|What Sequestration Really Means|
Armed Services Committee - Buck McKeon, Chairman - 2119 Rayburn HOB - (202) 225-2539 - ArmedServices.House.GovHalf of Sequestration Triggers Will Fall Directly on Defense
While some have questioned the precise distribution of the first round of cuts to security spending, no such uncertainty exists in the sequestration phase of the Budget Control Act (BCA). On page 18 of the bill, the BCA allocates “half of the total reduction calculated” under the bill, which is $492 billion over 10 years, “to discretionary appropriations and direct spending accounts within function 050” under sequestration. Over 95 percent of the budget authority under budget function 050 is for the Department of Defense. The remainder includes the nuclear weapons programs managed by the Department of Energy. In describing the implementation of sequestration, the BCA uses the term “revised security category,” which some have suggested might include Homeland Security, international affairs, and other spending. But the BCA specifically defines the “revised security category” under sequestration on page 17 as “discretionary appropriations in budget function 050.”
Defense Cuts Will Not Wait Until 2013
Sequestration Will Drastically Shrink the Military and Harm National Security
Panetta continued in that letter to warn that sequestration would effectively eradicate an entire generation of military modernization, potentially including:
Despite over 350 base closings in five rounds of BRAC, sequestration could lead to another round of closures.
Reductions under sequestration would put our military and national security at risk. Secretary Panetta’s own analysis affirms sequestration would:
The information above is for general awareness only and does not necessarily reflect the views of the Office of Economic Adjustment or the Department of Defense as a whole.