teachers, police officers and other public servants in communities all across America who would also lose their jobs. A laid-off teacher is just as unemployed as a laid-off defense contractor.”
