Our view

It came as no surprise that a bipartisan Senate vote Thursday night approved a measure that would end furloughs for 1,500 air traffic controllers a day. After all, many members of Congress plan to fly today and next weekend, visiting their home states.

Public pressure proved more important to their decision, of course. The House is expected to take up the matter today and the White House issued a statement that it would consider any bill put forward.

The measure allows the Department of Transportation to transfer funds among departmental accounts in order to spread the effect of forced budget cuts. The furloughs were expected to trim $200 million this year alone.

At the same tim, the Department of Justice backtracked on its plan to require 116,000 employees to take unpaid days off, citing the same method--moving money between accounts and finding cuts elsewhere.

As Senator Mark Udall (D-Colo.) said of the air traffic bill, it “will help replace the indiscriminate effects of sequestration.”

Yet sequestration, however reviled as a political tool, was intended to force Congress to make tough decisions on government spending. The original measure was laced with cuts like the ones that led to air traffic controller furloughs--ones so painful elected officials would prefer to grapple with the spending issue.

Instead, Congress opted to ignore the problem and allow sequestration. Now we know why: they can circumvent the matter on a case by case basis and still avoid truly tough decisions.