Since the Budget Control Act (BCA) was signed into law on August 2, 2011, all eyes had been on the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction. With a looming $15 trillion national debt, weak economy and failing financial markets, this “Super Committee” was tasked with finding $1.5 trillion in savings over 10 years. A bipartisan group of 12 representatives and senators were chosen for the job, including Reps. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.), Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Dave Camp (R-Mich.), and Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), and Senators Max Baucus (D-Mont.), John Kerry (D-Mass.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.).

According to the BCA, the President would be allowed to request another debt limit increase up to $1.5 trillion if 1) the Super Committee’s recommendations are enacted by Congress; or 2) if a balanced budget amendment is passed.

The BCA required that the Super Committee submit a report to Congress by November 23, 2011, and that Congress vote on the deficit reduction package by December 23, 2011. Super Committee negotiations were futile, as Republicans and Democrats clashed mostly over tax hikes. Democrats insisted they would not cut a dime of spending without raising taxes, while Republicans refused to allow the government to reach even deeper into the pockets of hard-working Americans, especially at a time when tax hikes would exacerbate the country’s economic woes. On, November 21, 2011, the Joint Select Committee announced that they were unable to reach an agreement, which eliminated option number 1.

During the Super Committee negotiations, House Republicans chose to bring the least-restrictive version of the balanced budget amendment (BBA), H. J. Res. 2, to the floor. Stronger versions of a BBA have included provisions to cap total spending and require a two-thirds majority vote of both Houses to override the spending cap, increase taxes or levy a new tax. While H. J. Res. 2 did not include these protections, it would still have safeguarded taxpayers against politicians’ insatiable appetite for massive deficit spending.

However, on November 18, 2011, the House voted down the balanced budget amendment in a 261-165 vote, 29 votes shy of the necessary two-thirds (or 290 vote) threshold. There goes option number 2.

That leaves option number 3. The BCA specifies that if the Super Committee’s recommendations are rejected or if the balanced budget amendment fails to pass both chambers, $1.2 trillion will be automatically sequestered starting in 2013. These automatic spending cuts will reduce defense spending by $500 billion and reduce domestic programs such as transportation, education, housing and energy, by nearly the same amount. Automatic sequestration would largely exempt cuts to entitlement programs.

The Congressional Budget Office estimates that domestic programs would be cut by 7.8 percent, while defense programs would be slashed by 10 percent. However, Medicare spending would only fall by 2 percent. These cuts would only produce $68 billion in immediate savings in 2013, while subsequent cuts in future years will make up the rest. Nevertheless, lawmakers are up in arms over even these measly cuts.

A November 21, 2011 Wall Street Journal op-ed reminded taxpayers that domestic discretionary spending more than doubled from $298 billion in 2000 to $614 billion in 2010. Domestic programs received an additional $300 billion through the 2009 stimulus bill; sequestration would only take back slightly more than one-fifth of that amount in 2013.

National security hawks are particularly concerned with the hit that the Pentagon is now scheduled to take. According to the Senate Budget Committee, defense accounts for less than 20 percent of the budget but will make up half of the sequester cuts. Since 2008, the Pentagon’s budget has grown by 10 percent, compared to a 24 percent increase in nondefense discretionary spending, a 37 percent increase in Medicaid, 70 percent in education and more than 100 percent in food stamps.

Citizens Against Government Waste has long advocated for spending cuts within the Department of Defense; no government agency should be off the table when Congress is looking for places to save money and cut waste, fraud and abuse. However, it appears that many members of Congress regret agreeing to a deal that allows the Pentagon to be disproportionately slashed. In fact, lawmakers are now seeking ways to prevent automatic sequestration; Senators John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) have said they will offer a supplemental appropriations bill to restore some of the reductions to the defense budget.

A long-time motto on Capitol Hill is that “Rules are made to be broken.” It would not be surprising if lawmakers figured out a way to pervert the rules of sequestration, alter which programs take a spending cut, or backfill funding immediately after the money is sequestered. Any way the budget is sliced, taxpayers will not see any savings as a result of the BCA in fiscal year (FY) 2012 and are likely to only see negligible cuts in FY 2013 and beyond.

Without significant spending cuts, the nation’s economy will continue to sink while the taxpayers’ tab will become unfathomable. It is not too late for Members of Congress to do the right thing for Americans. There is no shortage of ideas to cut wasteful, unnecessary and duplicative government spending; CAGW’s Prime Cuts 2011 provides 691 recommendations that would save taxpayers $391.9 billion in the first year and $1.8 trillion over five years.

CAGW recently launched a campaign directed at all taxpayers, asking them to sign a citizen’s demand that asks, “Congress, Can You Spare a Dime?”  As comparisons with past economic disasters continue to resonate, CAGW has taken the “anthem of the Great Depression,” which was “Brother, Can You Spare a Dime,” and turned it into an easily recognized and understood message.  By joining the campaign, Americans will make it clear that they agree that Washington must act now to address the record national debt.  The Super Committee may have failed, but taxpayers are still clinging to a shred of hope that lawmakers will come to their senses and agree to make the significant and immediate spending cuts that are necessary to save the nation from bankruptcy.

  -- Erica Gordon