Editorial: Sequestration math cuts nothing but faith

Only in Washington, D.C., could not paying royalties you owe be considered a spending cut.

Welcome to the magic math of sequestration and the Obama administration.

Last week the Department of Interior announced it would withhold $26 million in oil and gas royalties from New Mexico. Only Wyoming, one of the nation’s largest onshore oil and gas producers, is facing a larger royalties loss — $53 million. And somehow, not paying states their energy and mineral royalties as provided under the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 and its subsequent amendments constitutes tightening the federal belt.

Well, it sure beats making the decisions about reining-in spending on pet projects and the bureaucracy. Perhaps it’s part of that balance the administration keeps talking about. As in, two for me, none for you.

As Legislative Finance Committee Director David Abbey points out, these cuts come from revenues, not appropriations. And Rep. Steve Pearce, R-N.M., observes that “the federal government is trying to bow out of their commitments to states after failing to cut wasteful spending within the government.”

New Mexico Attorney General Gary King says he is reviewing “the issues with my litigation group” to see if the cuts can be appealed. That’s something that should be fast-tracked.

And Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., says he is “looking into this decision by the Department of the Interior and exploring options to see if it can be reversed.”

The bottom line — while New Mexico will have to dip into its reserves to cover the shortfall, no actual federal spending has been cut. But plenty of panic has been ginned up by this cynical move that further erodes the public’s faith in the federal government’s ability to do the right thing.

This editorial first appeared in the Albuquerque Journal. It was written by members of the editorial board and is unsigned as it represents the opinion of the newspaper rather than the writers.