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.
The country is bankrupt. You have an islamic in the white hut fighting 2 wars in an islamic country which is now a waste of time, money and American lives.
Americans voted for this because they are idiots brainwashed by TV - this includes ALL TV. This Tuesday - some people woke up but others did not. We are broke.
Yeah....if there is waste, it will be cut.
The military is not a sacred cow.
I think we are overusing what the pundits call Hard Diplomacy. We need a strong defense. What the minimum (plus a healthy reserve) defense we need should be open for discussion. I believe the answer is something less than we have right now, if we use it effectively.
Whenever people are spending other people’s money, there is always waste that can be cut. The military is no different in that respect than any other part of the government.
Sorry, Defense is as ridiculously overfunded as HHS. What it needs is a narrower, clearly defined mission...just like the rest of the Federal Government.
You are a broken record.
It seems that our so-called leaders have actually gotten that backwards: They're more interested in providing for the general welfare and are only promoting the common defense with words... not actions.
Money for his district? Time to look out for what’s best for America, not that we couldn’t dump 75% of the social programs first starting with the Department of Education.
So what happens if the states demonstrate that the federal government is in breach of the contract that the states signed when they joined the union, a la Arizona and the fed refusal to honor their contract to protect the states against invasion? Is that part of the argument being used in court for the federal lawsuit against Arizona?
I agree. I believe that to be credible, the House will need to cut military spending. There MUST be some fat in the military budget.
Do we need to keep so many troops quartered in Europe - isn’t it about time that the European social democracies pay full freight for their own defense?
Lotsa luck, the incoming majority leader cannot go two sentences without saying the word “Iran”, and frankly given the Duke Cunningham example that is where the campaign cash comes from for the GOP.
He doesn’t have a district.... He does not hold an office....
Aside from the over-publicized $1000 hammer case (which was later proven to be false), please enlighten us as to which DOD programs should be killed. Before doing so, please subtract the DOD-as-society-changer programs and the various non-DOD boondoggles and pork that have been slid surreptitiously into the DOD budget. A fighting force is supposed to kill people and break things. All else is a drag on intent. Please also subtract from the DOD budget the direct and indirect expenses of the stupid mistakes committed in Afghanistan and Iraq. I believe that at that point, you will see that we are ill equipped and badly budgeted to deal with both the asymetric and major power threats to the country.
HHS and Dept Ed., on the other hand, are entirely about fluff and control of the population.
Just my opinion, of course.
And it will get worse. By 2030 one in every five residents of this country will be over 65, twice what it is now. And there will be just two workers for every retiree compared to the 3.3 now and the 16 in 1950.
Just as has happened in Europe, the politicians will choose butter over guns. We cannot afford both.
I agree with you.
Throwing more money at defense is always ok, but throwing more money at other things, such as education, is not always going to work?
There can’t be any wasted money in the defense budget? Why are we still in Korea?
Just how in debt do we have to be before we decide we can’t afford something in the defense budget? 20 trillion? 30? 100?
Do we have to wait till the Chinese come to claim land in exchange for debt forgiveness?
We have troops in 123 countries.
Bring them home - and put them on the border if needd.
The US Navy is larger than the next 14 navies combined. Expect some cuts, it not WWII anymore.
The USAF has 330,159 personnel on active duty, 68,872 in the Selected and Individual Ready Reserves (in essense on-call staff), and 94,753 in the Air National Guard as of September 2008.
As of 2009, the latest year I could find complete data for -the USAF operated 5,573 manned aircraft
3,990 by active duty
1,213 by the Air National Guard
370 Air Force Reserve units
THey also have approximately 180 unmanned combat air vehicles run by a comcination of A/D and Reserves
2,130 air-launched cruise missiles operated amnd maintained by A/D
Finally - the 450 intercontinental ballistic missiles currently in inventory are operated and maintained by A/D troops. The USAF has already started on “realignment” - I suspect a lot of contractors in their future.
The Army is pretty shorthanded, so much so that many functions are already contracted out.
And the US Marines - are the Marines, they have done so much for so long with so little - they are expected to perform miricles with almost nothing. But - there is still room for trimming.
Expect R&D, fancy new weapons system and some ‘support’ function to feel the knife. And more base closures are in the futures....
Now all we have to do is cut SS and medicare fraud
Cut welfare fraud
Cut or kill unnecessary programs like farm subsidies, underwriting alternate energy, and on and on.
Maybe even start with these.
Does CONgress have the will?
I doubt it.
But when you are 3 Trillion (or more) in the hole - you had damn well better do something.
Jim addressed this on page 2 of his article. He stated that a bi-partisan panel created earlier this year “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.”
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.