Stay updated with breaking news from Andy copeland. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
but then i look at some other numbers and it doesn t make sense. for example, the cuts, in terms of real terms, the cuts that the defense department already agreed to and then the sequestration on top of that would only be about 11%, in real terms. ronald reagan cut defense by 10% in his second term. george h.w. bush cut it. so this is right in line with those. that seems to make sense. yes, when you re talking about percentages, always matter where is you re starting from. i think it s more instructive to actually look at the dollars being cut. you look at the total between defense and non-defense, it would represent a reduction of over $100 billion in the coming fiscal year. and that s really the number you have to focus on that translates into the economic impact that we re talking about. so a structure today, this would be a precipitous set of cuts that would happen very quickly, would happen without the benefit of strategic thinking on how they would be applied. ....
good evening, everyone. i m erin burnett. outfront tonight, the big scare. with just four days in the congress high tails it out of washingt washington, there was plenty of talk about the looming consequences of the looming fiscal cliff. we re talking about tax cuts expiring for everyone automatically, payroll taxes going up, emergency unemployment benefits ending and, of course, the $1.2 trillion in so-called sequestration cuts. about half of that sum is going to come from defense. the obligation of the commander in chief is to act like the commander in chief, and that would be to prevent these cuts, which in the words of his own secretary of defense, would devastate our national security. interesting, acting like a commander in chief, because a lot of the previous commanders in chief have done a lot more than barack obama may be about to do. we ve certainly been here before. former president ronald reagan during his second term cut defense spending by about 10%. ....
there was plenty of talk about the dire consequences of the looming fiscal cliff. we re talking about tax cuts expiring for everyone automatically, payroll taxes going up, emergency unemployment benefits ending and, of course, the $1.2 trillion in so-called sequestration cuts. about half of that sum is going to come from defense. the obligation of the commander in chief is to act like the commander in chief, and that wld be to prevent these cuts, which in the words of his own secretary of defense, would devastate our national security. interesting, acting like a commander in chief, because a lot of the previous commanders in chief have done a lot more than barack obama may be about to do. we ve certainly been here before. ronald reagan during his second term cut defense spending by about 10%. the cold war was winding down. those cuts continued under former president george h.w. bush, about 18% in cuts. and then former president clinton. clinton did start to increase ....
sequestration impacts both elements of the budget. so help me understand because i ve heard that argument and it makes sense. but then i look at some other numbers and it doesn t make sense. for example, the cuts, in terms of real terms, the cuts that the defense department already agreed to and then the sequestration on top of that would only be about 11%, in real terms. ronald reagan cut defense by 10% in his second term. george h.w. bush cut it. so this is right in line with those. that seems to make sense. yes, when you re talking about percentages, always matter where is you re starting from. i think it s more instructive to actually look at the dollars being cut f. you look at the total between defense and non-defense, it would represent a reduction of over $100 billion in the coming fiscal year. and that s really the number you have to focus on that translates into the economic impact that we re talking about. so a structure today, this would be a precipitous ....
with four days before congress high-tails it out of washington, there was plenty of talk about the dire consequences of the looming fiscal cliff. we re talking about tax cuts expiring for everyone automatically, payroll taxes going up, emergency unemployment benefits ending and, of course, the $1.2 trillion in so-called sequestration cuts. about half of that sum is going to come from defense. the obligation of the commander in chief is to act like the commander in chief, and that would be to prevent these cuts, which in the words of his own secretary of defense, would devastate our national security. interesting, acting like a commander in chief, because a lot of the previous commanders in chief have done a lot more than barack obama may be about to do. we ve certainly been here before. ronald reagan during his second term cut defense spending by about 10%. the cold war was winding down. those cuts continued under former president george h.w. bush, about 18% in cuts ....