Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Omb Sequestration Report

Omb Sequestration Report

Ratings: (0)|Views: 600|Likes:
Published by Jake Grovum

More info:

Published by: Jake Grovum on Sep 14, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





OMB Report Pursuant to theSequestration Transparency Act of 2012(P. L. 112–155)
The Sequestration Transparency Act o 2012 (STA) (P.L. 112-155) requires the Presidentto submit to Congress a report on the potential sequestration triggered by the ailure o theJoint Select Committee on Decit Reduction to propose, and Congress to enact, a plan to re-duce the decit by $1.2 trillion, as required by the Budget Control Act o 2011 (BCA). In re-sponse, the Oce o Management and Budget (OMB) is issuing this report based on assump-tions required by the STA. The report provides Congress with a breakdown o exempt andnon-exempt budget accounts, an estimate o the unding reductions that would be requiredacross non-exempt accounts, an explanation o the calculations in the report, and additionalinormation on the potential implementation o the sequestration.In August 2011, bipartisan majorities in both the House and Senate voted or the threato sequestration as a mechanism to orce Congress to act on urther decit reduction. Thespecter o harmul across-the-board cuts to deense and nondeense programs was intendedto drive both sides to compromise. The sequestration itsel was never intended to be imple-mented. The Administration strongly believes that sequestration is bad policy, and that Con-gress can and should take action to avoid it by passing a comprehensive and balanced decitreduction package. As the Administration has made clear, no amount o planning can mitigate the eect o these cuts. Sequestration is a blunt and indiscriminate instrument. It is not the respon-sible way or our Nation to achieve decit reduction. The President has already presentedtwo proposals or balanced and comprehensive decit reduction. It is time or Congress toact. Members o Congress should work together to produce a balanced plan that achieves atleast the level o decit reduction agreed to in the BCA that the President can sign to avoidsequestration. The Administration stands ready to work with Congress to get the job done.The estimates and classications in the report are preliminary. I the sequestration wereto occur, the actual results would dier based on changes in law and ongoing legal, budgetary,and technical analysis. However, the report leaves no question that the sequestration wouldbe deeply destructive to national security, domestic investments, and core government unc-tions. Under the assumptions required by the STA, the sequestration would result in a 9.4percent reduction in non-exempt deense discretionary unding and an 8.2 percent reductionin non-exempt nondeense discretionary unding. The sequestration would also impose cutso 2.0 percent to Medicare, 7.6 percent to other non-exempt nondeense mandatory programs,and 10.0 percent to non-exempt deense mandatory programs.The percentage cuts in this report, and the identication o exempt and non-exempt ac-counts, refect the requirements o the laws that the Administration is applying. With thesingle exception o military personnel accounts, the Administration cannot choose which pro-grams to exempt, or what percentage cuts to apply. These matters are dictated by a detailedstatutory scheme. The Administration does not support these cuts, but unless Congress actsresponsibly, there will be no choice but to implement them.On two separate occasions, the President has put orward proposals to responsibly avoidthese arbitrary cuts: rst, in the President’s Plan or Economic Growth and Decit Reductionthat was presented to the Joint Committee in September 2011, and second, in the President’sscal year (FY) 2013 Budget. Both o these plans made tough choices to reduce the decitwith a balanced package o spending cuts and revenue increases, with the FY 2013 Budgetproposing $2.50 in spending cuts or every $1 in new revenue. Both plans included over $4trillion in decit reduction, including the decit reduction in the BCA itsel, ar exceeding theamount that would have been required o the Joint Committee to avoid sequestration. Impor-

Activity (22)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
Remedy_Land added this note
I really enjoyed reading this pdf
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Vladimir Moshkin liked this
Maria Medina liked this
Chedrey Labra liked this
Leonard Palma liked this
Erasmo Perla liked this
adnantahireng liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->