Originally Posted by patteeu
Why should there be additional taxes in a sequester replacement? The sequester is all cuts, right? So shouldn't dumb cuts (of the across the board, sequester type) be replaced with smart cuts (cut bad and ineffective programs first)?
Ideally they would replace these dumb, frontloaded cuts with cuts to entitlement spending that only slowly phase in, achieving the same level of deficit reduction without hitting the economy so hard. It doesn't seem either party will go for this, though.