Posted on 11/04/2010 7:36:12 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
After their big election gains, congressional Republicans must now commit to getting the federal budget under control. Unfortunately, some have advocated cutting the defense budget as part of the solution. Reducing defense spending now would be a dangerous mistake.
It’s important for conservatives to get this issue right. To that end, here are a few observations.
First, the framers of the U.S. Constitution envisioned national defense as the priority obligation of the federal government. The first power granted to the president in Article 2 is “Commander-in-Chief of the Armies and Navies of the United States, and of the Militias of the Several States.” Of the 17 powers granted to Congress in Article 1, six relate specifically to defense, and the Constitution grants Congress the full range of authorities necessary to establish the defense of the nation (as it was then understood).
The other powers granted to Congress are permissive in nature; Congress can choose to exercise them or not. But the federal government is constitutionally obligated to defend the nation. Article 4, Section 4 states that the “United States shall guarantee to every State a republican form of government and shall protect each of them against invasion.”
That means, for those who take the Constitution seriously, that national defense is a higher priority than other areas of federal activity. While other parts of the federal budget may be presumptively suspect, spending on the national defense is not.
Second, every category of international risk facing the United States is demonstrably growing. Islamist extremists remain a formidable threat. They are fighting to reconstitute their safe havens in Afghanistan and to acquire weapons of mass destruction for use against the United States. The Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism — a bipartisan panel with the status of the 9/11 Commission — found unanimously that terrorists would “more likely than not” develop and use a weapon of mass destruction against a Western city by 2013. The director of national intelligence publicly agreed with that dire assessment.
Nuclear technology and weaponry advances are cascading through rogue and failing states around the world. Pakistan — an unsteady partner facing an existential threat from terrorists — has a substantial and growing nuclear arsenal. The U.S. must be diligent in ensuring that those nuclear assets stay out of the hands of terrorists. Both North Korea and Iran are steadily increasing the range, payload, and accuracy of their ballistic missiles. No one seriously believes that the Iranians will voluntarily stop their nuclear program or that the West (except perhaps the Israelis) will use force to stop them.
Finally, the last few years have seen the rise of aggressive “peer competitors” who are developing the military capacity to challenge the vital national interests of the United States. China, for example, is rearming at a rate far ahead of American intelligence predictions.
According to most reports, China has the most sophisticated cyber-warfare capability in the world. The Chinese already boast an arsenal of advanced fighters and missiles able to deny the U.S. Navy access to the Taiwan Strait. They are building as many as five submarines per year and have established a modern submarine base on the island of Hainan. They have announced plans to build destroyers with the explicit purpose of developing a credible blue-water navy.
Meanwhile, American military strength ebbs. The military is approximately 40 percent smaller than it was when Desert Storm was fought in 1991, and the Pentagon’s inventory of “platforms” — primarily ships, aircraft, and tracked vehicles.
In short, the military faces a crisis in modernization that can no longer be ignored. Earlier this year, Congress created a blue-ribbon independent panel to review the Pentagon’s strategic plans. Chaired by former defense secretary Bill Perry and former national-security adviser Stephen Hadley, the panel included members from across the political and ideological spectrum. It concluded that the military was headed for a “train wreck” unless the basic inventories of the services were recapitalized. The panel endorsed various reform measures to achieve savings in current programs, but it also determined that, even if those savings could be achieved, “a substantial additional investment, beginning right away and sustained through the long term,” would be necessary to meet the crucial modernization needs.
Fortunately, it is well within the government’s capacity — even in these difficult budgetary times — to find the necessary funding. Congress could reverse the decline in military capability simply by capturing the unspent portion of the stimulus package and spending it judiciously on modernization over the next five years. As the panel report demonstrated, it is possible to marshal a strong bipartisan consensus for such an effort.
The problem is not budgetary. The problem is getting our government leaders to focus on the vital connections between strength, prosperity, and freedom. The best and cheapest way to protect American security is to sustain American power at a level that reduces risk, encourages global economic growth, and deters the wars that cost America so much in lives and treasure.
As Ronald Reagan was fond of saying, “Of the four wars that happened in my lifetime, none occurred because America was too strong.”
— Jim Talent, now a distinguished fellow at the Heritage Foundation, served on both the House and Senate Armed Services Committees during his years in Congress.
If you cut defense spending, we get behind our enemies who already know we are going down the tubes economically.
If we cut defense spending, it will be the active soldiers, sailors and Marines who will take the cut, not anyone else. They already do without. They need new transport planes, better intel, and our enemies need to know we will not be backing down on our defense.
The airlines make “free” citizens go through those screening machines and there are vans with the same technology driving on our streets looking into our homes. Something seems wrong here.
I know I am not up on what really goes on with military spending but I just think defense cuts should be last on the list. Maybe redistribution, but not cuts.
And I am concerned about it with my kid having enlisted. :)
Reality is a bi*ch. Deal with it.
Tax payers will be paying around $600 billion in interest on the national debt by 2012, the chairman told students and local leaders in Detroit.
“That’s one year’s worth of defense budget,” he said, adding that the Pentagon needs to cut back on spending. “We’re going to have to do that if it’s going to survive at all,” Mullen said, “and do it in a way that is predictable.”
Great points.
Don’t cut the military budget, but redirect it to the most productive uses where necessary.
We can let Europe defend themselves, and reduce our presence there.
We can close unnecessary bases around the world.
And there are defense contractors all across the country making stuff for the military that Congress ordered but the military didn’t ask for(a bunch of new C-130 planes out of Georgia, for instance).
It should save a few Grand to sell off Nancy’s 757 for starters.
I’ve got a brother in law who works for a defense contractor. Listening to him, there are DEFINITELY ways to cut the military budget.
I agree, but so much DoD money has been diverted within the DoD for failed or ineffective socialist experiments. Identifying and re-directing those useless, counter-productive programs would enhance the effectiveness of our military without increasing the budget.
Cut waste everywhere. Period. No sacred cows.
It’s time for zero based budgeting and that includes the Pentagon.
This must have been a reflex reaction on his part or does he get residuals?...
Jim Talent, now a distinguished fellow at the Heritage Foundation, served on both the House and Senate Armed Services Committees during his years in Congress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.