The administration recently
released its 2013 budget proposal, and conservatives are correctly alarmed
that it calls for unprecedented spending and continued annual deficits
exceeding $1 trillion. But the same conservatives complain that the budget
does not devote enough funds to overseas adventurism.
I continue to be dismayed that
in spite of our economic problems, most of those who call themselves fiscal
conservatives refuse to consider any reductions in military spending. Doug
Bandow of the Cato Institute very aptly addresses this in his recent article
for the American Conservative entitled "Attack of the Pork Hawks".
He points out that conservatives are using a tired liberal argument to defend
the bloated military budget: namely, that more spending equals better
results. The federal education morass is merely one example that clearly
disproves this.
The facts are that the
President's budget calls for an 18% increase versus the previously planned
20% increase. This is not a cut, yet Pentagon hawks continue to issue dire
warnings that this "draconian" decrease in proposed future spending
will seriously threaten our national security. In truth, the majority of DOD
spending goes to protect other nations, including prosperous allies like
Europe and Japan and South Korea - nations that could and should take more
responsibility for their own defense.
Is there any amount of money
that would satisfy the hawks and the neoconservatives? Even adjusted for
inflation, military spending is 17% higher now than when Obama took office.
Even the worst case scenarios of Obama's "cuts", adjusted for
inflation, still put outlays at 2007 levels, which are 40% higher than a
decade ago. Our total spending on overseas adventurism and nation building
equals more than the next 13 highest spending countries in the world
combined. Even if we were to slash our military budget in half, we would
still be the world's dominant military power, by far.
In reality, the military
industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us about has become every
bit the voracious monolith he feared. It wastes as much as any other arm of
government, if not more, because it knows it can depend on unlimited blank
checks from a terrified Congress.
Mr. Bandow concludes that
America is more secure today than at any point since before WWII, and that
military outlays should be reduced accordingly. We should, Mr. Bandow argues,
"stop garrisoning the
globe, subsidizing rich friends, and reconstructing poor enemies. Instead,
it's about time Washington focused on defending American and its
people."
I couldn't agree more. Wasting
money on overseas adventurism and nation building threatens our national
security by massively contributing to our debt. Both welfare and warfare
spending are tipping our economy into a serious currency and debt crisis. We
can afford no sacred cows in our budget. One only has to look to the violence
and civil unrest in Greece and ask - is that the sort of security we envision
for our nation's future?
