Jonathan Cohn checks in on the sequester:
The Bipartisan Policy Center has called it a “slow-motion train wreck” that would deprive the economy of about a million jobs over two years. That prediction is broadly consistent with other forecasts, by such independent experts as Macroeconomic Advisers and the experts at the Congressional Budget Office. And it’s not like the recovery is strong enough to absorb such a hit easily.
But will voters link slower growth—and fewer jobs—to the sequester? Will they ask why it’s a better alternative than the budgets President Obama and the Democrats have proposed—budgets that would undo the cuts and make up some of the difference through higher taxes on the wealthy? And will lobbyists for affected industries, from medicine to defense, force Congress to pay attention to them? So far, the answer to all three questions has been “no,” to the surprise of many (including yours truly). That means the sequester cuts going into effect now, for this fiscal year, are likely to stay in place.
Why the political calculus may start to change:
Flights were delayed by up to two hours across the country on Monday, the first weekday that the nation’s air traffic control system operated with 10 percent fewer controllers. Pilots, gate agents and others were quick to blame furloughs caused by mandatory across-the-board budget cuts, but the Federal Aviation Administration said it was too soon to tell.
The Dish 