There is hardly anything that people take for granted as easily as the state budget. Indeed, what the state budget is being spent on, as well as what cuts it is supposed to undergo and due to what factors does not interest an average citizen of the USA in the least. When it comes to cutting on the bare necessities and the everyday facilities, as well as raising the costs for services, the results sequestration become obvious, which leads to another bunch of economical, financial and political problems to solve. Although demanding that a person should pay for certain services and pay the debts that the person has made is a rather legitimate demand, the idea of sequestration is still too severe a measure to impose on a person. In addition, some of the aspects of sequestration can lead to people questioning its actual usefulness and the reasonability if sequestering the state budget. Despite the fact that currently, the U.S. government and the President insist on the need to sequestrate the budget, the results of the given procedure may turn out even more drastic than expected. Even though budget sequestration might lead to getting financial help for the state to cover the expenses, the costs that the USA will not be worth the effort. To start with, the process of sequestration needs a definition. Described as “a process of automatic, largely across-the-board spending reductions to meet or enforce certain budget policy goals” (Saturno and Heniff 17–4), sequestration does not seem a fabulous perspective for the U.S. economy. One of the most often expressed concerns about the sequestration concerns the way in which the budget cuts are carried out. According to what Larsen says, these are not just the cuts in budget that the U.S. state authorities talk about, but the cuts in the rates of the budget growth. Therefore, not only the current budget, but also the whole budgeting policy of the United States is threatened once the policy of sequestration becomes an integral part of the American reality. The given event can be the point at which the U.S. economy starts going completely downhill. With the current spending levels as the basis for the future budget to be planned on, the government of the United States will practically reduce the future growth rates of the federal budget (Shick 82). Reconsidering the possible effects of the sequestration policy, one can assume that it might lead to the same deplorable economical situation as the one that the United States faced in 1990 because of the missteps taken in 1980 (Schick 82). To its credit, the sequestration policy has certain positive aspects. No matter how scanty the obtained financial resources will supposedly be, it is still necessary to admit that the state government is still planning to use this money for the greater good. As the state report says, the budget cuts and the money obtained as a result of the sequestration are going to be used for a noble cause. To start with, the cuts will serve the purpose of enhancing the state defense program, which is crucial in the light of the increasing tension in the relationships between states. As the report says, 10% ($55 billion) are going to be used for enhancing the defense program. Another important issue that the state is going to address as soon as the state budget increases is the concern for the citizens’ health. Medicare will receive 2% of the revenues in addition t