Everyone has a story. What's yours?
 Linda Thomas
twitter: @TheNewsChick
About Linda
Linda is the morning news anchor and features reporter for KIRO Radio. This is her local news blog, with an emphasis on social media, technology, Northwest companies, education, parenting, and anything else that grabs her attention.

If you have a news tip or story idea, I'd love to hear from you...

To leave a voice message for Linda about any of her stories call toll free 1-855-251-2363

Follow Me on Pinterest


Obama.jpg
Head Start and Early Head Start services would be eliminated for approximately 1,000 children in Washington. In this photo President Obama visited a classroom to talk about the importance of universal pres-school in the United States. (Johnny Crawford/Atlanta Journal-Constitution/AP Photo)

Expect these automatic cuts in Washington state by Friday

February 24, 2013 @ 5:54 pm (Updated: 5:39 am - 2/25/13 )

We've been hearing about the impact of the potential federal cuts, the so-called "sequester" for weeks. Now the White House has listed a state-by-state breakdown of how we'd be impacted by the $85 billion in cuts that will kick in if Congress doesn't act.

Here is what it says will be cut this year alone in Washington state:

Teachers and Schools

Washington will lose approximately $11,606,000 in funding for primary and secondary education, putting around 160 teacher and aide jobs at risk. In addition about 11,000 fewer students would be served and approximately 50 fewer schools would receive funding.

Education for Children with Disabilities: In addition, Washington will lose approximately $11,251,000 in funds for about 140 teachers, aides, and staff who help children with disabilities.

Child Care: Up to 800 disadvantaged and vulnerable children could lose access to child care.

Work-Study Jobs: Around 440 fewer low income students in Washington would receive aid to help them finance the costs of college and around 180 fewer students will get work-study jobs that help them pay for college.

Head Start: Head Start and Early Head Start services would be eliminated for approximately 1,000 children in Washington

Environment

Washington would lose about $3,301,000 in environmental funding to ensure clean water and air quality, as well as prevent pollution from pesticides and hazardous waste.

In addition, Washington could lose another $924,000 in grants for fish and wildlife protection.

Military Readiness

Approximately 29,000 civilian Department of Defense employees would be furloughed, reducing gross pay by around $173.4 million.

Army: Base operation funding would be cut by about $124 million.

Air Force: Funding for Air Force operations would be cut by about $3 million.

Navy: Cancel aircraft depot maintenance at Whidbey Island, a demolition project in Bremerton.

Law Enforcement and Public Safety

Washington will lose about $271,000 in Justice Assistance Grants that support law enforcement, prosecution and courts, crime prevention and education, corrections and community corrections, drug treatment and enforcement, and crime victim and witness initiatives.

Public Assistance and Health

Washington will lose about $661,000 in funding for job search assistance, referral, and placement.

Vaccines for Children: Around 2,850 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 $195,000.

Washington will lose approximately $642,000 in funds to help upgrade its ability to respond to public health threats including infectious diseases, natural disasters, and biological, chemical, nuclear, and radiological events.

Washington will lose about $1,740,000 in grants to help prevent and treat substance abuse, resulting in around 3800 fewer admissions to substance abuse programs.

The Washington State Department of Health will lose about $174,000 resulting in around 4,300 fewer HIV tests.

STOP Violence Against Women Program: Washington could lose up to $143,000 in funds that provide services to victims of domestic violence, resulting in up to 500 fewer victims being served.

Nutrition Assistance for Seniors: Washington would lose approximately $1,053,000 in funds that provide meals for seniors.

The statement from the White House briefly explains what it considers to be the problem in Congress with budget negotiations:

"Unfortunately, many Republicans in Congress refuse to ask the wealthy to pay a little more by closing tax loopholes so that we can protect investments that are helping grow our economy and keep our country safe. By not asking the wealthy to pay a little more, Republicans are forcing our children, seniors, troops, military families and the entire middle class to bear the burden of deficit reduction.

The President is determined to cut spending and reduce the deficit in a balanced way, but he won't stick the middle class with the bill. The President is willing to compromise, but on behalf the middle class he cannot accept a deal that undercuts their economic security."

Republicans say Mr. Obama deserves his share of the blame for the budget problems and Republican Senator John McCain calling on President Obama to convene a summit meeting to work out an agreement.

"I won't put all the blame on the president of the United States, but the president leads," says McCain. "The president should be calling us over somewhere — Camp David, the White House, somewhere — and sitting us down and trying to avert these cuts."

By LINDA THOMAS

Related: The smallest military cuts sting the most - local ROTC program in jeopardy

More from Linda Thomas

MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (84)


  • Add A Comment

  • Kosh wrote...
    Big Deal
    February 25, 2013 5:59 am
    Even with the cuts we are still spending more this year than last year and all without a budget of course thanks to dirty Dems.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • cdbtx wrote...
    This is the perfect example of why the public
    February 25, 2013 6:07 am
    does not trust the media. Instead of researching and reporting on all news the Media partakes the position of Political Cheerleader and repeats the party line rhetoric.

    Sequestration - the reality. Try Google and you'll find the facts about sequestration within 3 minutes...

    This year, the sequester would slow the growth in federal spending by just $85 billion, from an expected, pre-sequester budget of $3.64 trillion — less than a 2.3% reduction.... Why isn't this reported?

    Because of ongoing contracts and the Byzantine labyrinth of federal budgeting, only $44 billion of that $85 billion will actually be cut from this year’s budget.... Why isn't this reported?

    The rest will be cut in future years, but attributed to this year’s budget. So, the real reduction in federal spending this year is just 1.2%. Why isn't this reported?

    If the federal government can’t reduce spending by less than a penny-and-a-half on the dollar without throwing us into the dark ages, something is truly wrong. Why isn't this reported?

    The media has become a mirror of our politicians ethics and integrity...

    Any doubt why I would never spend 1 cent for the Seattle Times?

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • soo purletiv wrote...
    A tragedy in the making.... NOT (Well, maybe)
    February 25, 2013 6:42 am
    Let the sequester begin.

    These arbitrary cuts need to happen for 3 reasons.

    1) Spending is out of control, and we all know it. That's the obvious one!

    2) No one cared when the majority of Congress forced the HCA down my throat a few years ago. Now that the reality of that farce is soon to come to fruition, people will be severely hurt, financially with that junk bill. Since no one cared about those of us hurt by that junk, why should we care about those hurt by these cuts? BTW: A lot of those affected by the sequester, are the same ones who clapped and cheered and thought the HCA was heaven sent without shedding a single tear for those damaged by it. So again, why should I cry when others are affected by the sequester?

    3) First of all, I hardly believe this will happen. But if it does... We will all see politicians all over the country squirming. (love that) They want to play games with peoples lives? Let them! But let them also feel the full weight of the consequences at the same time. Let them get an earful, due to their ineptness in governing. Let them worry about holding on to their seat. Let them worry about actually having to make decisions, rather than tow the party line. Let them squirm! LET THEM SQUIRM!

    It is all a game to them. People get hurt by their games all the time. So let's play. Let's play their game. And let's see who gets hurt this time...

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ChartryC wrote...
    Great News
    February 25, 2013 6:47 am
    This is great news for the people of America, What will be even better is getting rid of our Welfare system and make people WORK for their food and a place to live. People need to pull their own weight. I am excited to see this FUNDING go bye bye, and for states to pull back on their own spending, and not rely on bailouts all the time. We pay WAY to many TAXES as it is, and its time for govnt. to start taking a hard look at themselves. And know that we are TAPPED out and can not afford anymore. Enough is enough
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ratrustle wrote...
    as long as we're cutting!
    February 25, 2013 6:52 am
    The first thing to go on my list is the TSA. Let's profile and use professional police or military to keep our skies safe. It seems to work pretty darned well in Europe and I can't believe it would cost more money! There, I feel better shooting from the hip -- just like a legislator!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • maplefish wrote...
    ratrustle
    February 25, 2013 10:03 am
    Hilarious and agreed! Good place to start. How about we cut foreign aid in half to countries that hate our guts? Why on earth are we giving the Saudi's $Billions in aid? Does anyone in their right mind think they need our tax dollars??? I think NOT!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Moondoggie wrote...
    cdbtx nailed it! It is only 44 billion that will be cut this year.
    February 25, 2013 6:53 am
    here is what happened at our house this year when I had to tell my wife that I didn't get the 4% raise I wanted and only got a 1% raise. My wife cried out “Oh Honey Bear! what shall we do with only an extra 1% to spend?” “Don’t worry Tootsie Wootsie, we just won’t get to take the kids to Disney Land this year or buy that new car”. “But Honey bear, the children do so love Disney land and you did promise me a new car with real Corinthian Leather” she said as she stood there with those pouty lips and long legs. “Oh all right” I replied. “ But we all have to make sacrifices. No doctor or dentist visits for the kids this year, and they are only allowed to eat food on Mondays Wednesdays and Fridays”. “And what sacrifices do we have to make Dear?” she asked. “We shall have to stand by and helplessly watch our children suffer” I replied “Now go put on that new designer dress I just bought you and tell the nanny we will be back very late. We have a table reserved at Chateau Le Money , and we can’t be late!”
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • mnpat wrote...
    The administration has played a dangerous game,
    February 25, 2013 7:02 am
    The administration and congress have failed for years to demonstrate they are capable of managingour government or to put forth abudget capable of handling the debt and income. They conrtinue to play o game of whom flinches first. Medicaid, Medicare, Health Care, Social Secutity and the debt need to sustainable if you wish to proceed, they currently are not and no one seems to interested in discussing these issues.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • messiah101 wrote...
    Of course the Rightys will complain
    February 25, 2013 8:08 am
    Of HIGHER unemployment numbers when government cuts mean higher unemployment
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SeattleNative wrote...
    It's up to Obama where the cuts are made
    February 25, 2013 9:21 am
    If people suffer, he'll be to blame.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • maplefish wrote...
    M101 & You Lefty's - Just remember what Barry said
    February 25, 2013 9:44 am
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyLmru6no4U
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HPD 5-0 wrote...
    SHut up assholiah
    February 25, 2013 10:31 am
    your "input" is no longer relevant.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • flipper wrote...
    Uh oh...
    February 25, 2013 8:30 am
    I thought Obamacare was supposed to provide vaccines for everyone...what happened?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • TooTallTom wrote...
    Any chance you reporters will actually do your job?
    February 25, 2013 8:30 am
    How about you lazy a** reporters stop regurgitating the crap the White House is spewing to scare us and Congress into letting our Dear Leader spend more money we don't have! The Sequester takes 2.5% of the budget increases out of play this year and spreads the rest of the cuts out over 10 years. So the list the White House sent out is Breezy Speculation and a desperate attempt to keep the spending going. This from a President who has yet to get a budget through Congress. Shame on you!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • SeattleNative wrote...
    After watching the Sunday morning programs...
    February 25, 2013 9:23 am
    ...even the democrats in the Senate are fed up that Harry Reid won't let them bring forth a budget. Of course, they aren't calling him out by name. But they clearly want to pass a budget rather than continuing resolution after continuing resolution.

    Elections have consequences.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }