The Right Opinion
Downsizing Defense
As Republicans take their case to the voters in November about the Obama administration's massive overspending and record debt, they should seriously consider what could be a rare bipartisan objective: cutting defense spending.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates -- a George W. Bush appointee and an Obama holdover -- has announced plans to reduce what he calls the "cumbersome" American military hierarchy. Gates also wants to cut spending by more than one-quarter on support contractors and close the Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Va., which, according to the Washington Post, "employs about 2,800 military and civilian personnel as well as 3,300 contractors, most of them in southeastern Virginia." Gates' proposal got the attention of Senator James Webb, Virginia Democrat and Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell, a Republican. Closing a national security facility would cost jobs and Virginia, which recently announced a budget surplus and houses the Pentagon and other military venues, doesn't want to regress.
It is one of Washington's major embarrassments that no matter which party controls Congress, members use defense spending to create jobs and do favors for political contributors in their states and districts. But like the bipartisan Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process, which operated through Republican and Democratic administrations and resulted in the closing of 350 outdated military bases, a similar approach to cutting unnecessary defense spending might also produce benefits to taxpayers.
The problem has been that the Left too often wants to cut defense for its own anti-war and political agenda and the Right thinks all defense spending is good and to cut it is unpatriotic. So how about starting with the most outrageous and unnecessary spending, which should make harder cuts a little easier?
Citizens Against Government Waste (www.cagw.org) offers some useful places to begin. In the 2010 defense budget, "$3,385,000,000 was added anonymously for four projects. According to the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, signed into law on Sept. 14, 2007 by President George W. Bush, members of Congress are required to add their name to each earmark. However, they continue to violate this law by adding anonymous earmarks to fund projects -- often big-ticket items -- at the expense of taxpayers." Why can't Congress live under laws it passes to regulate itself?
Another anonymous earmark for $250,000,000 was added, "For advance procurement of components for the two DDG-51 destroyers planned in fiscal year 2011. According to a Sept. 29, 2009 Associated Press article, the DDG-51 destroyer is "to be built in Pascagoula, Miss., home to Republican Sen. Thad Cochran," Ranking Member on the Appropriations Committee. "Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), John Kerry (D-Mass.), (former senator) Paul Kirk (D-Mass.) and Rep. Travis Childers (D-Miss.) added $8,100,000 for a hybrid drive system for the DDG-51 destroyer."
Spending may be Washington's last bipartisan activity.
Again anonymously, $2,500,000,000 was earmarked for "10 additional C-17 aircraft. In a floor statement posted on his website, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) voiced his opposition to the C-17 funding: 'what we would do in this bill is effectively fund the purchase of new aircraft that we neither need nor can afford with critical sustainment money. That would have a significant impact on our ability to provide the day-to-day operational funding that our servicemen and women and their families deserve.'"
It will take more than spending reductions to make the Pentagon -- and the American economy -- healthy again. Ultimately, the political leadership must develop a policy about the proper role of the United States in the world and what weapons are necessary to fight modern wars against terrorists.
President Obama has said (and so have his predecessors) that he doesn't like the pork in defense bills, but he has to sign what Congress sends him. The least he could do is to shame those members who won't attach their names to spending measures, or who support spending for weapons the Pentagon neither wants, nor needs.
Wasting money on the Department of Defense may strengthen the political careers of politicians, but it weakens our defenses.
(c) 2010 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.
8 Comments
Billy
Thursday, August 12, 2010 at 8:44 AM
Why can't Congress live under laws it passes to regulate itself? Because it doesn't have to until it will be MADE to do so. THAT FACT is the root of 90% of our current problems. As Stark said: we can do anything we want. He's right. Until he can't. If that day of reckoning doesn't come soon nothing else will matter. They know that in Washington. Too bad for all of us that few outside it do.
Talman
Thursday, August 12, 2010 at 9:36 AM
You don't tow the democratic line you lose government jobs in your state. That seems to be what is happening. Look at Texas. Sealy, Tx lost its military truck building contract to Wisconsin. And the Wisconsin company wasn't ready to meet production schedules. Cost Sealy roughly 3,000 jobs plus another 6800 on the periphery. Devasted the local economy. Sealy, Tx is about an 80 minute drive from downtown Houston. Still not enough punishment, NASA has different mission; improve relationships with Muslim world. Cost to Houston about 10,000 high tech jobs including those on the periphery. Picking our pockets, dam near breaking our bones and threatening our survival; that what I see.
Jeff Fryrear
Thursday, August 12, 2010 at 9:48 AM
Won't happen. The "military-industrial complex" is too firmly entrenched. The defense contractors, read also retirement jobs for Field Grade Officers, have a grip on our military which cannot be easily broken. We employ these firms to do jobs that we used to have servicemembers do. We shrink the military, we grow the contractors. It costs more but it appears that we saved on soldier costs. we are in the trap and need people of integrity to pull us out. Congress lacks the integrity to do the job.
M Rick Timms, MD
Thursday, August 12, 2010 at 7:54 PM
Accountability. Nice idea - especially in government, which specializes in spending other peoples money.I am not oppossed to eliminating waste , fraud, and abuse in the area of defense spending --- but why not expand that to include the Federal Government spending in other areas -- such as the "entitlement" give-aways that no one is really "entitled" to , except that some politician was trying to buy thier vote.The problem is too much money going to Washington. If they do not have the money - they can't waste it. ( unless they just print more like this bunch is doing). We have to rein in the Federal Beast.We can do that by electing true conservatives and educating the ignorant masses to the futility of "government spending for job creation".If we are not able accomplish that at the ballot box, our society will collapse into revolution and societal anarchy, as a result of simple economics and human nature.Let's stop wasteful defense spending as part of a complete restructuring of the role of federal government - based on constitutional principles.
HAMBONE
Thursday, August 12, 2010 at 9:24 PM
Don't you just love it when a bunch of political hacks start deciding what our fighting men and women "really" need?Here's a fresh thought- Let the Generals that have some combat experience and have spent their entire lives learning to kill bad guys in huge volumes (and cheaply) call a few shots.
Ray
Saturday, August 14, 2010 at 11:03 AM
M Rick Timms, MD You state if they don't have the money they can't spend it. No, they don't have to print more simply borrow more as they are doing right now. It is said that every $1 they spend, 42 cents is borrowed. How is that for fiscal responsabilty?
Frank E.
Saturday, August 14, 2010 at 3:28 PM
08/14/10 IT seems to be no law availible to put a stop to to OBAMA'S and DEMOCRATIC PARTY of TREASON and THIEVERY, Come NOVEMBER the PEOPLE can do what law enforcement won't do,and thats CLEAN HOUSE!!!
M Rick Timms, MD
Sunday, August 15, 2010 at 6:34 PM
Right you are Ray! These leftists are grabbing power - buying votes of the illiterate and the unionized with money they either print from thin air or borrow from the Chinese as if there is no payback. The real tragedy is that the answer is so simple - as Reagan said. Not easy - but simple. Get Government out of the way of American free enterprise.This economy could turn around on a dime - literally- with the right leadership, focused on limiting the role of the Federal government. The current Democrat socialist experiment is clearly a failure - and hopefully will educate a new generation (those that don't know about Jimmy Carter -the "misery index" President) on the folly of socialism. This Obama/Chicago outfit is particularly dangerous because they have no regard for the law or even giving the impression of following it. Except of course when they selectively cite law to baffle those who read only the headlines -- such as with the Arizona Immigration law.We must clear the Congress in November and do all that is required to prevent a lame duck session from further subverting the will of the American People. Bar the doors to the Chambers of Congress if necessary - but we must stop these criminals from poisoning the Well of Freedom any further.