A Sensible Solution to the Sequester Problem

[Andrew D]

Put the entire burden of cuts on the military budget.

If we were to cut the military budget by the entirety of the costs imposed by the sequester, the military budget would still be grossly bloated.

So the choice before us is straightforward: Do we cut a military budget that is strangling ordinary workikng Americans? Or do we throw the burden of the sequester on poor and middle-class Americans while continuing to transfer wealth to the already wealthy?

[Jarlaxle]

Its a start. There needs to be more slashing, but its a start.

[Crackpot]

The problem isn't the cuts but how they're being cut. Across the board cuts are stupid as it actually punishes areas that run efficiently. And let's also not pretend that defends spending is a black hole that has nothing to do with the rest of the economy. The defense industry employs huge amounts of public and private employees.

[oldr_n_wsr]

The problem isn't the cuts but how they're being cut.

I can agree with that.
My salary was cut (taxed more) by 2% this year. I think the gov can cut 2% from its 3.x trillion dollar budget without the doom and gloom being hyped.

[Scooter]

It doesn't sound like a lot until it is drilled down to the level of individual programs. I got this email the other day on the effects of the sequester on HIV testing and treatment:

The AIDS Drug Assistance Program is among the many federal programs that will take a hit if $85 billion in across-the-board spending cuts go through March 1, and those cuts could potentially lead to an increase in HIV transmission, the White House said Sunday in a reporton the anticipated state-by-state impacts of the so-called sequester.

The report — part of the Obama administration’s public campaign to encourage a compromise between Congress and the White House in order to avoid the austerity measures — says the budget cuts could lead to a drop in access to life-saving HIV medications and an increase in treatment costs for those infected with the virus.

“Cuts to the AIDS Drug Assistance Program could result in 7,400 fewer patients having access to life saving HIV medications,” the report says. “And approximately 424,000 fewer HIV tests could be conducted by Centers for Disease Control (CDC) State grantees, which could result in increased future HIV transmissions, deaths from HIV, and costs in health care.”

In Michigan, those cuts could result in a loss of $315,000 in federal dollars used for HIV testing. That could mean 7,900 fewer tests conducted. In Iowa, the state could lose $61,000, resulting in 1,500 fewer HIV tests, while Florida — one of the states hardest hit by the HIV epidemic — could lose $1.4 million, resulting in nearly 36,000 fewer HIV tests.

This news comes at a time when LGBT leaders and AIDS service organizations in the U.S. are struggling to address a sharp increase in new HIV cases in young men who have sex with men. At the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force’s annual Creating Change conference held in Atlanta last month, CDC official Gregorio Millett released disturbing data estimating that in 30 years half of the current population of 20-year-old men who have sex with men will be infected with HIV. For black men who have sex with men in that cohort, the infection prevalence rate is estimated to reach 70 percent in that same time frame.

Until earlier this year, thousands of Americans infected with the virus were on waiting lists to gain access to HIV medications. The drugs can costs thousands of dollars a month, but without them, most people grow very sick, increasing their health-care costs even further. The Obama administration in July 2012 distributed $69 million to 25 states to eliminate the waiting lists for the AIDS Drug Assistance Programs in those states, but some people continue to wait for support to access the drugs.

Public health officials have often touted HIV treatment as a successful prevention method, citing several studies showing that when a person is on successful anti-retroviral medication care — meaning the virus is nearly undetectable in the blood — he or she is significantly less likely to transmit the infection.

But not having access to the medications can lead some who are infected to grow sick quickly and possibly die from complications from the infection. For those currently taking powerful HIV-treating drugs, losing access to that medicine could lead to their bodies to develop resistant strains of HIV. Those strains are transmissible, and a CDC official told The American Independent that 16 percent of new HIV infections each year are resistant to one or more HIV medications currently available. Resistant strains make the virus more difficult to treat, create more complicated treatment protocols, and end up costing more per person with HIV.

In addition to the issues surrounding treatment, a reduction in testing could also trigger an increase in new infections. Studies show that in the U.S., 20 percent of persons infected with HIV do not know they harbor the virus, but it’s worse among men who have sex with men. A 2010 study found that while one in five gay and bisexual men in 21 U.S. cities was infected with HIV, 44 percent of them were unaware of their infection. Last November, the CDC reported that about 60 percent of young people ages 13 to 24 living with HIV were unaware they were infected.

Studies show that those who are infected but unaware of their status are three-and-half times more likely to transmit their infection.
HIV activist Laurel Sprague, the regional Coordinator for the North American affiliate of the Global Network of People Living with HIV, was shocked by the White House’s analysis.

“Cuts to HIV testing and treatment mean that, in Michigan and around the country, testing will not be as easily available to our young people and that the many young people who lack good private health insurance will be challenged to find the medical care they need,” Sprague said in an email.

“The consequences are clear,” she continued. “In the short term, we will see more of these young people die of AIDS. There will be long term effects as well. This is not a system that can simply be reversed once members of Congress finally decide to live up to their responsibilities. The community viral load will remain high and the cycle of new infections between people who do not know their HIV status will continue. Those newly infected will not learn of their status or receive timely treatment, increasing their risk of death as well.”

This is but one example where the cuts will cause more people to get sick and die. I am sure it is not the only one.

[dgs49]

Fortunately, the more that people think about the public debate the more unserious the President appears.

In a government that increases its spending by 3-4% every year regardless of anything, we are expected to believe that a lousy 2% cut - merely a few shillings more than was tossed at NY/NJ in the wake of Huricane Sandy - will have such catastrophic results. How stupid does he think we are?

No wait, he already demonstrated that back in November.

Never mind.

[dgs49]

Anyone infected with the AIDS virus through sexual contact at this late date deserves it.

[Scooter]

It's like baiting Pavlov's dog.

[oldr_n_wsr]

It doesn't sound like a lot until it is drilled down to the level of individual programs.

If everything stayed at last years levels of spending (like many of us working stiffs household budgets) things would not be anywhere near the hysteria it's being made out to be.

While I really want the gov to succeed, why is everything made out to be a major, hyped up, the sky is falling, calamity?

Come on, 2% of 3.2 trilliion dollars is going to stop HIV treatments and throw grandma off the cliff and stop autistic treatments and cause planes to fall from the sky and the highways to succumb to mother nature (oh wait that already happened twice in the past few months here on LI). I have to wonder if you add up all thesupposed cuts to things I would bet the total is more than the paltry 2% of the total budget.

Obama is on the stump against something he wanted. The guy is great campaigner, not much of a doer as far as I can see.
Blame the republicans, blame the dems, it takes a leader to get things done, not someone with a velvet tongue for firing up the masses.

[Scooter]

Come on, 2% of 3.2 trilliion dollars is going to stop HIV treatments and throw grandma off the cliff and stop autistic treatments and cause planes to fall from the sky and the highways to succumb to mother nature

That is precisely the problem with indiscriminate across-the-board cuts, they can have catastrophic consequences for real people.

[Jarlaxle]

Anyone infected with the AIDS virus through sexual contact at this late date deserves it.

You mean like a rape victim?

[Scooter]

I'm sure Dave believes someone can't contract HIV if they are "legitimately" raped.

[rubato]

Anyone infected with the AIDS virus through sexual contact at this late date deserves it.

You mean like a rape victim?

Or someone who had sex with their wife/husband?

yrs,
rubato

[Gob]

Or Dave even...

Old folks hunting for flings exploded last year as seniors gleefully look to play the field online.

Ourtime.com membership sprung from 1 million to 2.5 million singles in just the last nine months, and now the three biggest love sites for grannys and granpops — Senior People Meet, Seniors Meet and Ourtime.com — share more than four million people combined.

"I have hundreds of men trying to hang out with me," 68-year-old Liz Defore brags of her online dating frenzy.

The Southern California native joined a slew of dating sites last year after breaking up with her 48-year-old boy toy. Now she basks in male attention as more than 600 men have come running after her self-described girlish looks and youthful mind. Meanwhile, she happily scours profiles, finding herself hot metrosexuals who slather on moisturizer, manicure their fingernails and ball out at rock concerts.

“My man can’t act like a fart! I’d rather stick pins in my eyes,” says Defore.

Grey-haired singles like Defore are happily recharging their love lives online as each one averages 10 messages a month from potential partners and gets their profiles checked out 50 times every 30 days.

And the fun leaps right from the computer into the bedroom. Seniors are catching STDs at record rates; the number of 50, 60 and 70 year olds getting chlamydia, syphilis and gonorrhea doubled in the past decade. The US Center for Disease Control and Prevention reports cases of chlamydia and syphilis in older kin ballooning to more than 19,000 and 2,500, respectively.

Longer life expectancy, climbing divorce rates and recharged libidos are behind the surge in online and offline love affairs.

“I went out on a date at least once a week. You know there are things that are fun in life, and that was fun for me!” gushes 68-year-old Judy Tatman of her escapades following her husband’s death.

She rendezvoused with more than 35 suitors over her year of using Ourtime.com and gallivanted around the country from Oregon and Arizona to Kansas and New York. Tatman indulged in tasty home-cooked meals, lovely homes and at least one Jacuzzi sex-fest with an online catch.

“I thought, oh my God, I hardly know this man! This is ridiculous!” she giggled.

Shirtless, weathered men snapped and emailed photos of themselves for Tatman’s delight, and others even sexily undressed in front of their Web cams. One man sent her a picture of his manhood for her viewing pleasure.

“And I’m thinking, is this supposed to make me hot or something?” she laughed.

Her online studs varied in shape, size, color and age. Some men as young as their thirties happily went after her. “They were younger than my son! But I’m a pretty chick,” she said.

Tatman and Defore claim they’re conservative when it comes to jumping into the sack though. The former slept with three men, including her current live-in partner, during her year-long online dating venture. Meanwhile, Defore hasn’t met anyone sexy enough to jump into the sack with yet.

“Ew, yuck! They look too old. Or they don’t have teeth. They’re yahoos with baseball caps!” she says.

She’s still looking for someone to change her mind. Happy hunting!

[Joe Guy]

I'm sure Dave believes someone can't contract HIV if they are "legitimately" raped.

Thank God that women who get raped have that 'abort' gene so they don't get pregnant.

On the other hand, I guess I'm just one of those bleeding heart liberals, but I don't believe that people who contract a terminal disease deserve to die because they may or may not have made an error in judgment.

[dales]

In dave's world, women who get raped where prolly "asking for it".

[Lord Jim]

It should be pointed out that the 2% number regarding the cuts is really misleading...

That refers to the budget overall, but since the sequester doesn't touch entitlement spending at all, (or interest payments on the debt, which obviously can't be cut) the actual cuts work out to 9% in discretionary domestic spending and 13% in defense.

[Rick]

LJ I also noticed on the news last night that the pentagon offered up substantial cuts to certain programs but were turned down.

Here in AR 600 civilian employees are fixin to be laid off at Jacksonville AFB. So much for minimum wage...

[Big RR]

Keld--who control what programs are cut? Is it congress or the executive? It's pretty disgusting that a department can't choose which programs to cut (absent some mandate to keep them).

[Rick]

One program the pentagon was willing to cut immediately was M1 Abrams upgrades to the tune of $2.5 billion, I didn't catch the other but the total for 2 progrms alone was $4+ billion.