For several weeks prior to the sequester taking effect, instead of meeting with Congress, the president was running around the country telling everyone what a disaster it would be to have an $84 billion (2.4 percent) cut in government spending. The hundreds of thousands that he spent on these trips would have helped pay for sequester. What is wrong with sending his message from the White House?
There is a government agency that tracks government spending. In 2012, of the more than $3 trillion that was spent, more than $250 billion is unaccounted for. This is besides all the other waste we know is happening. Whenever the Democrats run short of money to spend, instead of cutting back, they start calling for a tax increase.
Somehow, a 2.4 percent decrease in spending is a disaster, but a 3, 4 or 5 percent raise in taxes is all right. Raising taxes results in a decrease in consumer spending, which is not a good thing. We know that the government wastes at least 15 percent of the money they spend.
Why we should give them more to waste? Also, if it was such a disaster, why did Obama and Congress leave town the week before it took effect?
RITA F. SILVA