Sen. Mikulski: Sequestration in Maryland Would Risk 200 Teachers, Head and Early Start for 800 Children, 2,050 Vaccines and Cause 46,000 Department of Defense Furloughs

From the office of U.S. Senator Barbara Mikulski:

U.S. Senator Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.), Chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, today issued the following statement on the White House report released today that details the serious consequences of sequester:

“This latest report from the White House confirms sequester will be devastating, causing ripple effects across our economy and costing America hundreds of thousands of jobs we can’t afford to lose. These are real impacts in real communities with real consequences.

“We must stop sequester with a balanced approach to reducing our debt and deficit that includes reforms to the tax code, strategic cuts to mandatory spending and gives credit for cuts already taken.

“We can do it if we work in a bi-partisan way across the aisle and across the Capitol dome to agree on closing tax loopholes and making strategic cuts while maintaining our investments in education and innovation. That’s how we’ll create jobs today and jobs tomorrow, accelerate our economy and reduce our debt and deficit.”

According to the White House report, some of the consequences in Maryland include:

· Losing approximately $14.4 million in funding for primary and secondary education, putting around 200 teacher and aide jobs at risk. In addition, about 12,000 fewer students would be served and approximately 30 fewer schools would receive funding.

· Head Start and Early Head Start services would be eliminated for approximately 800 children in Maryland, reducing access to critical early education.

· About 2,050 fewer children will receive vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B due to reduced funding for vaccinations of about $140,000.

· Approximately 46,000 civilian Department of Defense employees would be furloughed, reducing gross pay by around $353.7 million in total.
For a full list of Maryland impacts included in the White House report, visit this link:

On Friday, Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Ray LaHood announced that sequester will slash more than $600 million from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) resulting in mandatory furloughs for nearly 47,000 air transportation employees and the closure of more than 100 air traffic control towers across the country. Air traffic control towers nationwide with fewer than 150,000 flight operations or 10,000 commercial operations annually could be closed. Such closures could also impact military operations who use regional airports such as the Martin State Airport.

According to DOT, the following Maryland regional airports could see their air traffic control towers close on April 1:

· Easton/Newnam Field

· Frederick Municipal Airport

· Hagerstown Regional Airport

· Martin State Airport

· Salisbury-Ocean City Wicomico Regional Airport


  1. Brian says

    Continued governmental spending; which requires increase in taxes will : put less food on my table, decrease the chance of my children attending higher education facilities, make it harder for me to pay my property taxes, harder to pay for gas, harder to pay for mortgage, harder to pay for clothes, harder to donate to my church, harder to give to charities, harder to pay my heat bills, harder to maintain my vehicle .etc etc etc………. Decrease government spending now.

  2. a parent says

    So tired of the scare tactics. The government needs to cut back on things at the top. Why do we pay for Air Force One weekend golf trips with friends. Drivers and gasoline for political leaders. Another funny thing is, from congress on up to the top will not be apart of Obama Care. They will have great private healthcare (for the rest of their lives) paid with our taxes. We have no idea all the money that is spent at the top for big government comforts. While the citizens struggle to keep their jobs, homes, decent healthcare, a little savings and a bright future for our children.

  3. Farmgirl says

    Congress needs to go line by line and cut out what is NOT necessary. I hope they start with themselves.

  4. rj derrick says

    Typical Obama scare tactics. How can there be a devastating cut to the budget, when the the do nothings in Congress hasn’t passed a budget to cut in 4 years. OweMalley uses the same tactics (must be a democrat thing). The sad part is the non educated electorate keeps voting them back in. But, why would they want to vote someone out who continues to coddle them and give them all the freebies that othes have to pay for (welfare checks, cell phones etc.)

  5. Brian says

    What a joke! If it is so bad a situation why did Senator M. and the rest of her crew head out of town last week? Why not stay and work out a way to fix things? I am so tired of the constant scare tactics of the current administration. I say let it happen my family will be okay, I will do whatever I have to do to ensure their needs are meet. Let the axe drop on this budget and let it drop now.

  6. ALEX R says

    Wow, folks! I guess maybe the constant theme here is that we don’t buy any of this doomsday stuff. Congress and the President have lost all credibility. Did they ever have much? Bring on the sequestration. Senator Mikulski, if you want to know who is to blame for this take a look in the mirror then show me a copy of the budget passed by the Senate. You haven’t done your job. Show me the budget, Senator. If you can’t show me the budget then stop whining about a situation you helped to create.

    Oh, and because of sequestration, tell me please exactly how many of your staff will be laid off.

  7. Fed up says

    What these “public servants” never seem to get is that 100% of us have had to cut back in our daily expenses over the past decade. Each year gets tighter and tighter yet the bloated government spends like a drunken sailor (my apologies to all sailors!). As for sequestration – let it begin! It’s the first time a cut has occurred since the 1980s – I dare say it may be the last we see in our lifetime considering the lack of responsibility, leadership and financial stewardship of our politicians.

    • Michael DORN says

      One correcrtion from a former sailor…when I ran out of money I stopped spending… they don’t!


    Why don’t we start with each Senator and each Representative laying off one member of their staff each. Just one. And let’s say that a staff member averages $50K per year in salary and benefits. Remember, the benefits are very expensive. If my math is correct that is $26.75 million. Now that would keep a lot of those poor Head Start kids from being hurt. And restore the vacinnation funding for poor children. What about it, Senator, who is more important? Congressional staff members or kids at risk? It’s up to you, Senator. You decide.

  9. Daddy Rabbit says

    The primary difference between the government and the Boy Scouts of America is that the Scouts have adult leadership.

  10. Localguy says

    I already contacted my representatives that I’m ready to take the risk of what these cuts might mean.

  11. Luther Lingus says

    We cannot cut $85 million off of $1 trillion dollars in spending!!!!!

    Poor people won’t eat.
    Teachers will be let go.
    Children will be thrown out into the streets.
    No more money for EBT cards to buy shrimp, cigarettes & lobster.
    No more free obama phones.
    Police and Firemen will be laid off.
    TSA workers will be laid off.
    No one will secure our borders.
    ………………..and on and on and on.

    Hey babs – we have to make due with less, maybe you and Obozo and Owe Malley should give it a try considering you are spending OUR MONEY you jackass!

    • Sara says

      I used to think the same thing, but it wont change much. People will continue to vote for people who give them free stuff.

  12. Sara says

    2.2 billion spent on giving away free cell phones, it was found that 46% of the phones went to people who were ineligible for the program. Its time we start cutting programs like these.

      • Briancz says

        A republican President, a democratic house and a republican senate. In any case, I don’t think they were anticipating the expansive costs of cell technology when compared to landlines.

        • Brian says

          copied this summary form wiki concerning That 1985 set of politicians: Some interesting tidbits about sequester and balanced budgets and deficits:

          The Gramm-Rudman-Hollings Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (99th Congress, S.1702, Pub.L. 99–177, title II, December 12, 1985, 99 Stat. 1038, 2 U.S.C. § 900) and Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act of 1987 (Pub.L. 100–119, title I, Sept. 29, 1987, 101 Stat. 754, 2 U.S.C. § 900) (both often known as Gramm-Rudman) were, according to U.S. Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, “the first binding constraint imposed on federal spending, and its spending caps have become part of every subsequent U.S. budget. Together with a rapidly growing economy it produced the first balanced federal budget in a quarter of a century.”[citation needed] After passage of this bill, the smallest unified budget deficit of the Reagan era was -$155.178 billion in fiscal year 1988.[citation needed]
          Senators Ernest Hollings (D-South Carolina), Warren Rudman (R-New Hampshire) and Phil Gramm (R-Texas) were the chief sponsors. The Acts were aimed at cutting the budget deficit, which at the time was the largest in history. They provided for automatic spending cuts (called “sequesters”) if the deficit exceeded a set of fixed deficit targets. The House passed the bill by a vote of 271-154 and the Senate by 61-31, and President Ronald Reagan signed the bill on December 12, 1985.[1][dead link] On August 12, 1986, Representative Dan Rostenkowski introduced the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Reaffirmation Act. The Senate passed the bill with two amendments by a vote of 36-35, and the House approved the Senate’s first amendment by voice vote but rejected the second amendment; the Senate receded that amendment by voice vote. President Reagan signed the bill on August 21.[2][dead link] The process for determining the amount of the automatic cuts was found unconstitutional in the case of Bowsher v. Synar, 478 U.S. 714 (1986) and Congress enacted a reworked version of the law in 1987.[3][dead link] Gramm-Rudman failed, however, to prevent large budget deficits. The Budget Enforcement Act of 1990 supplanted the fixed deficit targets.
          Balanced budgets did not actually emerge until the late 1990s when budget surpluses (not accounting for liabilities to the Social Security Trust Fund) emerged.

  13. ptb says

    Mikulski and O’malley are embarrassments to this state. SImple-minded, knee-jerk collectivism, with no accountability whatsoever.