Reality Check

Reality Check

Vets the truthfulness of claims and measures the efficacy of public policy

Does Sequestration Target Low-Income?

Sequestration cuts were never intended to be fair, well-reasoned pullbacks of bloated government agencies.

By Sam Brock
|  Friday, Mar 1, 2013  |  Updated 7:26 AM PDT
View Comments (
)
|
Email
|
Print
Sequestration cuts were never intended to be fair, well-reasoned pullbacks of bloated government agencies. NBC Bay Area's Sam Brock reports.

Sequestration cuts were never intended to be fair, well-reasoned pullbacks of bloated government agencies. NBC Bay Area's Sam Brock reports.

advertisement

Sequestration cuts were never intended to be fair, well-reasoned pullbacks of bloated government agencies.

Rather, the proposed $1.2 trillion in cuts were crafted as a way to force members of Congress to forge a deal on long-term deficit reduction.

Now that a broader agreement appears unlikely to materialize, at least in the short-term, taxpayers are left trying to figure out how their services will be impacted and to what extent.

Critics of sequestration claim the policy measure not only takes a bludgeon to federal programs, when a scalpel would be more appropriate, but also unfairly targets low-income Americans.

NBC Bay Area spoke with school, housing and social services officials on the frontlines of crucial services to determine if the cuts are unfairly impacting the poor.

Get the latest headlines sent to your inbox!
View Comments (
)
|
Email
|
Print
Leave Comments
Bay Area Proud
Bay Area Proud is NBC Bay Area's... Read more
Follow Us
Sign up to receive news and updates that matter to you.
Send Us Your Story Tips
Check Out