Prepare for impact of sequestration

Not that elected officials on the home front don’t have enough strictly local concerns to handle, but Hawaii voters have got to be hoping that lawmakers and Gov. Neil Abercrombie are keeping the latest federal fiscal bombshell in mind and adjust their legislative priorities accordingly.

The country seems all but certain to undergo a budgetary shock, a provision known as "sequestration" that was passed in 2011 as a trigger. Essentially, the government placed a gun to its head — across-the-board cuts of discretionary spending, set to take effect on Friday — in a move intended to force a less-radical compromise in reducing the deficit and, ultimately, the nation’s mounting debt. The thought was that leaders would be motivated to avoid such indiscriminate cutbacks in spending and seek a more measured, reasoned approach.

Unfortunately, that assumption proved wrong in the current toxic political climate. The gun’s about to go off, and although nobody seems sure how devastating the effect will be, Congress should find a way to contain any damage.

The Republicans in Washington, D.C., especially those in the House majority, are convinced this is the only way the budget is likely to be cut in the near future, so they’re not inclined to swerve to avoid the sequester. Democrats counter that there have already been cuts made in the past session and that increasing revenue is the way to safeguard improvements in infrastructure and other programs that can help the nation build its capacity for economic growth.

Whichever argument comes closest to the truth, now is the time for Plan B and, fortunately, there is at least some movement in that direction. For the past week or more, some GOP members have advocated for legislation that would give federal agencies more flexibility in applying their budget reductions. Under the current time constraints, efforts to move a bill like that and have the "flexibility" option at the ready should attract bipartisan support.

In any event, Hawaii seems unlikely to escape all the collateral damage, given the state’s heavy reliance on federal aid. President Barack Obama over the weekend released state-by-state projections on the anticipated effects of the cuts. Some of the bullet points for Hawaii:

» About 20,000 civilian workers would be furloughed. This is the result of $106 million cut from Army base operations and $15 million from the Air Force; because active-duty members are insulated from reductions, the ax falls heaviest on civilian staff.

» Roughly $4.7 million will come from appropriations supporting Hawaii primary and secondary education.

» Safety-net programs would be affected, too. The state is pegged to lose $189,000 for senior-citizen meal programs, and more than a half million will be trimmed from various public health problems. Another $111,000, penciled in for job-search assistance, will be gone — and at an inopportune time when several employers here have announced layoffs for the near term.

Given the basic needs that may not be fulfilled, it would be smart for the Abercrombie administration to table some of its less-essential spending — the Hawaii Growth Initiative, a $20 million proposal to assist business entrepreneurs, comes to mind. Available funds should be redirected to core government functions.

Even on Capitol Hill, everyone freely admits that sequestration is an inept approach to curbing government spending. All the states would prefer that this not come to pass.

But we have to deal with the government we have, not the one we want, and on the local level it’s time for leaders who are pragmatic and skilled at the work-around. Hawaii officials have to do their best, knowing that D.C. will almost certainly do its worst before the week is out.