WASHINGTON — The potentially massive cuts in federal spending that could cascade through federal and state agencies beginning in three days were conceived a year and a half ago as Washington’s own version of a game of chicken.
The across-the-board reductions in everything from military spending to aid to the poor would prove so politically unpalatable, the thinking went, that the political parties would be forced to agree on a more sound plan to bring the deficit under control.
Comments
I am waiting for the first person to blame this on Bush. It is time for Congress to put on their Big Boys Pants and justify the faith their constituates granted them
Bonehead Bush bears absolutely no responsibility for the economic disaster he left us with at the end of his term???
Potlemac, that wasn't the question. No rational mind will debate the fact that we were overdrawn at the end of his term and Tim didn't even remotely give the former President a free pass. Given the way you won't let go of history, why don't we dig up the graves of men who took us off the Gold Standard and mock them for what they did?
Let it shut down, the people are tired of hearing about government.
That works just fine until you want to eat inspected meat or board an airplane.
This comment has been removed.
Ok, let's not even mention George Bush! It's all President Obama's fault. Hmmm.
From your tone I gather you think Our Dear Leader bares non of the responsibility. I'll give you this much, he is no Harry Truman.
This comment has been removed.
Not one word mentioned that there have been no buggets passed since Obama took office. That is the real problem yet the Globe failed to acknowledge that.
The last 4 years have been more of a fiscal disaster than the previuos 8 years. Obama created a game of political chicken that he cannot out manuver on. His failings are about to come home to roost!
Did you read the article? Congress has been using continuing resolutions for nearly 20 years to avoid passing budgets.
It's too hard to read the article when you have Right Wing Talking Points popping out of your mouth.
This wasn't an opinion piece. It was a straight up new article. However, as usual the comment section is already had its share of partisan shots by folks who just can't stand reality. Is Warren Rudman some kind of "liberal" big spender, not hardly. But he recognizes the complicity of both parties.
An unwillingness on the part of Repubs. to face the realities of shorfalls in revenues, the unwillingness of Dems. to address the issue of entitlements have led us to this point in time. Now some folks are in love with the idea of smaller government and that is fine. But these folks including those who sit in Congress need to come to grips with the fact that at their core the public has already and on numerous occasions rejected the idea of smaller govt. They want their SS, Medicare, educational funding, infratructure, unemployment and all of that good stuff govt. provides. Certainly when one makes the argumet, wasted money, blah, blah, a nice generalized argument people will agree with you. But they don't want govt. out of their lives, they like it.
So until both parties recognize what they see before their own eyes and man up tell the public what needs to be done we will continue along the clown path until you create quite a mess or the public moves en masse to one party or another. I don't think they will move to an austerity party. So get to work boys.
Turk, whoa, whoa, whoa. You make some false assumptions.
"the public has already and on numerous occasions rejected the idea of smaller govt. They want their SS, Medicare, educational funding, infratructure, unemployment and all of that good stuff govt. provides"
The "public" is not one large, single minded entity. If it were, there would be no question about taxing until we ran off the tracks. Some people want some programs, some want more programs than others. But not everyone wants "all that good stuff".
This whole excercise is about reigning in the tax and spend habits of democrats who like to get their votes by promising the moon, stars and planets to their constituents (typically the big city dwellers) at the expense of everyone else. We all know that the dems really strong base is the large cities.
The dems cannot move to cut "programs" or it will the end of their party. Telling the reps to move more to the middle only serves to weaken theirs. There is a serious division going on among the people how govt is viewed and its role via programs and such, and it is being reflected in the congress.
This whole excercise is about reigning in the tax and spend habits of democrats-----Thet's not the whole exercise. Tht's one sided. It is also about the big moneyed interests that own the government (billionaires, corporations , banks) who like the 60 years of continually reduced taxes the got and do not want any changes.
Yea lets shut it down We do not need policeman, fireman and schools anyway. We need to go back to the colonial days when each family taught their own children what they needed to know. Eliminate traffic lights, stop paving roads. We could save a lot by going back to dirt roads. Stop providing water to people. Everyone should pay the same amount as it costs to buy a gallon in the supermarket.
Dewitt, do try to keep up. This is a story about the Federal government. I know liberals like to look to their daddies and mommies in Washington for everything, but police, fire and education are stste responsibilities.
MBA is another hard case like Christie of NJ who was sooooo glad to see Obama get off the plane after Sandy.
the only one's to blame in this mess is we...the voters
It's hard to play chicken with people who have no skin in the game.
Meaning what exactly? I take it to mean that Rep's cannot play chicken with Dem's, since democratic voters have no skin in the game, they are typically the ones who receive all the benefits of the wonderful govt giveaways.
Since the dems just keep promising more and more to their base, and their base keeps sitting in the big cities watching TV, they will definitely need to raise taxes, loopholes are just a first step. But since their base pays very little in taxes, the money is going to have to come from somewhere, isn't it? MORE TAXES. No one has successfully put the inner city deadbeats to work in my lifetime, so all this talk about creating jobs is to make sure the rest of America goes to work to pay for the deadbeats.
"the inner city deadbeats"
Since when is 2% "massive". And uncle sam is still spending more then last year. So when it happens and there is not real effect. comrade oblunder shuts down things to make his point. The adoring media will point the camera at someone that now professes to have to eat cat food ( and not the gourmet cat food). This will be the second comming of y2k.
Ever since the radical right took control of the republican party they've been playing brinkmanship with the American economy!
If you have that idea, then your ONLY news source is the Boston Globe.
Better than Fox who thinks its a left wing conspiracy for Obama to play golf with Tiger in private.
The OPIONATED Globe Headline says it all. Globe headlines are always opinionated. ..You don't even have to read the article to know that the Globe article will attempt to shift blame from Obama to those unnamed evil people of yesteryear (or even yesterday). As far as the Globe is concerned, Obama gets credit for anything good that happens. And that includes situations when Obama either opposed the good result or had nothing to do with it. And, of course, as in the current situation, Obama can't possibly be responsible for anything bad that happens. Even if the bad result occurred partly or all from Obama's domestic or foreign policies or agenda...And the article could have pointed out that in the Senate, the Majority Leader can prevent most bills from coming to a vote if he wishes.
This comment has been removed.
Never let a crisis go to waste
some facts:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/341553/obama-caught-lying-about-sequester-deroy-murdock
let me guess, people did not like the source...but you cant argue the facts - just name calling
This comment has been removed.
I wonder if they would play chicken if they were about to be layed off and lose their healthcare. My solution- the first cut would be to have all congressmen work without pay or benefits until a budget compromise is worked out!
cancel pay and benefits - i like it
"History" No I would hold that you make the gross assumption.. We can have these debates regarding the size of govt. but the fact is you want a reduced role. But every time the public is asked cut SS, Medicare, educatinal funding, the answer is a resounding no. You and those like you simply say - no isn't the right answer - we have the right answer and that answer is cut these programs. You're fully entitled to that opinion however when I commen I am merely commenting on what is possible. You don't have majority support, you do not have electoral. I am just saying be rational, be political you go for what you can get not what ideology says what you must stand for. Stand for it all you want but you'll lose.
Even now pragmatic Republicans are coming out for gay marriage, immigration, even Repulican Governors such as Brewer and others are saying, "cut a deal". This is called politics. Now the Republican Party of which I was once a member has a choice that I presented. Face the reality, the public wants certain things. Tell the public the truth regarding the cost of those things, don't oppose those things merely express the truth regarding cost. If the public still desires those programs at their cost of increased revenues then you must deal with that position. Otherwise the conservative position isn't, "we want a balanced budget", it becomes we don't want the programs that the public wants. You want to run on that, knock yourself out, but we already know what the result will be. You lose.
So ignore all of Obama's threats:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/02/26/the_fairy_tale_on_spending_cuts_117168.html
let the cuts happen. shut down the whole scam. don't believe the scare tactics
This comment has been removed.
attaturk is on target. It's more or less an everyone is to blame situation. I don't like the rhetoric from either the left or the right. President Obama should have been more aggressive at the end of 2010 when his own bi-partisan financial commission, Simpson-Bowles, tqht he appointed gave their time, service and expertise to the President and our country. President Obama simply didn't lead on any part, as in none of their recommendations. In my opinion and in the opinion of some very fair minded people throughout the country it was the single greatest failure of his first term. He could have at least cleaned up the corporate tax code and as such lowered the corporate rates for the growth engines of our economy businessess with fewer than 500 employees, businesses with fewer than 50 employees, and knock out the ridiculous tax loopholes the mega corporations have mined into our tax code throug highly paid lobbyist, that's a fundamentaql fairness issue. We need economic growth, we have all the innate and natural resource assets to be the most dynamic and best place to do business and create jobs in the world. We'll never get to where we need to be without sensible, fair, commonsense pro-growth economic policies. How about applying means testing to folks who are doing quite well and are still receiving full social security benefits and pay the same premiums for Medicare as someone, and they are many, who have a social security check as their only source of income, that's insane. No one with a half a brain blames President Obama for the fiscal crisis nor at least 60% of the new debt in his first term which is already basked into the cake with the built in entitlement payments for the important life sustaning programs that Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are, throw in Military Spending and Interest on the National Debt and that's 85% of the Federal Budget. But please don't tell me that the Federal Government is not replight with waste, fraud and abuse and 2.5% of the rate of growth in spending can't be cut. Was the sequester, that was the President's advisors idea poorly crafted, yes, give the power to make these cuts back to the agencies, stop demagouging, stage crafting and trying to scare people and start getting the greatest country in the world, that still has the most potential, in every possilble way, to remain the greatest most open,innovative, free and prosperous economy in the world. It's all here, we have it all and we can run down both tracks, have a dynamic economy, that continues to reward hard work, innovation, ideas and success, while also having a compassionate society that helps lift up and provide a stable safety net for our brothers and sisters, young, old and all ages in between who are struggling and less fortunate and they are many. I know President Obama is a compassionate man who cares about people. I like many of his ideas and things he's achieved. The Stimulus did a lot of good, it did, but it should have simultaneously been followed up with his leadership on the implementiton of a few, some of the Simpson-Bowles recommendations and there's no excuse for that.