Sequester to go into effect Friday
February 28, 2013 | 08:59 PM
Following the failure of Democratic and Republican bills in the Senate to delay the sequestration of government funds, the sequester that will cut funding in all federal agencies for the remainder of the fiscal year including the Agriculture Department will go into effect on Friday, but no immediate effects are expected.
If no action is taken to stop the sequester, most USDA employees, including meat inspectors, and county office employees will be furloughed for some period. However, those furloughs would not start until April or May since federal employees must be given at least 30 days notice of a furlough, and more in some cases.
The Democratic proposal, which beginning in 2014 would have eliminated the direct payments that crop farmers get whether prices are high or low, got 51 votes.
Three Democrats who are up for election in 2014 — Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Kay Hagan of North Carolina — voted against the proposal, which was written by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., and others.
The Republican alternative, which would have given President Barack Obama more flexibility in deciding what to cut, got only 38 votes. Nine Republicans voted against it.
Some Republicans said that giving Obama more flexibility would mean that he would also take the blame if his decisions turned out to be unpopular, but other Republicans feared giving the administration more power.
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., said in a news release that she was frustrated that no bipartisan agreement was reached, but added, “In the next month, there will be a series of fiscal debates that will provide a chance for us to fix some of the damage caused by sequestration.”
“There are already proposals on the table that will help reduce the federal deficit, while also supporting the North Dakota economy like the farm bill,” Heitkamp said. “By ending subsidies, streamlining and consolidating programs and cracking down on abuse, the bill reduces the deficit by $23 billion. That’s more than is cut in sequestration.”
House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., said he was pleased the Senate had rejected the Reid-Stabenow proposal.
“The agriculture portion of their proposal called for a 50 percent cut to a single title in the farm bill that accounts for 6 percent of overall agriculture spending and less than 1 percent of overall federal spending,” Lucas said.
“Further, the Reid-Stabenow proposal called for tax increases while adding money to a laundry list of pet projects,” he said. “Our agricultural producers remain committed to being a part of the solution to our fiscal crisis, but a plan that is made up of half tax increases and half cuts to agriculture and defense is an absurd approach to balancing a budget.”
If no action is taken to stop the sequester, most USDA employees, including meat inspectors, and county office employees will be furloughed for some period. However, those furloughs would not start until April or May since federal employees must be given at least 30 days notice of a furlough, and more in some cases.
The Democratic proposal, which beginning in 2014 would have eliminated the direct payments that crop farmers get whether prices are high or low, got 51 votes.
Three Democrats who are up for election in 2014 — Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Kay Hagan of North Carolina — voted against the proposal, which was written by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., and others.
The Republican alternative, which would have given President Barack Obama more flexibility in deciding what to cut, got only 38 votes. Nine Republicans voted against it.
Some Republicans said that giving Obama more flexibility would mean that he would also take the blame if his decisions turned out to be unpopular, but other Republicans feared giving the administration more power.
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., said in a news release that she was frustrated that no bipartisan agreement was reached, but added, “In the next month, there will be a series of fiscal debates that will provide a chance for us to fix some of the damage caused by sequestration.”
“There are already proposals on the table that will help reduce the federal deficit, while also supporting the North Dakota economy like the farm bill,” Heitkamp said. “By ending subsidies, streamlining and consolidating programs and cracking down on abuse, the bill reduces the deficit by $23 billion. That’s more than is cut in sequestration.”
House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., said he was pleased the Senate had rejected the Reid-Stabenow proposal.
“The agriculture portion of their proposal called for a 50 percent cut to a single title in the farm bill that accounts for 6 percent of overall agriculture spending and less than 1 percent of overall federal spending,” Lucas said.
“Further, the Reid-Stabenow proposal called for tax increases while adding money to a laundry list of pet projects,” he said. “Our agricultural producers remain committed to being a part of the solution to our fiscal crisis, but a plan that is made up of half tax increases and half cuts to agriculture and defense is an absurd approach to balancing a budget.”
