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.

View Comments (
)
|
Email
|
Print

    NEWSLETTERS

    Sequestration cuts were never intended to be fair, well-reasoned pullbacks of bloated government agencies. NBC Bay Area's Sam Brock reports. (Published Wednesday, Mar 27, 2013)

    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.