Budget

Retroactive repeal of sequestration possible -- but risky

US Capitol

Impact from the devastating federal budget cuts that could be imposed by sequestration come Jan. 2 could be mitigated, a new analysis suggests, but it is questionable how effective those efforts would be.

Federal agencies currently remain in a state of limbo as government leaders appear either confident, or at least hopeful, that a last-minute deal will avert the 10 percent across-the-board cuts. Even if the lame duck session fails to produce an agreement that nullifies the measure, mandated in last year’s Budget Control Act, there is a strong possibility that sequestration could be retroactively rolled back later in 2013.

That retroactive repeal, combined with strategies that delay initial implementation of the temporary sequestration’s cuts, could mean the effects may be felt only minimally or not at all by agencies. The executive branch has the power to mitigate the cuts and how they affect agencies, according to OMB Watch.

Should there be a failure to avert sequestration before Jan. 2, “if the administration chooses to take action to lessen its impacts, and if it lasts just a few weeks and is retroactively canceled, then there would be minimal or no damage to most affected federal defense and non-defense programs,” Patrick Lester, OMB Watch’s fiscal policy director, wrote in the report. However, repealing sequestration retroactively would still require agreement between Congress and the president, Lester warned.

There are a number of different strategies that could be used to minimize a temporary sequestration’s influence on agency programs. Among them are apportionment authorities that allow the administration to control the rate of federal spending; the use of carryover funds; redirection of funds to higher priorities; accelerating spending to avoid furloughs and layoffs; and delaying new contracts and grants in order to fund existing ones.

But without a deal to avert sequestration on the table, those measures – particularly the delays – are a gamble, according to Todd Harrison, senior fellow in defense budget studies at the Center for Strategic Budget Assessments.

 “If implementation gets delayed in hopes that sequestration won’t go into effect, it could end up being worse in the end,” Harrison said. “The sooner you start making reductions, the less disruptive the cuts will be. Or it could end up being a case of kicking the can down the road and hoping to get bailed out.”

For example, if agencies end up waiting until halfway through the fiscal year, they’ll have to cut 20 percent for the remainder of the year in order to meet the 10 percent requirements for fiscal 2013, Harrison noted.

Similarly, accelerating spending to avoid furloughs could backfire if a deal is not reached, forcing agencies to make even deeper cuts into the workforce to meet the reduction requirements.

Given that sequestration is happening because Congress failed to reach a deal to begin with, it is hardly unthinkable that efforts to reverse sequestration could also fail. If agencies go forward without budget-cut plans, they could be backed into a corner, Harrison said.

Furthermore, if agencies are not feeling the pain of the drastic budget cuts, it may hinder the impetus on Congress to address the problem.

“What will motivate Congress to make changes if they’re delayed? Why change if no one is feeling the impact? That sense of urgency might not be there,” Harrison said.

In the OMB Watch report, Lester points out that a sequestration lasting anything longer than a few weeks, those impacts will definitely start to be felt and cuts to programs and jobs will start to materialize.

“In its September report to Congress, the Obama administration labeled sequestration ‘a blunt, indiscriminate instrument and not a responsible way to make policy.’ This judgment remains true,” Lester wrote. “If triggered, the worst effects of sequestration may be avoided temporarily – long enough for Congress to consider alternatives – but they can only be postponed for a while.”

About the Author

Amber Corrin is a former staff writer for FCW and Defense Systems.

The Fed 100

Save the date for 28th annual Federal 100 Awards Gala.

Featured

  • computer network

    How Einstein changes the way government does business

    The Department of Commerce is revising its confidentiality agreement for statistical data survey respondents to reflect the fact that the Department of Homeland Security could see some of that data if it is captured by the Einstein system.

  • Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. Army photo by Monica King. Jan. 26, 2017.

    Mattis mulls consolidation in IT, cyber

    In a Feb. 17 memo, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told senior leadership to establish teams to look for duplication across the armed services in business operations, including in IT and cybersecurity.

  • Image from Shutterstock.com

    DHS vague on rules for election aid, say states

    State election officials had more questions than answers after a Department of Homeland Security presentation on the designation of election systems as critical U.S. infrastructure.

  • Org Chart Stock Art - Shutterstock

    How the hiring freeze targets millennials

    The government desperately needs younger talent to replace an aging workforce, and experts say that a freeze on hiring doesn't help.

  • Shutterstock image: healthcare digital interface.

    VA moves ahead with homegrown scheduling IT

    The Department of Veterans Affairs will test an internally developed scheduling module at primary care sites nationwide to see if it's ready to service the entire agency.

  • Shutterstock images (honglouwawa & 0beron): Bitcoin image overlay replaced with a dollar sign on a hardware circuit.

    MGT Act poised for a comeback

    After missing in the last Congress, drafters of a bill to encourage cloud adoption are looking for a new plan.

Reader comments

Wed, Nov 7, 2012

The solution is to not allow Congress to go home until they pass a budget for FY2013 that the President will sign. It is their obligation to do so every year no later than the 30th of September. It is a huge part of their jobs to get that accomplished. It is time that they stayed in Washington until the job was complete.

Wed, Nov 7, 2012

The President also said that he was going to close Gauntanamo Bay, in fact he signed a document saying it would close with in one year of his first term. Last time I checked he has not even visited Gauntanamo nor closed it. The American people need to realize that people say things to get elected most of which are not true.

Wed, Nov 7, 2012

The article fails to even comment on the reasons for sequestration. Gross budget deficts and impending further downgrades in the U.S. Credit ratings, which will raise the cost of financing our debt and further accelerate the growth of the deficit, leading to even more serious impacts. For those who don't understand economics, that's where our current policies lead and increasing the tax rates on those making over 200K won't make a dent in the deficit, as taxing them at 100% still won't even balance the budget.

Wed, Nov 7, 2012

“In its September report to Congress, the Obama administration labeled sequestration ‘a blunt, indiscriminate instrument and not a responsible way to make policy.’ Then Obama should not have signed it into law. Seems kind of funny he blasts his own law as a "blunt instrument". If it weren't so sad for the citizens of this country, it would be laughable.

Wed, Nov 7, 2012 JimO

Kicking the can down the road seems to be the only strategy that both sides agree on. Eventually, it has end but I give the goernment at most 2 more years of the "Kick the Can" game -- then it is over.

Show All Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group