Letter: Sequester would be good thing by reducing federal spending

Mar. 01, 2013 @ 11:34 PM

Editor:

Recently I have been hearing a lot about something called sequester. Webster has several meanings for the word, but I will consider it to withdraw.

The president’s spending plans are being partially withdrawn. A little less money will be spent by the federal government, under the sequester plan. Sequester sounds like a good idea to me, since the federal government is borrowing a great deal of the money it spends.

After the president’s recent vacation he came home and made a speech about how terrible the sequester plan would be. I consider his speech to be a diatribe of demagoguery or a litany of lies. Some of the cuts seem to be miniscule. Defense spending is to be reduced from 19 percent of the total budget to 18 percent. Nondefense, domestic spending is to be cut from 16 percent to 15 percent of the total budget.

I understand that Head Start could be reduced. I have never understood why we have Head Start in the first place. It has been proven to do very little for the participants. Seems to me that Head Start is just an expensive babysitting (or child care) service.

The president and his supporters in the media are saying sequester would be so bad for the country that we might go into a recession. The free world as we know it might no longer exist. Essentially, sequester would undo some of excessive spending the Obama administration has brought upon us. I say, bring it on!

George L. Fowler

Sevierville