Boehner on the Sequester: Let's Gamble With the Recovery

     That would seem to be the implication of his comments yesterday in his interview on "Meet the Press."

     "House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said he didn't know what effect sequestration would have on the economy, during an interview that aired on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday.

"I don't know whether it's gonna hurt the economy or not," Boehner said. "I don't think anyone quite understands how the sequester's really gonna work." 

Boehner pointed to instances where he felt the White House may have exaggerated the impact of the spending cuts, saying, "There are a lot of questions about how the White House is handling the communications on this." 

Well, if you look at the fact that they claimed all these air traffic controllers are going to be laid off and then if was found out they really didn't have to. And then when Secretary of Education went out and claimed that all these teachers in one county in West Virginia were being laid off as a result of the sequester, found out that wasn't quite true. And then they release thousands of detainees down in Arizona before the sequester even takes effect. There are a lot of questions about how the White House is handling the communications on this.

     "But Boehner maintained that he too is worried. "I am concerned about its impact on our economy and its impact on our military."

       http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/boehner-not-sure-if-sequester-will-hurt-economy?ref=fpb

      So if you're not sure what the impact will be is this really the time to be gambling on it? With a slow recovery that may be gathering steam is this really the time to take a risk in the hope it will benefit the GOP politically?

       Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell, by contrast, is more sure about the effect: he knows any effect of the sequester cuts will be modest. 

       Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) on Sunday characterized the spending cuts mandated under sequestration as "modest."

       "This modest reduction of 2.4 percent in spending over the next six months is a little more than the average American experienced just two months ago, when their own pay went down when the payroll tax holiday expired," McConnell said during an appearance on CNN's "State of the Union."

        "McConnell defended his statement when pressed. "Well, but by any objective standard, cutting 2.4 percent out of $3.6 trillion is certainly something we can do."

        "McConnell framed the spending cuts as something Congress had promised the American people it would do."

        "We've got to begin to cut spending," he said. "And we promised the American people we'd do it a year and a half ago and we're going to do it."

        http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/mcconnell-spending-cuts-under-sequestration-modest

         McConnell has a faulty way of looking at it: it's as if so you took a pay cut and now they need to get their pay cut too ignoring that the sequester takes away from the American people as did the payroll tax hike. You could make the case that since Americans own pay went down already why reduce it further? 

        "Another error is the Republican demand that the Democrats replace the sequester with only spending cuts: if we replace the scheduled $85 billion dollars in spending cuts with $85 billion dollars in different spending cuts how is that any different? About the only thing they want to change is to replace the military cuts-that some Democrats like-with more domestic cuts. Do they really think the Dems will get rid of the military cuts in exchange for cuts to Medicare-ie, the Ryan budget?"

      "Credit where credit is due: NBC’s David Gregory did a nice job pinning down John Boehner’s evasions and falsehoods during a lengthy interview on Meet the Press yesterday.  Gregory called out Boehner for falsely claiming Dems have no plan to reduce the deficit. And Gregory didn’t let Boehner get away with suggesting Dems haven’t gotten serious about spending cuts, confronting the Speaker with the fact that they agreed to deep cuts in 2011.

But there’s still one question that I’d like to see posed to Boehner and every GOP lawmaker. It’s this: Is there any ratio of entitlement cuts to new revenues that Republicans could support, and if so, what is that ratio?"

      "Look, the bottom line is very simple. The sequester is now set to take hold, and it could mean a lot of pain and economic damage. If that happens, there will be a ferocious political battle over who is to blame. But Dems are never going to agree to replace the sequester with only spending cuts, as Republicans want, for the simple reason that for Dems, no cuts-only package is preferable to the sequester. So we’re not averting the sequester without a compromise that includes new revenues."

      We've had Republicans like Lindsay Graham say that the sequester military cuts will embolden Iran, North Korea, and al Qaeda-even drive up membership at training camps. We have Republicans like Boehner concerned about the hit this will be on the economy. Yet these risks are preferable to getting rid of Chevron's tax credits?

     Here no doubt is where Boehner declares 'the President got his tax hikes." Yes, and you GOPers have gotten your spending cuts, in fact so far going back to 2011 there have been more spending cuts to tax revenues by a 3-1 ratio.