Five things you need to know about sequestration

September 3, 2015

By Robin Stephenson

Sequestration was never meant to be the law of the land. In fact, the proposal to cap discretionary funding in the federal government's budget was meant to be so unsavory that it would force members of Congress to negotiate a responsible solution to deficit reduction. In 2011, they failed to reach an agreement.

Sequestration is a choice - a choice that can be changed when Congress negotiates funding levels for the fiscal year 2016 budget on their return from recess.

Budgeting by fiat has gone on far too long. 

Sequestration shrinks the overall size of the federal pie (the total amount the government has to spend), putting many anti-poverty programs at risk. Since 2011, the automatic caps have dictated the federal budgeting process, with the exception of two years of relief with the Ryan-Murray deal. But unless Congress acts, additional cuts will return in the fiscal year 2016 and continue through 2021.

Sequestration will cut non-defense appropriated programs, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), Head Start, Feed the Future, and other important nutrition programs by $37 billion each year through 2021.

The Congressional Budget Office recently told Congress that replacing sequestration would lead to higher employment and increased economic output.

Here are five things you need to know about sequestration.

  1. Sequestration treats everything alike. Sequestration subjects non-defense programs, such as WIC – a program Bread members are advocating for as part of this year’s Offering of Letters – to the same cuts as defense programs. Some members of Congress have called to alleviate defense caps but are silent on caps that affect programs for low-income families.
  2. Sequestration removes responsibility: Sequestration was put in place to force Congress to make tough budget choices on raising revenues and cutting mandatory spending. Rather than making tough choices, members of Congress are letting sequestration hit yearly appropriated spending again and again.
  3. Sequestration erodes the safety net: Churches and charities would be expected to pick up the slack. To make up the difference, every house of worship of every faith would have to raise $105,714 each year. Churches can’t do it alone.
  4. Elections complicate matters: As we head into an election year, it will become harder to replace sequestration in the next two years unless Congress acts now. If the caps continue, Congress will struggle to offset cuts, and that likely means targeting what they consider low-hanging fruit. Anti-hunger programs will be on the chopping block.
  5. Your voice will be the difference: Time and time again, your faith-based advocacy has protected anti-hunger programs. When the deal that led to sequestration passed in 2011, your calls and emails to Congress helped exempt programs like SNAP (formerly known as food stamps), Medicaid, and the earned income and child tax credits.

Contact your members of Congress today, and tell them to replace sequestration and pass a budget that funds programs that help low-income families.  To learn more about sequestration, read The Consequences of Sequestration and Tight Budget Caps.

Photo: In 2013, nearly 70 percent of Meals on Wheels programs had to drop the number of meals they served to poor seniors as a consequence of sequestration. 

Sequestration is a choice - a choice that can be changed by Congress.
Design by Doug Puller/Bread for the World

from our Resource Library

For Education

  • Election Resources

    One of the best times to raise the issues of hunger and poverty is during election campaigns. Engage candidates in your state/district on hunger and poverty using our elections resources.
  • Racially Equitable Responses to Hunger During COVID-19 and Beyond

    By Marlysa D. Gamblin and Kathleen King

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture defines food insecurity as when a person or household does not have regular, reliable access to the foods needed for good health. Black, Indigenous, and Other People of Color (BIPOC) have historically had higher...

  • Fact Sheet: COVID-19 Global Pandemic, Better Nutrition Protects Lives

    With the coronavirus now spreading in low-resource contexts and new waves of infection expected in the coming year, better nutrition for vulnerable people is more important than ever.

For Faith

  • Finding Hope, Ending Hunger on Both Sides of the Border: A Bilingual Latino Devotional

    Devotional writers challenge us to feel the Spirit of God within us and to hear God’s urgent call to demand justice so all can put food on the table.
  • The Bible on Health as a Hunger Issue

    “As you therefore have received Christ Jesus the Lord, continue to live your lives in him, rooted and built up in him and established in faith.” These words from Colossians 2:6 remind us of the faith that is active in love for our neighbors.

    The Bible on...

  • Unity Declaration on Racism and Poverty

    A diverse body of Christian leaders calls on the churches and Congress to focus on the integral connection.

    Dear Members of Congress,

    As the president and Congress are preparing their plans for this year, almost 100 church leaders—from all the families of U.S. Christianity—are...

For Advocacy


African at Heart

November 22, 2019


From the Blog