Panelist Adam Reilly, a reporter for WGBH-TV’s “Greater Boston,” asked whether the country should stay the course on sequestration.
The $1.2 trillion in federal budget cuts over the next nine years will affect defense, national parks, NASA, and reduced Medicare payments to doctors, and other areas. They took effect on March 1 when the U.S. Congress and President Barack Obama could not find an alternative to the plan — a government-designed penalty in case of inaction during budget talks in 2011. The first set of cuts will total about $85 million during 2013.
Reilly asked that with positive signs for the country’s unemployment rate and the stock market, should the U.S. stay the course with the expected package of cuts or should they find a grand bargain on the budget?
Sullivan: He said the country has far too many unemployed and under-employed Americans to take pride in the improving unemployment rate. Sullivan added that the sequestration budget cuts were not as dramatic as the Obama Administration said they would be.
“I think frankly our government was trying to frighten us,” Sullivan said.
He added that government should determine its priorities and has areas where it can cut.
Winslow: He echoed Sullivan when he said that the unemployment rate’s change should not be seen as promising.
“I think it’s a sad day in America when we count as an improvement in the unemployment rate people giving up looking for jobs,” Winslow said.
He added that the country has many many areas of “profligate” spending in which to cut — and those areas need to be looked at.
Gomez: The businessman said that companies aren’t hiring because they’re waiting for more agreement out of Congress. He wants to see Congress figure out a way to compromise on the two percent in budget cuts called for in sequestration. If they can’t compromise on such a small issue as cutting two percent of the federal budget — they should “literally resign and come home.”
– Alex Bloom, abloom@enterprisenews.com