As the nation braced for the $85 billion in sequestration cuts to kick in on March 1, Joe Lieber of Washington Analysis laid out the "numerous tools available" to blunt sequestration's impact. He said that, based on the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) estimates release in early February, sequestration's impact "may be less than many fear."
While the sequestration cuts will "clearly still be economically material in terms of the drag on GDP," Lieber said, he doubts the policy will remain in effect through the end of the fiscal year if, as he suspects, "the unprecedented move leads to chaos within the federal government and a continued outcry from both Democrats and Republicans, who worry about indiscriminate cuts to non-defense and defense accounts."
Furthermore, President Obama's comments urging Congress in early February to replace the sequester with a mix of "unspecified spending cuts and tax increases did little to change our opinion that the policy will go into effect."
Lieber said that regarding defense cuts, Pentagon planning guidance "stresses that near-term cuts would be absorbed primarily by civilian personnel furloughs, hiring freezes, and various administrative support and maintenance activities."
Reductions to key weapons hardware programs, he said, "would be 'back-loaded,' thereby lessening the immediate threat that contractors might otherwise face." Moreover, "in order to further mitigate sequestration's impact on acquisition priorities, this guidance directs the services to 'identify and prioritize any essential reprogramming actions' that might be required to permit budget officers greater flexibility in shifting funds between accounts to protect certain programs."
Lieber also noted that the continuing resolution (CR) that funds the federal government through March 27 provides another potential vehicle to mitigate the sequester, though he doesn't believe Republicans would force a government shutdown. "Congress could give the various agencies authority to reprogram, or transfer, funds from one budget function to another," Lieber said.
For example, Lieber said that Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., has proposed such an option for the Defense Department. "Lawmakers could also provide some additional funding in the CR for defense or non-defense discretionary spending, or they could decide to do away with the sequester altogether, with offsets or without (though the latter is very unlikely). How destructive the sequestration is will in part determine what Congress does."
Obama urged Congress in early February to delay the looming sequestration cuts by passing a package of both spending cuts and tax hikes, but Obama's plan was said to be DOA in the House.
While both the House and the Senate are "working toward budget proposals that I hope reflect this balanced approach," Obama said, "I know that a full budget may not be finished before March 1, and, unfortunately, that's the date when a series of harmful automatic cuts to job-creating investments and defense spending—also known as the sequester—are scheduled to take effect."
Obama told lawmakers that if they can't act "immediately on a bigger package" by the time the $1.2 trillion in sequester cuts are scheduled to go into effect, they should at least "pass a smaller package of spending cuts and tax reforms that would delay the economically damaging effects of the sequester for a few more months."