I remember waaaaaaay back when the sequester was proposed. At the time, it was meant to be a package of cuts so harmful that the R's and D's would come to a deal, any deal, to prevent them from happening. Back then, the key word was "harmful". For the R's, there were cuts to the military, because literally everyone knows that's the only thing the R's will care about being cut. That's just accepted among everyone in America, be it the everyman on the street, the media, or the Dems. The cuts that the Dems would supposedly do anything to stop were things that are capable of helping poor people. Housing relief. Headstart. Public defenders. Home heating assistance. The cutting of government employee jobs all across state and local levels.
Obviously, we know that this hypothetical doomsday package is now very much a reality. We also know which cuts the parties actually found to be intolerable, and they weren't the cuts to the poor. I don't mean to waste anyone's time, but sometimes when I hear people on this site talk about how the sequester is really the best we could make out of a bad situation, it helps to remember that those people are wrong. The sequester was designed to be harmful in real, tangible ways. It's not the best of a bad situation. It's the worst-case scenario come to life, by design.
So is there a reason Dems are shooting for a CR that will restore government funding at sequester levels? Isn't this the time to make the case for repealing it, now that the Republicans are oh-so-defeated and discredited?
And don't give me any "But the Republicans will say...." No. No no no. We all know what the Republicans will say. They'll freak out and say horrible, stupid things. No shit. Are they going to become more uncooperative and obstructionist than they already are? I don't think it's even possible, so no, "The Republicans will...." is not a valid reason to not try and repeal the sequester.
The problem is, I don't even hear any big-name Dems even talking about it. Why?
Is the sequester popular?
Is wanting to repeal the sequester and restoring services and jobs cut by it not good politics? Or something? I don't get it. Maybe I'm missing something. It looks to me (and someone please tell me this isn't true) that the Dems are willing to accept the sequester without so much a fight over it.
Make no mistake, cementing the sequester cuts into permanence is a loss for Dems. Keeping the government open and not defunding the ACA are not victories, sorry. That's just beating the R's back. I keep hearing about all the stuff Republicans are demanding, but what are the Democrats demanding? Are we ever going to make demands, ever? Repealing the sequester seems like the obvious play. Is there a reason we're not doing it?