A Policy That Hurts Those Who Need Help Most
On May 30, 2025, the White House issued a memorandum that could unravel the safety net millions of Americans depend on. By ordering uniform cuts to non-exempt federal programs starting October 1, 2025, the administration has chosen a path of reckless austerity. This sequestration, authorized by the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, isn’t a careful plan to balance our books. It’s a broad, unthinking slash that threatens education, housing, and healthcare for the most vulnerable.
The order follows a formula set by the Office of Management and Budget, rooted in a 1985 law designed to force fiscal discipline. Yet discipline doesn’t mean punishing those least equipped to bear it. With a $1.9 trillion deficit and a national debt of $36.2 trillion, the problem is real, but automatic cuts to vital programs aren’t the solution. They’re a refusal to grapple with the harder work of targeted reform.
While Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid escape the axe, countless other programs—like Pell Grants, affordable housing initiatives, and job training—face deep reductions. These services keep students learning, families housed, and communities strong. Cutting them blindly betrays the promise of equal opportunity. Advocates, from educators to housing coalitions, warn of the devastation ahead, and they’re right to be alarmed.
For those unfamiliar with budget battles, sequestration is like a chef chopping ingredients without checking the recipe. The result leaves millions underserved. The Congressional Budget Office projects our debt climbing to 118 percent of GDP by 2035, a serious challenge. But slashing programs that empower people only deepens inequality and weakens our economy.
This policy stems from a long-standing power struggle between Congress and the White House over who controls federal spending. Since the 1974 Congressional Budget Act, lawmakers have fought to preserve their authority against executive overreach. Now, this sequestration order bypasses that balance, leaving the public to pay the price.
The High Price of Austerity’s Mistakes
We’ve seen this before, and the results were grim. The 2013 sequestration cut GDP growth by up to 1 percent, eliminated 1.8 million jobs, and curbed business investment. Families lost income, and communities struggled. Studies of European austerity show even worse: sharp fiscal cuts can reduce economic output by 3 percent over a decade. Repeating this error risks derailing our recovery.
Groups like the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities highlight how these cuts disproportionately harm low-income families, students, and small businesses. Teachers could lose jobs, health clinics might close, and infrastructure projects may stall. With the national debt at 100 percent of GDP and rising, we need solutions that strengthen, not weaken, our economic foundation.
Some argue sequestration forces fiscal responsibility, a last resort when Congress gridlocks. Organizations like the Club for Growth claim it pushes lawmakers toward deficit reduction. But this logic fails. Harming millions to break a stalemate isn’t leadership; it’s a dodge. Real responsibility means crafting policies that protect the vulnerable while addressing the deficit.
A better path exists. Closing tax loopholes for the wealthiest could raise billions without touching programs that support education or housing. Progressive lawmakers advocate for phased deficit reduction that prioritizes opportunity. Investing in people, not cutting their lifelines, drives long-term prosperity.
Choosing People Over Shortcuts
Mandatory programs like Social Security and Medicare face long-term solvency challenges, but sequestration offers no real fix. Options like means-testing benefits or adjusting Medicare payments could save billions while preserving support for those in need. Why opt for crude cuts when precise reforms are within reach?
Congress can still act. Budget reconciliation allows lawmakers to raise revenue and protect key programs. Yet the 2025 budget’s demand for $1.5 trillion in mandatory cuts favors tax breaks for the wealthy over families’ needs. Labor unions and policy experts are urging a stand against austerity, calling for investments in people instead.
This fight is about real lives—a teacher’s livelihood, a student’s education, a family’s home. We can’t let blind cuts tear apart our communities. Before October 2025, lawmakers must reject sequestration, raise fair revenue, and reform strategically. Will we choose a future of opportunity, or let austerity deepen division? The answer matters now more than ever.