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 (79)


  • Add A Comment

  • HLC wrote...
    The House of has come up with a budget every year.
    February 25, 2013 9:35 am
    The fool in chief couldn't come up with a budget when he controlled both houses of congress. As leadership goes he is a total waste. Tiger Woods did say he is a pretty good golfer for a guy that only golfs five days a week. You just can't fix stupid.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    Here is the plan that the Democrats have.
    February 25, 2013 10:05 am
    Demagogue the public into believing the Republicans are the "bad" party and gain control of congress so our "Dear Leader" can REALLY LEAD..= Destroy America.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Ron_Spins wrote...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_elections,_2014
    February 25, 2013 10:06 am
    .
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HPD 5-0 wrote...
    The sky is falling!!!!
    February 25, 2013 10:21 am
    Or so says the left. The sky is not falling. This is only $85 billion, which is somethihng like 2% of the entire budget. Many of us real people have had to cut our spending by far more than 2% for the last 4+ years thanks to Owebama. It's time the left get a dose of reality; taxpayers are not a bottomless pit of "revenue".
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • HPD 5-0 wrote...
    Why is it Always the critical services, such as police, fire departments, medical aid, etc and education and aid to the elderly that gets cut first?
    February 25, 2013 10:29 am
    Standard operating procedure for the DimoRats. Why? Because that's all they got. BLACKMAIL. They can't very well say "Watch out! We're cutting welfard and 'art', benfits for Congress!" Taxpayers would go; fine, do it! They are realizing that their entire philosophy is a failure and they are scared.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • hnuh wrote...
    02-25-2013 "cuts"
    February 25, 2013 10:53 am
    These are reductions in the rate of increase. The parasitic government class will make this insignificant reduction as painful as possible for the working proletariat, to punish us for allowing legislative opposition to the regime's agenda. The parasitic underclass will not be injured, only the productive working proletariat will be punished. This perspective on fomenting revolution is not new. Funamental change indeed.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Zoeller wrote...
    Obama prior to election during the presidential debates:
    February 25, 2013 10:56 am
    "There wil not be a sequester it's not going to happen." Obama after the election: "We are going to have a sequester." If his lips are moving, well you all know the rest.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Realitycheck wrote...
    True Zoeller
    February 25, 2013 7:10 pm
    But he had to lie so he could keep golfing all over (on tax payers dime). And the stupid sheepel believed him too. That is what happens when you allow white/black/green/yellow/red/purple/checkered trash re-produce and vote.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Roark wrote...
    All he has to do is do what he said he would do!
    February 25, 2013 11:48 am
    The republicans caved in and gave Obama his "tax on the rich". A deal is a deal. Now that it's HIS turn to give up some cuts he's going back on his promise to make cuts. This is all within Obama's power to stop. He's refusing to negotiate with the GOP who hold the moral high ground in this situation. They did their part. Not it's Obama's turn. If Washington loses this money, Washingtonians can thank their vote to re-elect a president who can't keep his word.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • po_guy wrote...
    Please re-read this line:
    February 25, 2013 12:58 pm
    "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." Every thing listed in these dreary reports show that the middle / lower clas is stuck with the impending results!!! They get these benefits because they already cannot pay for them. So since they won't be stuck witht he bill, they just lose the benefit. Pretty sweet deal. Where are the cuts that will hurt the rich and well-to-do?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • skillda1 wrote...
    Mr. Bill says...
    February 25, 2013 1:20 pm
    OHH NOOOOOOOOO!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Keitho wrote...
    Does not add up
    February 25, 2013 1:36 pm
    Were looking at 44 billion in a budget of 3700 billion per year. If this happens, spending will be reduced to approximately the same level as it was last year. I dont remember the hysteria and mass layoffs last year. Its February and Obama has already been on his 2nd vacation of the year. Apparently he he no worries about the calamaty about to take place. Its all Democrats and unions putting out the sacre stories. I dont buy it. We need to cut much more than 44 billion a year. $400 billion would be a good start.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • Largent803 wrote...
    Boils down to spending
    February 25, 2013 2:14 pm
    While I admit schools and other needs are needed. The problem has been a host of issues ranging from a job listing in the federal govt for a schedule maker to the Dept of Labor. To a great deal of travel. The company I work for doesn't like us to travel much. They would rather use technology such as Webex and the phone. I read recently you could cut out un-needed schedule maker jobs within the federal govt and save about 200 million dollars. The meetings I do right now doesn't require any travel and the message is completed using Webex.
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }