Source: CNS News
The impending sequester did not prevent the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) from acting in late February to seal a $50-million deal to purchase new uniforms for its agents–uniforms that will be partly manufactured in Mexico.Soon after this new investment in TSA uniforms, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano warned Americans that the lines are already lengthening at airports due to the sequester.
“We are already seeing the effect on the ports of entry, the big airports for example,” Napolitano told Politico on Monday. “Some of them had very long lines this weekend.”
Read more
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-05/janet-napolitano-dazed-and-confused-about-what-sequester-really-means
Janet Napolitano Dazed And Confused About What Sequester Really Means
In the face of Janet Napolitano's terrifying claims that major airports were already seeing lines "150 to 200 percent as long as we would normally expect" as a result of the budget-crushing sequestration cuts that went into force on Friday, The Telegraph reportsthat, in fact, LAX "haven't had any slowdowns." But how can that be? The government said it would all be horrible - and to think of the children... it appears Ms. Napolitano was speaking that dialect of English we call 'politician' as airports have'received no reports of unusual security delays.' Unpossible. The DHS would not return calls questioning her exclamations that she "did not mean to scare, just inform," about LAX, O'Hare, and Atlanta's Hartfield-Jackson. This scare-mongery follows Maxine Waters' 170 million unemployed claim andArne Duncan's teachers already being laid off claims. Trust, indeed.
Via The Telegraph,
Ms Napolitano said today that major airports were seeing lines "150 to 200 per cent as long as we would normally expect" as result of the federal spending cuts that went into force on Friday."We're already seeing the effects at some of the ports of entry, the big airports, for example. Some of them had very long lines this weekend," she told a breakfast event organised by Politico.When pressed for specifics she cited Chicago's O'Hare, Atlanta's Hartfield-Jackson and Los Angeles International Airport (LAX), adding: "I don't mean to scare, I mean to inform."..."We haven't had any slowdowns at all," said Marshall Lowe, a spokesman for LAX. Mr Lowe said that he had been on duty over the weekend and received no reports of unusual security delays.DeAllous Smith, a spokesman forHartfield-Jackson, said: "There have been no abnormally long lines at the security checkpointnor unusual aircraft delays at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport as a result of sequestration."Their comments were echoed by Karen Pride, the director of media relations at Chicago Department of Aviation, who described operations at O'Hare as "normal" with "no unusual delays or cancellations"....The Obama administration has been repeatedly accused of exaggerating the impact of the $85 billion in cuts as it seeks to pressure Republicans in Congress into replacing them with a mixture of spending reductions and tax rises....The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not immediately return a request for comment on Ms Napolitano's claim....Jean Medina, a spokeswoman for Airlines for America, the airline industry's trade group, also contradicted Ms Napolitano's claim. "We're not seeing any impact at the moment," Ms Medina said. "Our biggest problem this week is going to be weather rather than the sequester."..."I haven't heard of anything like that at all," ...
and.....
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/5/email-tells-feds-make-sequester-painful-promised/
The Obama administration denied an appeal for flexibility in lessening the sequester’s effects, with an email this week appearing to show officials in Washington that because they already had promised the cuts would be devastating, they now have to follow through on that.
In the email sent Monday by Charles Brown, an official with the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service office in Raleigh, N.C., Mr. Brown asked “if there was any latitude” in how to spread the sequester cuts across the region to lessen the impacts on fish inspections.
He said he was discouraged by officials in Washington, who gave him this reply: “We have gone on record with a notification to Congress and whoever else that ‘APHIS would eliminate assistance to producers in 24 states in managing wildlife damage to the aquaculture industry, unless they provide funding
to cover the costs.’ So it is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be.”
to cover the costs.’ So it is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be.”
“This email confirms what many Americans have suspected: The Obama administration is doing everything they can to make sure their worst predictions come true and to maximize the pain of the Sequester cuts for political gain,” said Rep. Tim Griffin, Arkansas Republican.
Republican.
Mr. Brown, the official who sent the email and who is eastern regional director for wildlife services at APHIS, didn’t immediately return a call Tuesday afternoon seeking comment.
APHIS is an agency within the Agriculture Department, and on Tuesday department Secretary Tom Vilsack was challenged on the email at a House committee hearing by Rep. Kristi Noem, who said she hoped the department wouldn’t tie agencies’ hands.
Mr. Vilsack said he hadn’t seen the email, but said agencies are supposed to be trying to find ways to manage the impact of the cuts.
“If we have flexibility, we’re going to try to use it to make sure we use sequester in the most equitable and least disruptive way,” the secretary testified. “There are some circumstances, and we’ve talked a lot about the meat inspection, where we do not have that flexibility because there are so few accounts.”
.”
The administration earlier had warned that supplies of beef, pork and poultry could drop this year because slaughterhouse inspectors will have to be furloughed, and under federal law meat can’t be processed without inspectors present.
Ms. Noem told Mr. Vilsack the email made it sound like the administration was sacrificing flexibility in order to justify dire predictions.
“I’m hopeful that isn’t an agenda that’s been put forward,” the South Dakota Republican congresswoman told Mr. Vilsack.
The $85 billion in sequesters began Friday, and have hit most of the federal government, where employees will face furloughs.
But even amid the cuts, APHIS is still hiring new employees and interns.
Since Sunday the agency has posted 24 help-wanted ads including 22 student internships, one ad seeking a clerk in a New York office, and one ad seeking three “insect production workers” to grow bollworms in Phoenix.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/dhs-plans-to-release-5000-illegal-immigrants-due-to-sequestration/article/2523295
House investigators learned Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials developed plans to release about 5,000 illegal immigrant detainees, although Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano has denied responsibility for the decision.
“An internal document obtained by the House Judiciary Committee shows that Administration officials at ICE prepared cold calculations to release thousands of criminal aliens onto the streets and did not demonstrate any consideration of the impact this decision would have on the safety of Americans,” committee chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., announced.
The ICE document contains a table that proposes “reduc[ing] invoiced daily population by 1,000 weekly.” Between February 22 and March 31st, this plan would drop the number of detainees from 30,748 to 25,748.
“The decision to release detained aliens undermines the Department of Homeland Security’s mission to keep our homeland secure and instead makes our communities less safe and more vulnerable to crime,” Goodlatte said. “[R]egardless of sequestration, DHS actually has plenty of funding to pay for the detention of criminal aliens. Unfortunately, it seems Administration officials are more interested in using sequestration to promote their political agenda than as an opportunity to get our nation’s fiscal house in order.”
Napolitano said that it wasn’t her decision, even though ICE is part of DHS. “Detainee populations and how that is managed back and forth is really handled by career officials in the field,” she told ABC.
She also confirmed that the releases would continue. “We are going to manage our way through this by identifying the lowest risk detainees, and putting them into some kind of alternative to release,” Napolitano said at a Politico event, per The Daily Caller.
The New York Times profiled a “low risk” detainee released by ICE. The detainee was taken into custody “when it was discovered that he had violated probation for a conviction in 2005 of simple assault, simple battery and child abuse, charges that sprung from a domestic dispute with his wife at the time.” NRO’s Jim Geraghty asked, “If convictions for ‘simple assault, simple battery and child abuse’ make you ‘low-risk,’ what do you have to do for Janet Napolitano to consider you ‘high-risk’?”http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/03/boehner-sequester-how-it-ends
Boehner on sequester: 'I don't think anyone quite understands' how it ends
US lawmakers on both sides show little room for negotiating way out of possibly devastating spending cuts that kicked in Friday
Email
Secretary of defense Chuck Hagel discusses the effects of the sequester on military operations, which bore the brunt of the cuts. Photograph: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters
Billions of dollars in sequester-induced budget cuts appear set to stay for the time being, with leading political figures in Washington indicating no early resolution to the impasse, as they eye next year's congressional elections.
John Boehner, the Republican speaker of the House of Representatives, said on Sunday he saw no path to agreement with the president over the $85bn in automatic cuts, about half to military spending, that kicked in on Friday after the two sides failed to agree a package of budget reductions and tax rises to tackle the deficit.
"I don't think anyone quite understands how it gets resolved," he said on NBC's Meet the Press.
Pressed on why he does not agree to the president's demand to increase revenues by closing tax loopholes, Boehner turned the question around and accused Barack Obama of failing to keep his side of the implicit bargain that higher taxes already agreed should be matched with spending cuts.
"The president got $650bn of higher taxes on the American people on January the first. How much more does he want? When is the president going to address the spending side of this?" said Boehner.
"You can't tax our way out of this problem. We've got to deal with the spending side, just like every American family has to."
Boehner said he made the same point at a "very frank" but polite meeting with the president on Friday.
Obama emerged from the encounter saying he saw little prospect of an agreement with Republicans in Congress in the near future. The president, apparently with one eye on the 2014 mid-term elections, predicted that it will take public opinion to shift the GOP.
"What I can't do is force Congress to do the right thing," he said after the meeting. "The American people may have the capacity to do that."
Obama suggested that voters, sick of lurching from one financial crisis to another, will pressure their representatives.
"After some reflection, as members of Congress start hearing from constituents who are being negatively impacted … that they step back and say, all right, is there a way for us to move forward on a package of entitlement reforms, tax reform, not raising tax rates, identifying programmes that don't work, coming up with a plan that's comprehensive, and that makes sense," he said.
"It's going to mean hundreds of thousands of jobs lost. That is real. We're not making that up. That's not a scare tactic, that's a fact."
The president has said he did not know how long it will take for the cuts to shift the Republican position.
"It may take a couple of weeks. It may take a couple of months," he said.
Gene Sperling, director of the White House National Economic Council, said Obama called a select group of Republican members of Congress on Saturday who may be more likely to consider "tax reform that raises revenues to lower the deficit". The president also spoke to Democratsopen to tackling entitlement spending long-term.
But the Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, said his party will not be backing down and remains committed to $1.2tn in spending cuts over the next decade without increasing taxes.
"I'm absolutely confident we're going to reduce spending the amount of money we promised the American people we would in a law the president signed a year and a half ago," he told CNN.
"We said we're open to discussing how to reconfigure those spending reductions without raising taxes … So far I haven't heard a single Senate Republican say they would be willing to raise a dime in taxes to turn off the sequester."
A report in the Washington Post on Sunday suggested that Obama had all but given up on attempts to push for bipartisan solutions to problems in Washington. Instead he was focusing on winning back the House in next year's mid-term elections to force through his remaining agenda.
But McConnell said he does not think voters will be swayed against Republicans.
"The American people look at this and say: gee, I've had to cut my budget more than this – probably on numerous occasions over the last four years because we've had such a tepid economy now for four long years," he said.
Boehner said he did not know what the long term effect of the sequester will be.
"I don't know whether it's going to hurt the economy or not. I don't think anyone quite understands how the sequester is really going to work," he said.
Still, the Republican leaders kept the door open to further negotiation at least on how the sequester cuts are distributed. They are keen to reduce the impact on the military and shift more of the burden to welfare spending which is already severely hit.
"We're willing to talk to him (Obama) about reconfiguring the same amount of spending reduction over the next six months," said McConnell.
Boehner said he did not think the spending crisis would reach the point of a government shutdown later this month, and that Congress will approve the funding to keep federal agencies open after March 27.
"We should not have any talk of a government shutdown so I'm hopeful that the House and Senate will be able to work through this," he said.
http://mjayrosenberg.com/2013/03/01/lobby-to-get-israel-exempted-from-sequestration/
( Seeking an exemption for Israel would be politically tone deaf - however , Congress really can't be dumb enough to outsource its authority regarding commencing war to a foreign nation ? Can they be that stupid really ? )
LOBBY TO GET ISRAEL EXEMPTED FROM SEQUESTRATION
Douglas Bloomfield, who served as AIPAC’s chief lobbyist for more than a decade, reports this week that the lobby intends to insist that the United States not include Israel’s $3 billion grants package in the sequester that goes into effect today. Writing in the New York Jewish Week, Bloomfield says:
Nonetheless, everything I hear indicates that Bloomfield is right although I doubt AIPAC will have the gall to insist on insulating AIPAC from the cuts that will occur in this year’s budget. More likely, it will wait until Congress is putting the 2014 cuts in place (there is more Congressional discretion in allotting the pain after 2013) before demanding not just that Israel go to the head of the line but that it not be forced to stand in the line at all.
That is a designation not enjoyed by any other nation, JTA [the Jewish Telegraphic Agency] pointed out, noting it may be a step toward the goal of some conservatives of divorcing assistance to Israel from all other foreign aid spending.
But all this is nothing compared to the centerpiece of AIPAC’s lobbying activities this coming week. According to theDaily Beast, the lobby will also dispatch its 13,000 delegates to Capitol Hill to promote a resolution on Iran that is being introduced by Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC). The resolution “urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in self-defense, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.”
In other words, if Israel goes to war with Iran we are at war too.
Daily Beast quotes Columbia University professor, Gary Sick, who says that the effect of the resolution would be to authorize Israel to decide when and if the U.S. goes to war. “This legislation would effectively entrust that decision to a regional state…. Such a decision is an American sovereign responsibility. It cannot be outsourced.”
I don’t know what can get AIPAC off this dangerous course. Surely it understands, as the Forward reported this week, that the idea that the lobby runs U.S. foreign policy is now even the staple of popular culture as demonstrated in February alone on Saturday Night Live, the Kevin Spacey miniseries “House of Cards” and at the Academy Awards.
The lobby has outlived its usefulness. Its work no longer helps make Jews or Israel more secure. In fact, it accomplishes the opposite. It’s time for Israel to finally do what Yitzhak Rabin tried to: divest itself of the lobby.
At a time when sequestration is about to take a big bite out of the Pentagon budget, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) will be sending thousands of its citizen lobbyists to Capitol Hill next week to make sure Israel is exempted from any spending cuts.At one time I wouldn’t have believed AIPAC would dare try something this nervy.That is it because traditionally AIPAC has been very cautious about not taking actions that suggested putting Israel’s interests over America’s. Demanding that Israel be exempt from cuts that virtually every American will feel seems so counterproductive as to almost be suicidal for the lobbying powerhouse.
This could prove a very risky strategy at a time when millions of Americans will be feeling the bite of the sequestration debacle, from the defense budget to the school lunch program.
But not aid to Israel, which will be untouched if AIPAC gets its way.
Nonetheless, everything I hear indicates that Bloomfield is right although I doubt AIPAC will have the gall to insist on insulating AIPAC from the cuts that will occur in this year’s budget. More likely, it will wait until Congress is putting the 2014 cuts in place (there is more Congressional discretion in allotting the pain after 2013) before demanding not just that Israel go to the head of the line but that it not be forced to stand in the line at all.
No matter when Israel is exempted, and by how much, it is wrong and would represent nothing more than another power play by the lobby. After all, a cut of $175 million out of a $3 billion U.S. grant is nothing that Israel can’t handle. Besides, since when is any foreign aid gift automatic, so automatic that it is provided whether the donor can afford it or not. Even teenagers don’t demand a car when his parents are filing for bankruptcy. Additionally, if aid to Israel (thelargest chunk of the foreign aid budget) is protected, mandated sequestration cuts will have to be proportionately increased on other recipients, primarily African countries which receive much needed development assistance (hunger, poverty, disease prevention) .
But that’s AIPAC or, to use the more encompassing term, the Israel lobby. At its conference this week it will, if Bloomfield is right, not only demand that Israel be exempt from sequestration, but also that Congress enact legislation declaring that Israel is a “major strategic ally.”That is a designation not enjoyed by any other nation, JTA [the Jewish Telegraphic Agency] pointed out, noting it may be a step toward the goal of some conservatives of divorcing assistance to Israel from all other foreign aid spending.
But all this is nothing compared to the centerpiece of AIPAC’s lobbying activities this coming week. According to theDaily Beast, the lobby will also dispatch its 13,000 delegates to Capitol Hill to promote a resolution on Iran that is being introduced by Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC). The resolution “urges that, if the Government of Israel is compelled to take military action in self-defense, the United States Government should stand with Israel and provide diplomatic, military, and economic support to the Government of Israel in its defense of its territory, people, and existence.”
In other words, if Israel goes to war with Iran we are at war too.
Daily Beast quotes Columbia University professor, Gary Sick, who says that the effect of the resolution would be to authorize Israel to decide when and if the U.S. goes to war. “This legislation would effectively entrust that decision to a regional state…. Such a decision is an American sovereign responsibility. It cannot be outsourced.”
I don’t know what can get AIPAC off this dangerous course. Surely it understands, as the Forward reported this week, that the idea that the lobby runs U.S. foreign policy is now even the staple of popular culture as demonstrated in February alone on Saturday Night Live, the Kevin Spacey miniseries “House of Cards” and at the Academy Awards.
As one who believes that the lobby is a bad influence in American life, I suppose I should be glad that the lobby’s overreaching is finally being taken note of. On the other hand, I don’t like it. The Lobby, despite its claims, does not speak for most American Jews, not by a long shot. (In 2008, the American Jewish Committee poll found that just 3 percent of Jews cast their votes with their focus on Israel, findings that were repeated in a Florida only poll in 2012).Moreover, there is no indication that those Jews most focused on Israel share AIPAC’s (an organization with just 100,000 members) hard line approach.
Nonetheless, AIPAC’s aggressiveness tars us all, and Israel too. I recall back in 1973, when Israel was attacked by Egypt and Syria on Yom Kippur, America rushed to its aid, saving the country from possible collapse. Few questioned that doing so was the right thing to do. But that was before its lobby became a punch line in jokes about Jewish power, jokes that – as the case of Chuck Hagel demonstrated – are not fabricated out of thin air.The lobby has outlived its usefulness. Its work no longer helps make Jews or Israel more secure. In fact, it accomplishes the opposite. It’s time for Israel to finally do what Yitzhak Rabin tried to: divest itself of the lobby.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-01/there-goes-sequester
There Goes The Sequester
Today is the day when, if one listens to Obama whose idea it was in the first place, an unprecedented $85 billion spending cuts will be sequestered, unleashing famine, pestilence, the apocalypse and grizzly bears (as all park rangers will be dead from starvation). Which is why we applaud the administration's desire to preempt this tragic for the nation outcome, by issuing, in one day alone: February 28, $80 billion in Treasurys sending debt to (obviously) what is a new all time high $16,687,289,180,215.37.
In other words, the entire apocalyptic impact of the sequester for 2013 was offset by one day's debt issuance.
Oh, and we didn't label this post Friday humor because it rightfully falls under the Friday grotesque, surreal tragedy category.
From Debt To The Penny:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/01/obama-republicans-arbitrary-sequester-order
Obama blames Republicans before signing 'arbitrary' sequester order
President warns US to prepare for drawn-out standoff after futile meeting with congressional leaders over scheduled cuts
No comments:
Post a Comment