|
Congress, with its insatiable
appetite for spending, is set to pass yet another "supplemental"
appropriations bill in the next two weeks. So-called supplemental bills allow
Congress to spend beyond even the 13 annual appropriations bills that fund
the federal government. These are akin to a family that consistently
outspends its budget, and therefore needs to use a credit card to make it
through the end of the month.
If the American people want
Congress to spend less, putting an end to supplemental appropriations bills
would be a start. The 13 "regular" appropriations bills fund every
branch, department, agency, and program of the federal government. Congress
should place every dollar in plain view among those 13 bills. Instead,
supplemental spending bills serve as a sneaky way for Congress to spend extra
money that was not projected in budget forecasts. Once rare, they have become
commonplace vehicles for deficit spending.
The latest supplemental bill is
touted as an "emergency" war spending bill, needed to fund our
ongoing conflicts in the Middle East. The emergencies never seem to end,
however, and Congress passes one military supplemental bill after another as
the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan drag on.
Many of my colleagues argue that
Congress cannot put a price on our sacred national security, and I agree that
the strong, unequivocal defense of our country is a top priority. There comes
a time, however, when we must take stock of what our blank checks to the
military industrial complex accomplish for us, and where the true threats to
American citizens lie.
The smokescreen debate over
earmarks demonstrates how we have lost perspective when it comes to military
spending. Earmarks constitute about $11 billion of the latest budget. This
sounds like a lot of money, and it is, but it is a drop in the bucket
compared to the $708 billion spent by the Pentagon this year to expand our
worldwide military presence. The total expenditures to maintain our world
empire is approximately $1 trillion annually, which is roughly what the
entire federal budget was in 1990!
We spend more on defense than the
rest of the world combined, and far more than we spent during the Cold War.
These expenditures in many cases foment resentment that does not make us
safer, but instead makes us a target. We referee and arm conflicts the world
over, and have troops in some 140 countries with over 700 military bases.
With this enormous amount of money
and energy spent on efforts that have nothing to do with the security of the
United States, when the time comes to defend American soil, we will be too
involved in other adventures to do so.
There is nothing conservative
about spending money we don't have simply because that spending is for
defense. No enemy can harm us in the way we are harming ourselves, namely
bankrupting the nation and destroying our own currency. The former Soviet
Union did not implode because it was attacked; it imploded because it was
broke. We cannot improve our economy if we refuse to examine all major
outlays, including so-called defense spending.
Ron
Paul
www.house.gov/paul
Congressman
Ron Paul of Texas enjoys a national reputation as the premier advocate for
liberty in politics today. Dr. Paul is the leading spokesman in Washington
for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, and a return
to sound monetary policies based on commodity-backed currency. For more
information click on the Project Freedom website.
Published
with the authorization of Dr. Paul.
Copyright
Dr. Ron Paul
|
