Last Friday, with sequestration’s across-the-board, indiscriminate cuts looming and a host of outstanding issues still unaddressed, Speaker Boehner called a vote on whether the House should adjourn and return home for the week.
I voted against adjourning and said, “As precious seconds tick away, the House should be in Washington doing its job and finding a compromise to protect our economy. Speaker Boehner should reverse course, and keep the House in session.”
Sequestration was designed to spur bipartisan action in Congress to address our long-term fiscal outlook. When used in the past, that is precisely what happened. In fact, former-Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX) said: “It was never the objective of Gramm-Rudman [legislation that used sequestration in 1985] to trigger the sequester; the objective of Gramm-Rudman was to have the threat of the sequester force compromise and action.”