"I believe it is important to note that Republicans are debating among themselves whether to give DOD a pass in the deficit negotiations or to take a little more seriously the need to get the extraordinarily bloated defense budget under control.
There seem to be three general Republican positions: 1) The Buck McKeon approach that defense should be increased, not reduced -- using the pretext that the Afghanistan and other conflicts constitute "war" analogous to World War II and it is unthinkable to cut; 2) the previous Republican deficit "hawk" position that Obama's $400 billion cut to "security" spending over 12 years (or his detuned $300 billion over 10 years) was as far as they could go (and still posture as pro-defense -- that is to say pro-defense spending -- in the 2012 elections), and 3) the newly emerging position, reported today in The Hill by journalist John Bennett, that suggests $600-700 billion in "security" reductions over ten years. The latter position takes some pressure off the Republicans to find deficit reduction in higher revenues (or, even, broader "tax loopholes").
Some perspective might help here. The Obama Deficit Commission came up with almost $1 trillion in defense cuts over ten years (notably not in the broader "security" category but in the more narrow "National Defense" budget function). Senator Tom Coburn also proposed almost $1 trillion in defense savings"..........READ MORE
No comments:
Post a Comment