Due to personalities, pettiness and partisan politics too boring to recount, the U.S. budget is about to be automatically cut (sequestered). To accomplish that goal, the OMB Report Pursuant to the Sequestration Transparency Act of 2012 (P. L. 112–155) has been released. I first saw this report in Obama releases sequestration report by Amber Corrin (Federal Computer Weekly).
Can it be that U.S. government spending has stepped out of the shadows and into the light?
The report identifies specific programs and the proposed cuts to each one.
As you can imagine, howls of “dire consequences” are issuing from agencies, grantees, elected officials and of course, government staff.
Some of which are probably true. Some of them.
Does the sequestration report give us an opportunity to determine which claims of “dire consequences” are true and while ones are false?
Let’s take an easy one:
001-05-0127 Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate
| Present | Cut | Remaining |
| 131 $Million | 11 $Million | 120 $Million |
Can you name (identify) a specific “dire consequence” to reducing the “Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate” budget by 11 $Million?
Want to represent the public interest? Ask your elected representatives to say what “dire consequences” they see from specific items in the sequestration report?
Do not accept hand waving generalities of purported “dire consequences.”
To qualify as a possible “dire consequence,” it should at least be identified by name. Such as: “Cut X means we can’t run metal scanners at government buildings.” Or “Cut 001-05-0130 means we can’t afford refreshments for Senate offices. (Yes, its really in there.)”
That would enable a meaningful debate over “dire consequences.”
Part of that debate should be around who claims “dire consequences” and what “dire consequences” are being claimed.
Can you capture that without using a topic map?
[…] The report is not a model of clarity/transparency. See: U.S. Sequestration Report – Out of the Shadows/Into the Light?. […]
Pingback by Topic Map Modeling of Sequestration Data (Help Pls!) « Another Word For It — September 29, 2012 @ 10:40 am
[…] U.S. Sequestration Report – Out of the Shadows/Into the Light? First post, general questions about consequences of cuts. (September 17, 2012) […]
Pingback by Free Sequester Data Here! « Another Word For It — March 1, 2013 @ 5:34 pm