A 25% Cut for the Pentagon? Key Dems Say Unnecessary Defense Spending Is Crippling the U.S. and Shou

[unhappycamper]

http://www.prwatch.org/news/2013/01/11939/25-cut-pentagon-key-dems-say-unnecessary-defense-spending-crippling-us-and-should

A 25% Cut for the Pentagon? Key Dems Say Unnecessary Defense Spending Is Crippling the U.S. and Should Be Part of Debt Debate
Posted by Lisa Graves on January 14, 2013

The largest Democratic Party organization in the nation has called on Congress to support a 25% cut in Pentagon spending. The California Democratic Party -- which includes more than 2,000 representatives of the state's more than seven million Democrats -- adopted this policy in the past year in the face of threats by Republicans in Congress to refuse to allow the U.S. to increase its credit limit.

~snip~



Despite this mandate, the two most powerful Californians in Congress -- Representative Nancy Pelosi, the Minority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, and Senator Dianne Feinstein, Chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence -- have not advocated for what their core constituents have asked that they and the other 38 Democratic members of the California Congressional delegation put on the table: a 25% cut in defense spending.

CSIS Department of Defense budget projectionAlthough California has a number of military installations and defense contractors, much of the money the Pentagon spends is on foreign bases and foreign wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan. The billions for the lengthy military actions in the Middle East are put on top of the Pentagon's core budget by calling this spending "Overseas Contingency Operations," which are counted as separate from regular appropriations for defense. The California Democratic Party is urging the 40 Dems in the state's 55-member congressional delegation to support cuts in the Pentagon's overall budget to "ensure that military spending prioritizes defense of the homeland and not the siting of numerous military bases on foreign soil as a substitute for robust diplomatic engagement."

But this call to decrease unnecessary military spending by 25% is not yet part of the national debate on spending and debt, even as DC girds for another major showdown over spending and cuts. Meanwhile, some Republicans have renewed threats to block the raising of America's credit limit, and many of them have also demanded that the defense budget not face any significant cuts.

[Deep13]

1. Okay, sounds good. How about a cut to upper class wealth while we are at it.

By taxing estates, trusts, and capital gains.

[monmouth3]

2. John McCain's head will absolutely explode...Oh my!

[DetlefK]

3. When will the Pentagon be audit-ready? By 2017?

They cannot even account for what they do with their budget. There is no way to tell if a 25%-cut would be bad.

[MADem]

4. The problem is that the Pentagon can come up with cuts, but Congress will not approve them.

There are weapons systems the Pentagon could dump, but they're made in this Congressional district or that. There are bases that could be closed, but they're in this congressman's district, and those senators' state.

It's not just the people in uniform who are obstructing these cuts--in fact, they could probably get closer to real savings than the civilians, and faster, too--but the Congress is -- and they aren't without a point, either--thinking about how many jobs will be impacted by the cuts that the Pentagon might make.

[FreakinDJ]

5. So why are 2 Calif lawmakers opposed to cuts

They closed every fucking base in Calif - we ain't get shit out of this massive expenditure except the bill

[MANative]

6. My brother is the director of a large department at DoD

And ridiculously conservative, considering our true blue upbringing in Boston. He has readily admitted to me that his budget could be cut by 20% or more with no real harm to the core mission.