The sequester has been the height of discussion in Washington, D.C., for the past few weeks and is yet another partisan issue that politicians in our nation’s capital will have to conquer. The $85 million in automatic budget cuts was approved at midnight on March 2 and will bring several effects that may be more detrimental than President Barack Obama and Congress realize.

Both parties agree that the sequester will have negative effects. In Obama’s radio address, he said the spending cuts “will inflict pain on communities across the country,” costing jobs and slowing growth. The president also said that Republicans are to blame for the sequester due to the fact that Republicans did not want to close a tax loophole that may have helped reduce the deficit.

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) argues that closing the loophole would give the Obama administration more tax revenue; she accused them of wanting to spend on stimulus projects and government programs.

The sequester started as part of the 2011 agreement to break another Democrat and Republican budget disagreement, also known as raising the debt ceiling. It was even delayed for two months after Obama proposed the fiscal cliff.

A huge misconception about the sequester is that it doesn’t affect college students. On the contrary, the consequences, which first surfaced in January, include 8.2 percent in cuts towards federal work study programs, $49 million in cuts to the Education Opportunity Grant program, both of which provide aid to students with exceptional need. Although the Pell Grant will be safe from the sequester, there are still millions of dollars taken away from education funding.

As college students, we are at the forefront of the audience of those who will be negatively affected by the sequester. Approximately 33,000 students across the nation will be eliminated from the work-study program and 71,000 students will see reductions in their grants.

Aside from the obvious effects this will have on America’s education system, education cuts will also affect the military. The sequester cuts will take away resources for students that give them the basic skills necessary for the military entrance exams. Currently, a quarter of American students who don’t graduate or receive their GED aren’t able to serve in the military. On top of those numbers, 30 percent of high school students lack the basic math, science and English skills needed for the military entrance exams.

Taking away education funding should clearly be the lowest priority for sequester cuts. Not only are there obvious effects such as taking away resources from schools, all of which need and deserve them, but the sequester cuts on education will in turn have a domino effect on the military: restricting who is able to join the military, which will have its own negative effects on itself, such as not having enough people out of high school who are able to pass the military entrance exams.

The longer the effects of the sequester last, the more detrimental the effects on education and the military will be. The biggest obstacle in solving these issues comes from the constant partisan divide in Washington. It’s no surprise that Obama and the GOP have extremely differing views on the fiscal policy, but these partisan beliefs are causing a delay in even deciding upon the terms of the sequester, which not only prolongs the length of the terms of the cuts but delays any solution that they could possibly come up with.

Partisanship never solves anything if neither party is willing to compromise. Obama has said that the sequester is temporary as long as both sides can come to an agreement. It’s safe to assume that neither party wants to deal with the effects of the sequester, but the government has currently reached an impasse that can’t be dealt with if neither party will budge.

The current and potential effects of the sequester are dangerous ones that we may not be able to afford or recover from. Agencies can’t submit budgets to Congress if Congress can’t agree on those budgets. If the sequester isn’t adjusted soon, we may be paying for it even more in the future.

——————————————————————————————-

Katie Henry is a senior in journalism and mass communication and political science from Pella, Iowa.