Can We Just Cancel the Sequester?

Answer:  Yes.  Congress could pass a one sentence law repealing it. Done.  Tada!  We just figured out in seconds, what Congress has yet to figure out, and now as of March 1, the sequester is officially kicking in.  After a half-hearted one hour “summit” today (can you have a one-hour summit? we thinks not…) there is still no decision on what to do about the automatic spending cuts.  Based on one of the more awesome quotes to come from this whole debacle, however, we’re hopeful that our leaders are beginning to see the light.

“This [the sequester] is not going to be an apocalypse…it’s just dumb”

— President Barack Obama

That’s right, the president called the whole thing dumb.  We couldn’t agree more.  more

See, what’s extra frustrating about this whole situation is that this crisis is entirely manufactured; and not just by one side or the other. Both the GOP and Obama are perpetuating this stalemate in their own ways, blaming each other, and avoiding a long term solution.  Obviously, despite GOP claims, the impetus to avoid a sequester is not on Obama alone - he only proposed this strategy to deal with an intransigent GOP whose tomfoolery had resulted in the US’s credit getting downgraded.  Their strategy of not negotiating and instead reminding us that it was ”his idea” is cynical (surprise!) and more than a little cowardly.  Still, though we know that as of now, a majority of Americans will blame the GOP for these unpopular cuts, Obama and the Democrats (those that haven’t signed on to the CPC or Grayson/Takano letters circulating that call to simply repeal the sequester) are a part of the problem too.  They are banking on the fact that Republicans will be blamed for this ineffective and harmful strategy, and, like the GOP, are participating in a game of chicken.  They make dire warnings about what will happen (you mean we’ll have to wait at the airport longer?!?!  AHHHHHH!)  yet seem willing to let the cuts start in order to increase their leverage.  Why participate?  Why not suggest the madness?  THAT would get popular support and increase your leverage.  Blurg.Now that both sides have met to look like they did something, the outlook remains bleak.  It’s frustrating because, though perhaps the sequester is ultimately a bastardized GOP dream, Democrats did not get all of the tax increases they sought.  They took a terrible deal in the fiscal cliff negotiations and now they’re getting it handed to them by the Republicans.  Shouldn’t they have seen this coming? 

Well, We did, and who are we?  Geniuses, that’s who.  Republicans “caved” on a lame tax increase and now they’re done giving revenues.  Duhh.  How many tax increases do you think a Boehner-led Congress is actually going to go along with?  If we’re to glean anything from a post summit quote this morning, it’s that the answer is: none.

“But let’s make it clear that the president got his tax hikes on Jan. 1. This discussion about revenue, in my view, is over. It’s about taking on the spending problem here in Washington”

— Rep. John Boehner

This is why we said their bargaining strategy was poorly conceived.  Duh…

Either way, lets revisit the sequester itself. 

Here’s what we now know: Though it was never intended as an actual solution, the sequester won’t even be a good stand-in for a solution.  We’ve already been warned that it will slow growth and result in job losses, but the Bipartisan Policy Center says that the cuts in the sequester only hold off our national debt reaching 100% of our GDP by two years.  Basically, in 24 months we’re going to have a crippled state and and it will all have been for naught.  Our debt is huge, our economy is slow, and this policy is going to either exacerbate or not address those problems. Check out the chart below.

Now we know that “sequester” is a noun meaning a general cut in federal spending, but it’s also a verb meaning to isolate or hide away. According to us (two geniuses), there are plenty of things we could sequester without having a negative impact on the economy.  If we must sequester something, here is a list of things that would be far better to cut than all that spending:

1. Our rent (it’s too damn high, amiright?)

2. The price of flowers

3. The cost of the colorful pens that make shopping for office supplies so much fun.  Do you know how many colorful pens it takes to make a podcast and write a blog?  It’s sending us to the poorhouse.

4.  The quantity of processed food in the American diet (the brain trust has differing opinions on this.  One of us would wipe out all processed foods permanently (Lila) while one us us realizes that many dishes around the holidays need cream of mushroom soups (Brent).  [Note: only one of us is from the Midwest.  Can you guess which one?]

5. The Tea Party.  Sequester them away far away.  Space potentially.

Feel free to add your own suggestions below the depressing chart!

So seriously people, can we end the insanity and just decide to not have automatic spending cuts?  The answer is a simple yes.  And if they want to include an amendment to cut our rent and send the Tea Party into space while they’re at it, we certainly won’t stand in their way.

State of the Union Unscrambled

My fellow Americans, I’d like to thank you for toughing out the excessive number of reruns on television tonight by watching this speech.  As you may have heard, the state of the union is “stronger.”  What this means is that it’s not un-strong, and is steadily working it’s way towards a level of strength that is greater than it’s current, embarrassingly weak level.

Tonight I’ll be covering some of the ideas I’ve tossed around in the last few weeks, but in less detail and primarily through the use of soaring metaphors.   I’ll do my best to inspire you with insipid fanfare and unnecessary standing ovations, but it won’t be easy.  Our patience will be tested again and again by an opposition party that does not want to applaud as frequently as we do.  They will grumpily avoid eye contact with you, the American people, as they refuse to clap for ideas as simple as “providing decent educational opportunities” and “having the right to vote.”  

Tonight I stand before you ready to declare my full-throated support for a slew of ideas that shouldn’t be controversial but are.  Ideas like raising the minimum wage, allowing law-abiding undocumented workers a chance to one day get the green card we automatically offer any old Cuban citizen that floats up in a raft, and no longer paying for war in the Middle East in a roundabout attempt to lower prices at the pump.  Ideas like getting reeeeaaaallllly close to trying to offering universal health care and believing in the basic facts of science.  I know these are challenging concepts, but I’m committed to working through your idiocy because I have no other choice.  Frustratingly, my belief in everybodys’ right to vote even extends to people like you.

This speech will also be efficiently designed to mask some of my more controversial ideas.  I’ll use climate science as a lead-in to discussing my support for natural gas drilling, or “fracking” as the anti-flammable-water lobby calls it.  I’ll give you the impression that, in supporting this so-called clean energy, you are giving a great gift to the environment.  A gift that I will not mention (for your own good!) includes harmful chemicals seeping into your drinking water. Instead of focusing on that downer, I will focus on being heralded as a hero for my brave belief in the basic facts of science and nobody will be any the wiser.  My corporate friends will tip their hats to me but you won’t see that because they are shadowy and only meet with me behind closed doors.

Once I’ve covered these unpopular issues, I’ll make sure to distract you again with something moving.  I’ll stock the audience with as many examples of the triumph of the human spirit as possible, ensuring that not a single American will turn off their television set without feeling awed by our nation’s seemingly impossible greatness.  We are, after all, a nation that brings water and crackers to an 102 year-old would-be voter as she patiently waits in line for six hours; a line she is only standing in because of the color of her skin.  A nation that honors a bereaved mother by letting her sit next to the first lady instead of passing the gun control legislation that might have saved her daughter’s life.  A nation that sits a heroic policeman next to a complete stranger who has evidently not been warned that she will be on camera.  We don’t take the easy way out or search for easy answers, and that’s what makes us great.

All of this, of course, will seem magical when compared to what follows - a “response” speech by the opposition party that is never not bungled.  They will ask a rising star in the party to speak, only to embarrass them with a public access-style set-up and false assurances that they are prepared.  You will wonder how this person could have ever been elected to office considering their glaring inability to act natural while giving a speech.  Thus, the opposition party will destroy the presidential hopes of their one charismatic member/token minority, and we will all feel smug for it.

America, the tone of our voice will be significantly more important than any words we say tonight, but if we can get at least one Twitter hashtag out into the world, we’ll know we’ve done our jobs.  Good night and [something religious here].