The automatic federal funding cuts — known as the "sequester" — are set to go into effect on Friday, and the White House recently detailed how much funding each state could lose this year if Congress does not reach an agreement by the end of the week.
It's no surprise that Texas — the second-most-populous state in the nation — can be found at the top of nearly every metric. In funding cuts to Army base operations, Texas is tied for first with Georgia; both could lose up to $233 million. Texas also takes the top spot in lost Air Force operations funding, with $27 million at risk. In every metric shown below, Texas ranks in the top three.
Using the data made available for every state plus the District of Columbia (yes, we opened and collected numbers from all 51 PDFs), we have prepared an interactive that makes it easy to compare the White House's numbers for each state. Select a sequester cut from the drop-down to view a different chart.
Texas Tribune donors or members may be quoted or mentioned in our stories, or may be the subject of them. For a complete list of contributors, click here.
Comment Policy
The Texas Tribune is pleased to provide the opportunity for you to share your observations about this story. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask that you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or wandering away from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of the Tribune, and your user name will be displayed. Thanks for taking time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment.Login
| Sign-Up
Comments (17)
February 26 @ 6:26 a.m.
John Johnson
OK, Mr. Murphy...if what I read last night is true, these figures are not representative of what will be lost in a year, but over almost a ten year period...that it won't happen all at once...that it will hardly be noticed by most. Don't you think telling people that it is cumulative over ten years is important enough to point out?
February 26 @ 8:02 a.m.
raffaele cafagna
Because the question that’s most salient here isn’t the monies that are at stake now, but the monies that have been wasted before- and will be wasted again if we don’t demand cuts now. Monies that won't go to teachers and firefighters and cops and soldiers. Money that will reward those who've created the monster.
With government spending expected to cost $6.3 trillion in the US for 2013, let’s look at the things that we’ve squandered money on thus far; waste that has gone a long way to getting us where we are.
After all, sequester demands that we only cut $44 billion in federal spending. That’s a sum that more or less we’ve wasted on a ton of high profile boondoggles that seem to spark little outrage by the administration that can’t stand the idea of cutting even waste.
As Investor’s Business Daily says:
But will a $44 billion cut in spending out of a $3.8 trillion budget, a mere 1%, really be a "meat cleaver approach" that will "eviscerate" government programs?
Obama frightens people by pretending that the $1 trillion cut takes place right away rather than being spread out over 10 years.
He has taken almost every possible position on spending and taxes. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama continually promised to "cut net spending" and make government smaller. The stimulus was promised not to "raise projected deficits beyond a short horizon of a year or at most two."
Yet, during the fifth year of Obama's presidency, we are told that we can't cut spending, that we need even more government "investments."
The Department of Energy, for example, has sponsored loans of $34.5 billion to tenuous “green” companies, many of which have political connections to the Obama White House.
Let’s call in those loans.
The government’s venture into venture capitalism doesn’t seem like such a good idea to me when classroom teachers are going to get the axe.
Or maybe we could get General Motors to make due on the $15 billion that taxpayers are in the hole on the public stock offering of GM? Or perhaps we could ask the auto companies to get back the $27 billion that the government wasted on shoring-up the United Auto Workers union in the bailout plan?
Do we really need to save a union with declining membership and relevance, rather than pay teachers?
We can talk healthcare too.
Before we let the government take over the whole healthcare system, they could first clean up the estimated $48 billion in fraud and abuse that the government’s own General Accounting Office says haunts the part of healthcare that the government controls now-- Medicaid and Medicare.
“In 2010 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report claiming to have identified $48 billion in what it termed as ‘improper payments,’” reports Forbes. “That’s nearly 10 percent of the $500 billion in outlays for that year. However, others, including U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, suggest that there is an estimated $60 to $90 billion in fraud in Medicare and a similar amount for Medicaid.”
That’s at least $120 billion savings right there.
So if we can find an alternative to the green loans, tell GM to give us back the $42 billion that we wasted on the auto bailout- they have $26 billion in cash today…they can owes us the rest- that $60 billion in savings. Then if we clean up fraud and abuse in the healthcare system that the government runs we could save all told about $180 billion this year, with ongoing savings of $120 billion.
Shouldn’t we do that first before raising any taxes or firing any teachers?
I mean cut spending- and waste- and giving
What if we closed the Depts of Education, HUD, agriculture and Labor? Severely cut the FCC, FDA, ATF, EPA, HHS, IRS, NIH? We could save a trillion this year. Let's take a serious look at the organization of the military. How much overlap is there between services? How much of the administrative monster Pentagon can be shed? There are no sacred cows. I'd say we could probably find 44 billion of waste in the DOE (either energy or education) How about the USDA? The politics of fear. As Obama said, "we keep bouncing from crisis to crisis". He should know. HE'S the one in front of the "crisis peddlers" because, you know, they "never let a crisis go to waste".
And the GOP is hardly better. Between their fear peddling over cuts to the defense budget, which is also burdened with waste and fraud, and their seeming inability to remain standing against the bullying of the Left, the "establishment" GOP have betrayed us time and time again. For once they could get in front of the curve. The debt limit debacle is looming. They should just treat the sequester as a done deal and craft smart, targeted cuts (with teeth) to ALL government (since there is fraud and waste throughout). We the People have been teaching them to do this type of manipulation by not paying attention to what was being spent. We Allowed this to happen. It is We the People who must reign in this spending beast. Base Line Budgeting must GO! Balanced Budgets must return! If we want tranparency to turn this around We the People must hold them accountable. We Allowed and We Funded the transfer of 16 F=16's and 200 Abrahms Tanks. Mr. OBAMA STOP WASTING STOP SPENDING STOP GIVING ; Mr OBAMA WHY ARE YOU HERE ???????
This is BS. Spending cuts were already going to happen and the sequester doesn't do much more. The immediacy is the joke. The liberals want you to think govt will shit down. Not the case. The sequester, and any other cuts will take place over a period, which leaves room for adjustment. Hey, if I have to live within a budget due to Obama's policies, so should my government that I employ with my taxes.
"...due to Obama's policies..." Let's see how many of those so called Obama's policies are for two wars and billions and billions and billions of dollars authorized fro programs long before Obama was president and many in Congress weren't even there? Remember, over half of government spending is derived from mandatory spending passed over a very long period of time. The blame game has NO winners. The polarization of politics, the reliance on special interest funding of elections and their policymaking influence should bother more citizens than it does.
$5 says the House GOP comes back at the eleventh hour, and says Obama's cuts cut too much out of defense spending and not enough out of welfare programs and domestic spending.
Rick, that would be incorrect. The deficits under Obama went up from 500 billion to 1.85 Trillion in his first year in office and has remained higher than any budget deficit since Bush took office. Obama's yearly budge deficits will continue to rise. That was not due to mandatory spending or from the activities in Iraq or Afghanistan. The President has not passed a budget. He has not addressed the issue with mandatory spending or reducing the deficits or debt. His solution is to spend more and tax more. Obama was elected by people who want to continue to enjoy and get more from the Government which is not sustainable and leads to ruin.
suspect this is a one year cut since we are talking about 85 Billion in cuts. in a decade its 1.2 trillion in cuts. will it shut the government down? no, but it may slow down some. so what happens is that each agency cuts spending by cutting hours of employees, who actually do the work. leading to things like longer lines at airports, fewer food inspections, etc. but that just the cost of cutting spending. so live with it. or not of course other things are also cut like NOAA. which does among other things collects all of the reliable weather data. so you might not know that bad weather might happen the next day, or it might rain. or not.
Matthew, the budget not being passed is exactly where the focus should be, but is not. The crazy think is in 2009 and 2010 when Democrats controlled both senate and house, they failed to pass a budget either of those years. The truth is that we have no idea 'what' Obama's administration is spending 'our' money on, because he has not past a budget in years, which is utterly insane and is apparently illegal. But nobody seems to care about that.
Jason Holmes it isn't the ''budget'' that is im[ortant it is the indiviual appropriation bills. The republicans have controlled the house and the president has signed the appropriation bills passed by the senate and the house.
Jack, the Senate has not passed any of the budgetary appropriation bills since 2007. All that has been passed are continuing budget resolutions because the Senate and the President refuses to deal with the budget.
Only 1%? That's not nearly enough. It certainly should not result in long lines, as one comment mentioned. A standard work year is 2,000 hours long. One percent of that is only 20 hours ... or 24 minutes a week. Employees skim more time by leaving early / punching in late and taking longer breaks and lunches and impromptu smoke and coffee breaks than that. That doesn't require evil employees ... five minutes in a day is trivial and difficult to avoid.
The level of reduction in spending needed is that which is enough to cause US military to exit theaters of operation. If we took ALL the sequestered funds from there, we'd have no problem funding the schools (making college easily affordable for any qualified student in the process), responding to natural disasters and cleaning up our environment / moving to alternative fuels.
I don't want to gut the military ... but I'd like to see them take on the role of the baddest defensive force on the planet with the ability to strike anywhere on short notice with overwhelming force ... and come right back home immediately after. As things are now, we are funding not only a standing army on our shores, but a standing army of impressive size on a dozen other shores.
Oh, and while we're at it, we could make DHS terminate the contracts for 1.6 billion hollow point bullets. These bullets are illegal for use in international warfare under the Geneva Convention, but are perfectly legal for use domestically. We don't need a Stazi or Gestapo in this country.
April 26 @ 2:36 p.m.
SANDRA GLENN
I am guessing my computer didn't load the chart correctly. As I do not have a category for 'cuts' to ANY political salaries, benefits or compensations what-so-ever. If you follow the attached link http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/98-249.pdf , you can see we are paying billions of dollars for past Presidents, their widows, and their family. And this link referencing former Congressional members and families http://www.examiner.com/article/how-much-does-congressional-pay-and-benefits-cost-taxpayers. And most of the laws listed, which were of course voted in by the Congressional and Senate members themselves, are LIFETIME, and even continues to their widows after they receive 'tax paid for' funerals. But I still saw no link in the chart above for any reduction or cuts except for Senior services, children's lunches, teachers pay, police, fire and military protection......almost seems like we are in a third world country where if you aren't government, kings, queens or princes, you ain't nothing. And the very sad truth is I don't think our leaders are even subject to the social security taxes, etc.
Comments (17)
John Johnson
OK, Mr. Murphy...if what I read last night is true, these figures are not representative of what will be lost in a year, but over almost a ten year period...that it won't happen all at once...that it will hardly be noticed by most. Don't you think telling people that it is cumulative over ten years is important enough to point out?
raffaele cafagna
Because the question that’s most salient here isn’t the monies that are at stake now, but the monies that have been wasted before- and will be wasted again if we don’t demand cuts now. Monies that won't go to teachers and firefighters and cops and soldiers. Money that will reward those who've created the monster.
With government spending expected to cost $6.3 trillion in the US for 2013, let’s look at the things that we’ve squandered money on thus far; waste that has gone a long way to getting us where we are.
After all, sequester demands that we only cut $44 billion in federal spending. That’s a sum that more or less we’ve wasted on a ton of high profile boondoggles that seem to spark little outrage by the administration that can’t stand the idea of cutting even waste.
As Investor’s Business Daily says:
But will a $44 billion cut in spending out of a $3.8 trillion budget, a mere 1%, really be a "meat cleaver approach" that will "eviscerate" government programs?
Obama frightens people by pretending that the $1 trillion cut takes place right away rather than being spread out over 10 years.
He has taken almost every possible position on spending and taxes. During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama continually promised to "cut net spending" and make government smaller. The stimulus was promised not to "raise projected deficits beyond a short horizon of a year or at most two."
Yet, during the fifth year of Obama's presidency, we are told that we can't cut spending, that we need even more government "investments."
The Department of Energy, for example, has sponsored loans of $34.5 billion to tenuous “green” companies, many of which have political connections to the Obama White House.
Let’s call in those loans.
The government’s venture into venture capitalism doesn’t seem like such a good idea to me when classroom teachers are going to get the axe.
Or maybe we could get General Motors to make due on the $15 billion that taxpayers are in the hole on the public stock offering of GM? Or perhaps we could ask the auto companies to get back the $27 billion that the government wasted on shoring-up the United Auto Workers union in the bailout plan?
Do we really need to save a union with declining membership and relevance, rather than pay teachers?
We can talk healthcare too.
Before we let the government take over the whole healthcare system, they could first clean up the estimated $48 billion in fraud and abuse that the government’s own General Accounting Office says haunts the part of healthcare that the government controls now-- Medicaid and Medicare.
“In 2010 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report claiming to have identified $48 billion in what it termed as ‘improper payments,’” reports Forbes. “That’s nearly 10 percent of the $500 billion in outlays for that year. However, others, including U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, suggest that there is an estimated $60 to $90 billion in fraud in Medicare and a similar amount for Medicaid.”
That’s at least $120 billion savings right there.
So if we can find an alternative to the green loans, tell GM to give us back the $42 billion that we wasted on the auto bailout- they have $26 billion in cash today…they can owes us the rest- that $60 billion in savings. Then if we clean up fraud and abuse in the healthcare system that the government runs we could save all told about $180 billion this year, with ongoing savings of $120 billion.
Shouldn’t we do that first before raising any taxes or firing any teachers?
I mean cut spending- and waste- and giving
What if we closed the Depts of Education, HUD, agriculture and Labor? Severely cut the FCC, FDA, ATF, EPA, HHS, IRS, NIH? We could save a trillion this year. Let's take a serious look at the organization of the military. How much overlap is there between services? How much of the administrative monster Pentagon can be shed? There are no sacred cows. I'd say we could probably find 44 billion of waste in the DOE (either energy or education) How about the USDA?
The politics of fear. As Obama said, "we keep bouncing from crisis to crisis". He should know. HE'S the one in front of the "crisis peddlers" because, you know, they "never let a crisis go to waste".
And the GOP is hardly better. Between their fear peddling over cuts to the defense budget, which is also burdened with waste and fraud, and their seeming inability to remain standing against the bullying of the Left, the "establishment" GOP have betrayed us time and time again. For once they could get in front of the curve. The debt limit debacle is looming. They should just treat the sequester as a done deal and craft smart, targeted cuts (with teeth) to ALL government (since there is fraud and waste throughout).
We the People have been teaching them to do this type of manipulation by not paying attention to what was being spent. We Allowed this to happen. It is We the People who must reign in this spending beast. Base Line Budgeting must GO! Balanced Budgets must return! If we want tranparency to turn this around We the People must hold them accountable. We Allowed and We Funded the transfer of 16 F=16's and 200 Abrahms Tanks.
Mr. OBAMA STOP WASTING STOP SPENDING STOP GIVING ; Mr OBAMA WHY ARE YOU HERE ???????
Arthur M. Thomas IV via Texas Tribune on Facebook
and the political game show goes on.......
Jason Holmes via Texas Tribune on Facebook
This is BS. Spending cuts were already going to happen and the sequester doesn't do much more. The immediacy is the joke. The liberals want you to think govt will shit down. Not the case. The sequester, and any other cuts will take place over a period, which leaves room for adjustment. Hey, if I have to live within a budget due to Obama's policies, so should my government that I employ with my taxes.
Jason Holmes via Texas Tribune on Facebook
"Shit" was a Freudian slip perhaps in my comment...
Matthew Cowan via Texas Tribune on Facebook
You hit it on the heal of the nail Jason
Rick Henderson via Texas Tribune on Facebook
"...due to Obama's policies..." Let's see how many of those so called Obama's policies are for two wars and billions and billions and billions of dollars authorized fro programs long before Obama was president and many in Congress weren't even there? Remember, over half of government spending is derived from mandatory spending passed over a very long period of time. The blame game has NO winners. The polarization of politics, the reliance on special interest funding of elections and their policymaking influence should bother more citizens than it does.
Michael Siever via Texas Tribune on Facebook
$5 says the House GOP comes back at the eleventh hour, and says Obama's cuts cut too much out of defense spending and not enough out of welfare programs and domestic spending.
Matthew Cowan via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Rick, that would be incorrect. The deficits under Obama went up from 500 billion to 1.85 Trillion in his first year in office and has remained higher than any budget deficit since Bush took office. Obama's yearly budge deficits will continue to rise. That was not due to mandatory spending or from the activities in Iraq or Afghanistan. The President has not passed a budget. He has not addressed the issue with mandatory spending or reducing the deficits or debt. His solution is to spend more and tax more. Obama was elected by people who want to continue to enjoy and get more from the Government which is not sustainable and leads to ruin.
D W
suspect this is a one year cut since we are talking about 85 Billion in cuts. in a decade its 1.2 trillion in cuts. will it shut the government down? no, but it may slow down some. so what happens is that each agency cuts spending by cutting hours of employees, who actually do the work. leading to things like longer lines at airports, fewer food inspections, etc. but that just the cost of cutting spending. so live with it. or not
of course other things are also cut like NOAA. which does among other things collects all of the reliable weather data. so you might not know that bad weather might happen the next day, or it might rain. or not.
Gretchen Sams via Texas Tribune on Facebook
This is so stupid. 4th time our economy is being held hostage? Nobody even cares anymore.
Jason Holmes via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Matthew, the budget not being passed is exactly where the focus should be, but is not. The crazy think is in 2009 and 2010 when Democrats controlled both senate and house, they failed to pass a budget either of those years. The truth is that we have no idea 'what' Obama's administration is spending 'our' money on, because he has not past a budget in years, which is utterly insane and is apparently illegal. But nobody seems to care about that.
Jack Antonoff via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Jason Holmes it isn't the ''budget'' that is im[ortant it is the indiviual appropriation bills. The republicans have controlled the house and the president has signed the appropriation bills passed by the senate and the house.
Matthew Cowan via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Jack, the Senate has not passed any of the budgetary appropriation bills since 2007. All that has been passed are continuing budget resolutions because the Senate and the President refuses to deal with the budget.
Ben Bius via Texas Tribune on Facebook
Sequester Air Force One.
Bill Noln
Only 1%? That's not nearly enough. It certainly should not result in long lines, as one comment mentioned. A standard work year is 2,000 hours long. One percent of that is only 20 hours ... or 24 minutes a week. Employees skim more time by leaving early / punching in late and taking longer breaks and lunches and impromptu smoke and coffee breaks than that. That doesn't require evil employees ... five minutes in a day is trivial and difficult to avoid.
The level of reduction in spending needed is that which is enough to cause US military to exit theaters of operation. If we took ALL the sequestered funds from there, we'd have no problem funding the schools (making college easily affordable for any qualified student in the process), responding to natural disasters and cleaning up our environment / moving to alternative fuels.
I don't want to gut the military ... but I'd like to see them take on the role of the baddest defensive force on the planet with the ability to strike anywhere on short notice with overwhelming force ... and come right back home immediately after. As things are now, we are funding not only a standing army on our shores, but a standing army of impressive size on a dozen other shores.
Oh, and while we're at it, we could make DHS terminate the contracts for 1.6 billion hollow point bullets. These bullets are illegal for use in international warfare under the Geneva Convention, but are perfectly legal for use domestically. We don't need a Stazi or Gestapo in this country.
SANDRA GLENN
I am guessing my computer didn't load the chart correctly. As I do not have a category for 'cuts' to ANY political salaries, benefits or compensations what-so-ever. If you follow the attached link http://www.senate.gov/reference/resources/pdf/98-249.pdf , you can see we are paying billions of dollars for
past Presidents, their widows, and their family. And this link referencing former Congressional members and families http://www.examiner.com/article/how-much-does-congressional-pay-and-benefits-cost-taxpayers. And most of the laws listed, which were of course voted in by the Congressional and Senate members themselves, are LIFETIME, and even continues to their widows after they receive 'tax paid for' funerals. But I still saw no link in the chart
above for any reduction or cuts except for Senior services, children's lunches, teachers pay, police, fire and military protection......almost seems like we are in a third world country where if you aren't government, kings, queens or princes, you ain't nothing. And the very sad truth is I don't think our leaders are even subject to the social security taxes, etc.