Did FAA Sequester Deal Set a Precedent?

     Liberals like me worry that it's just the wrong one: namely by taking the heat off with the air traffic delays the Dems have basically locked in the sequester permanently. Mitigation is counterproductive. 

      It's hard to argue with Ezra Klein:

     "The Democrats have lost on sequestration."

     "That’s the simple reality of Friday’s vote to ease the pain for the Federal Aviation Administration. By assenting to it, Democrats have agreed to sequestration for the foreseeable future."

     http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/04/faa-il-have-democrats-lost-on.html

     The White House insists it doesn't like it but that the traffic delays were somehow unique-they were very simple to fix. Other effects won't be. 

     "President Obama plans to sign legislation eliminating FAA furloughs causing flight delays, but the administration is firmly against piecemeal fixes to other impacts of sequester cuts, press secretary Jay Carney said Friday."

    "This is a one-off case, if you will," he said, adding "the sequester itself cannot be finessed. It is having negative consequences around the country."

   "Carney argued the FAA fix, which was passed by Congress Friday, was doable because the funds were available to head off the need for FAA furloughs."

   "The fact is it’s a drop in the bucket, it’s a Band-aid over -- I think it's kind of a gross metaphor – but a big wound," he said. "The fact is this is a small amount of funding compared to the overall sequester. It's $253 million. There was an ability because of unobligated funds available that could be transferred."

     http://www.politico.com/politico44/2013/04/wh-warns-against-piecemeal-sequester-fixes-162731.html?hp=l1_b2

     I have to admit I don't totally get this. Is the point that this can't be done to other parts because they don't have available unobligated funds? He does get it right that this was a band-aid but doesn't a Band-aid make it less likely that the overall sequester will be stopped quickly" The GOP is of course claiming that these "unobligated funds" could have been used from the beginning and that the White House did this deliberately for political reasons.

    I don't believe that but this will be a taking point going forward along with crowing that the Dems caved. 

     http://diaryofarepublicanhater.blogspot.com/2013/04/eric-cantor-shows-us-what-republican.html

     In any case, many more are now seeking their own exception. 

     "First, meat inspectors got a reprieve from the sequester. Then air-traffic controllers at the Federal Aviation Administration . Now cancer and teachers’ groups are hoping to jump on the slippery slope Congress appears to have created by carving out special status for some programs hurt by automatic spending cuts"

     http://www.rollcall.com/news/the_clamor_for_special_sequester_deals-224385-1.html?ET=rollcall:e15552:35642a:&st=email&pos=epm

     Carney insists this is not the way to get it done:

    "While White House Press Secretary Jay Carney signaled President Barack Obama would sign the bill the House passed Friday to allow reprogramming of FAA funds to stop air-traffic controller furloughs, Carney cautioned against other “Band-Aid” measures."

   “Given how the Congress deliberates and the disagreements that exist on a variety of narrow, specific issues, you can imagine how little would be accomplished if that were the path that were chosen,” Carney said. “The right path is simply to come to the agreement on principle that everybody used to agree on, which is that the sequester should never be implemented.”

    I want to believe Carney and the White House. I want to believe. I still don't see how they let an opportunity slip out of their fingers. Again, while we don't want pain, it's the only way to avoid a permanent sequester. If every time a symptom of it comes they pass a bill, it will just allow the American people to go through a slowburn. Let's hope they either know something I don't know or will figure out this was a mistake. 

   Meanwhile, we have more GOPers gloating about their victory. 

     "Appearing on KHTE’s “The Alice Stewart Show” Friday, Sen. John Boozman (R-AR) argued that sequestration is “actually working” and compared the agencies who are complaining about the spending reductions to spoiled children:

BOOZMAN: I really think the FAA and many of the other agencies are trying to figure out how they can make things as painful as possible to the public. And it reminds me of a spoiled brat kid. You take away some of his stuff and, you know, he starts screaming. They don’t want want any cuts period. [...]

I think that you have to have some kind of a spending cap in place. You know, you can knock sequestration or not knock it, but it’s worked in the sense that hit has forced reduction in spending. And I’ve been here 11 years and this is the first time I’ve seen it in this manner, in the sense that it is something that’s actually working.

     http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/04/26/1926001/gop-senator-embraces-sequestration-it-has-actually-worked/

     Charming stuff, particularly referring to those suffereing the cuts as spoiled children who don't want to take their medicine.