50 senators and representatives calling for major defense cuts

[cowcommander]

A group of more than 50 senators and representatives, led by Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Ron Paul (R-Texas), are calling on the President’s National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform to endorse major cuts to the defense budget.

Joined by Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, they say the commission should look at what a press release calls “excessive defense spending” when they want to find ways to reduce the federal deficit and national debt. They plan to send the commission a letter about this on Wednesday. The Pentagon’s spending should, they argue, “be subjected to the same rigorous scrutiny that non-military spending will receive.” These cuts can be made in ways that “will not endanger national security,” according to the release.

This is the same group that said in June that $1 trillion could be cut from the defense budget in a report called “Debt, Deficits and Defense: A Way Forward.”


The presidential commission is expected to make its recommendations public in December. That should be a in interesting Christmas present for outgoing Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2010/10/11/big-new-push-for-dod-cuts/#ixzz12P7eDqXp

[orleans]

1. good. recommend. n/t

[villager]

2. The Empire won't like that. And hey, neither will Hillary Clinton...

...based on the reports about her "warnings" viz. British defense cuts!

Can't have the hoi-polloi getting the wrong ideas about how to use the wealth of a society!

[OmahaBlueDog]

3. Y'think?

IMHO, it's one of the reasons you're now hearing long time hawks like Chuck Colson calling for an end to the war in Afghanistan and why the Karzai government is in negotiations with the Taliban. This thing has to end. It's taking too long, it's killing too many people, it's costing way too much damn money, and it's not accomplishing much.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

4. That sounds like some sanity. WTF happened?

The Senate asking for a cut in military spending? Sounds fishy to me.

*muted sarcasm*

[ashling]

5. 50 SENATORS and representatives

Shouldn't it be "50 Representatives and Senators" if not "50 Members of Congress"
after all, this little blurb says that the group is led by 2 named Representatives, and mentions only one Senator who was a joiner?

:rofl:

[the redcoat]

6. Link to report

www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/1006SDTFreport.pdf


tl;dr Specifically interesting is page 13, outlining how to save about $1 trillion. Imagine if even $500 billion in savings was implemented. Incredible.


Also, page 5. "Change in US Federal Discretionary Spending" from 2001 to 2010. As you may have guessed, DoD is at the top of the list of the largest increases. Obviously this is directly attributed to Afghanistan and Iraq. But now it's time to bring it down. (Hell, it was time to bring it down 7 or 8 years ago...)

[Radical Activist]

7. Good. Alan Simpson said they were discussing it.

But I know we weren't supposed to hear that.

[Sherman A1]

8. Even Gates has suggested to the Pentagon that

they need to tighten their belts and this level of spending will not continue.

[Sherman A1]

9. delete -- dupe

[onethatcares]

10. are they trying to say

we don't need a green zone in Iraq? or 386 military bases scattered throughout the world protecting corporate interests? Why that's heresy......:sarcasm:

[zbdent]

11. Repub Ron Paul???

gee, when is the MSM going to go on and on about how he hates the military???

I guess when it's a Repug, he gets the free pass on outrage.

[txaslftist]

14. When he talks about cutting the military...

and closing all our foreign bases (which he has said for 20 years) they call him a dingbat, a loonie and an isolationist. They don't say he hates the military because he used to be a flight surgeon.

[B Calm]

12. When I served back in 1969-73 I saw a lot of wasteful spending and it's

only gotten worse. Back then we had service men doing laundry, cooking, etc etc, now it's all farmed out to private companies.

[zbdent]

22. I was listening to a radio station one time (might have been an NPR)

and I heard one of the callers lamenting the possible closure of a base in a heavily red area.

One of the arguments he used was that there was a barber shop which would lose all that business from the base ...

I thought that the military would have saved a bunch of money had they just kept the barber in place inside the military itself. Didn't the military use to have guys there with the electric clippers, giving everybody their haircuts? But then, it had to be "outsourced" to "save money" ... to buy multi-million-dollar missiles (which might or might not work ...)

[B Calm]

24. Unbelievable isn't it! Guys use to get out of the service with a trade

that could help them in civilian life. Now they just farm everything out to private business.

[HopeHoops]

13. I don't think we should cut defense spending. I think we should delete the Halliburton-like parts.

If so called "contractors" can't justify their expenses, don't pay them. Hell, I've always had to submit a receipt to get reimbursed for a fucking cup of coffee! The shrub gave Halliburton $8,000,000,000 for expenses they didn't have a clue about but just "knew they spent" - and right before the 2008 election, too!!! They can change their names as often as they want, but they're still crooks and parasites of the military budget. Justify it, keep it reasonable, and don't expect special treatment. If you don't like those rules, leave the game.

Now there ARE some things that need to be increased in the military budget. First, Veteran's benefits (especially disability). Second, troop pay and deployment allowances. Third, THE FUCKING FOOD - from what I've heard, it sucks worse now than it ever did before. Fourth, anything else that has to do with actually supporting THE TROOPS.

[txaslftist]

15. We are gonna cut defense spending regardless.

We can't afford what we spend now (which is more than the combined defense budgets of the entire rest of the world).

[Obamanaut]

16. A butt-load of money could be saved if there were a Department FOR

Defense to replace the *OF* Defense one.

Shut down the more than 700 military sites throughout the world, bring home the troops and their families, as much of the equipment as can be economically transported, and have a side-walk sale for the other stuff.

Saves money currently being spent on site leases, civilian employees at those sites, and the expense of moving people and equipment to/fro.

Spread the returnees amongst the stateside bases that were downsized, bringing an immediate boost to those local economies.

Reduce the overall size of the Department FOR Defense through normal attrition and reduced recruiting efforts.

Cease and desist being the Police Force to the World.

[txaslftist]

17. Sounds like a very good set of ideas...

now if we can only get Washington on board...

sigh.

[BeFree]

18. I'm sure the Tea party is all for this

Maybe they just haven't heard about it yet?

[txaslftist]

20. Actually they used to be.

When the tea party was Ron Paul's show.

Now they are just a subdivision of GOP, Inc; a wholly owned subsidiary of the Military Industrial Congressional Complex.

Of course, the Democratic Party is a subsidiary, too.

[LWolf]

19. Which 50? Who are the other 47? nt

[mistertrickster]

21. "Socialist" Germany's gov't spends 2,000 dollars LESS per person than the US does

while providing massive benefits that we could only dream of.

How do they do it?

Their military spending as a percent of GDP is way lower.

[Quantess]

23. If this is true, that's good.