Despite a brewing panic among Congressional Republicans (and some Democrats) over automatic, across-the-board defense cuts set to kick in on January 1, 2013, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee says those cuts must stand unless and until Republicans relent on their anti-tax absolutism, and agree on a balanced deficit reduction package that includes higher revenue.
“The purpose of the sequester is to force us to act to avoid the sequester,” Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) told reporters at a Christian Science Monitor roundtable. “It’s like a nuclear weapon — it’s totally useless; it can’t be used except to accomplish some other goal than its use. It’s used to deter.”
“Sequester” is a technical term for an enforcement mechanism built into the 2011 debt limit law. That agreement tasked the now-defunct Super Committee with reducing the deficit by $1.2 trillion over 10 years. In the event of its failure, though, the law included a penalty — including hundreds of billions of dollars to cuts to both defense programs and Medicare providers — meant to force members of both parties to deal with budget deficits in a balanced way.
It failed anyhow.
The Super Committee called it a day back in November, and now a number of Democrats, but mainly top Republicans (including House Majority Leader Eric Cantor) are trying to swap out the defense cuts for cuts to non-defense programs. That’s unacceptable to Levin, unless Republicans finally agree to include raising tax revenues from upper income Americans in the mix.
“The sequester…is used to force us to deal with the deficit. And it will. I predict it’s going to succeed,” Levin said. “But it will only succeed if it’s kept intact. That sword of Damocles can not be splintered. It’s got to be kept intact if it’s going to have its effect of basically forcing the Republicans, who have taken an ideologically rigid step against any new revenues, to relent and reflect what public opinion clearly is — that there is room for additional revenues, particularly in closing the loopholes [and] in restoring that higher rate for upper bracket Americans.”
Many Democrats would like to avoid the defense cuts, too. Some might even be willing to replace those cuts with cuts to separate programs, without seeking new revenue. But the Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman will have huge influence in how that all washes out — and he says ending the GOP’s anti-tax absolutism has to be the priority.
“The dam has got to be broken on revenues and what will break it, I believe, is sequestration,” Levin said. “And it can’t be divided and splintered up. It’s got to be kept in tact. And that’s what I believe will move the rigid ideologues to deal finally with revenue.”
Brian Beutler
Brian Beutler is TPM's senior congressional reporter. Since 2009, he's led coverage of health care reform, Wall Street reform, taxes, the GOP budget, the government shutdown fight, and the debt limit fight. He can be reached at brian@talkingpointsmemo.com.
serena1313 Don't be too hasty. He has only double-speak for the President's authority for indefinite detainment.
Mariothserena1313
You beat me to it, Marioth.
I can't trust Carl anymore than I'd trust Bill Kristol, these days.
~
If they don't blink pepper spray has a similar effect.
As one of Sen. Levin's constituents, I must say I am incredibly proud of him. Stand strong, and we in Michigan will support you.
We need defense cuts *and* a more progressive tax structure. Duh.
The debt and the deficit STILL aren't what caused the recession. In fact, basically all the recessions we've had over the past 40+ years have occurred after a period of sustained decreases in government spending. The deficit is nothing but a boogeyman, and we can damn well afford not only our current level of spending, but with increased spending as well.
Beavis Fine, and the increased spending does not need to be for ground forces.
Dear Brian,
Ever hear of "Nut Graph"?
If you have, you might write lede like this:
"The top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee says defense cuts must stand unless Republicans relent on their anti-tax absolutism and agree on a balanced deficit reduction package that includes higher revenue."
The rest of the clutter in your lede goes in the ... what? ... NUT GRAPH!
Kind regards,
Uggswell P. Gravel
Obama already said he would accept no changes so he gets to veto this
WHO are these Democrats? Tell us, please!
Any remaining Blue Dogs, and Dems from states with big defense industries (like California) and/or southern states with a lot of military bases would be my guess.
Levin is absolutely correct.
Any Dems that oppose this sequester and try to swap out defense cuts with other programs, need to be named. Named, and shamed, sooner rather than later.
The heat needs to stay on for this to actually work - Carl's 100% right. No splintering, no deals. NO QUARTER (in homage to Sniffit, whom I haven't seen for a while).
JJRothery OK, a deal, but it has to include upper income tax increases. Otherwise, the defense cuts are a really good second choice. The deficit won't go away without substantial defense cuts. Can't we spend as much as just half the world instead of as much as the whole world?
The sequester will be Obama's long term trophy after the short term bruises of the debt ceiling fight.
Good to see the payroll tax cut victory in December has reinvigorated Levin (mentioned on TPM twice now today), Pelosi, Waxman, etc.
It is about time the Democrats flexed their muscles. I was beginning to wonder if they had atrophied!
Good for Senator Levin! What little I know about the man I like, but I like him even better, now.
- spam
- offensive
- disagree
- off topic
Like