Budget cuts to the defense department proposed by Defense Secretary Robert Gateshave stirred controversy among Americans this week. While money for bailouts and stimulus packages skyrockets, defense spending has been on the backburner. Gates outlined three reasons for his proposal:
First, to reaffirm our commitment to take care of the all-volunteer force, which, in my view represents America's greatest strategic asset;
Second, we must rebalance this department's programs in order to institutionalize and enhance our capabilities to fight the wars we are in today and the scenarios we are most likely to face in the years ahead, while at the same time providing a hedge against other risks and contingencies.
Third, in order to do this, we must reform how and what we buy, meaning a fundamental overhaul of our approach to procurement, acquisition, and contracting
Some House Republicans are unhappy with the proposal, however. Rep. John McHugh (NY), ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee said this: “Republicans appreciate Secretary Gates' effort to shape the Department of Defense so that we more effectively fight the wars our troops are engaged in today; however, we are concerned about the tradeoffs involved in re-balancing the Department. It remains the Congress' responsibility to provide for the common defense -- continued delays in the release of the defense budget details hinders our ability to carry out our constitutional duty."
It's not just politicians, but military scholars who question the idea. Two American Enterprise Instiute scholars yesterday said this in the Wall Street Journal;
"The budget cuts Mr. Gates is recommending are not a temporary measure to get us over a fiscal bump in the road. Rather, they are the opening bid in what, if the Obama administration has its way, will be a future U.S. military that is smaller and packs less wallop. But what is true for the wars we're in -- that numbers matter -- is also true for the wars that we aren't yet in, or that we simply wish to deter."
Rep. J. Randy Forbes (VA) : "“It goes without saying that we should achieve efficiency in our nation's defense budget by eliminating wasteful programs, however it should be done with respect to strategic need rather than budget numbers.”
There are mixed opinions on the matter of defense spending but one thing is certain: the current overall budget spends too much, taxes too much and borrows too much. Putting fiscally responsible money in the necessary places is important and defense spending is certainly one of the most important to consider carefully.
President Obama has admitted this will be a bearing on taxpayers, reversing his promise not to raise taxes on those who make less than $200,000 a year. It could cost families as much as $3,100 per year, and $646 billion energy tax on Americans overall. In reality, it could be double or triple that estimated amount, according to the Wall Street Journal.
There is a budget that creates prosperity for Americans instead of leaving them struggling to pay the bills. After numerous bailouts, a huge spending bill, a stimulus package and now Obama's hope to integrate illegal aliens into our nation, the last thing Americans need is another thing to pay for.
The House Republican Budget Alternative: Ryan Proposes "The Path To American Prosperity"
House Budget Committee Ranking Republican Paul Ryan (WI) today introduced a comprehensive alternative to the fiscal year 2010 budget proposed by the President and Democratic Majority. In stark contrast to the Obama plan, the House Republican budget alternative will get spending and deficits under control - without raising taxes - and ensure America can prosper in the future.
Ryan issued the following the statement:
"America is coping with a deep economic recession today, and facing a tidal wave of debt tomorrow. The President's budget exploits the current economic crisis to justify trillions in new spending, taxes, and debt. Worse, by failing to address the looming insolvency of our entitlement programs, his plan puts our nation on a path to an even more dire fiscal catastrophe in the future.
"Republicans must not only act to stop this disastrous course, but offer the American people a better choice. Our budget alternative provides a path out of our current crisis - by restoring economic growth and job creation, controlling spending and deficits - and by lifting the crushing burden of debt and taxes from future generations.
"The House Republican budget alternative reflects the firm belief that America's greatest strengths lie in Americans themselves. Empowering Washington to micro-manage our personal affairs threatens prosperity; encouraging the creativity and entrepreneurial spirit of the American people restores prosperity. The stakes of this budget debate could not be higher; and the choice for a stronger, more secure, and more prosperous future could not be more clear."
The House Republican budget alternative works to accomplish four main goals: 1) fulfill the mission of health and retirement security; 2) control our nation's debts; 3) put our economy on a path of growth and leadership in the global economy; and 4) preserve the American legacy of leaving the next generation better off.
So, We are not fighting against terrorists? The war on Terror is now called = Overseas Contingency Operation!
If a terrorist blows people up, its no longer an act of terror, its a Man Made Disaster???
We plan on closing Gitmo, and they say we may Release some prisoners in the USA Hope you like your new neighbors! lol These men are terrorists, prisoners of war! They would slit your mothers throat, blow up your church, etc given a chance
I suppose we should now consider prisoners of war = Guests of the USA Military ????
Things are what they are. A terrorist is a terrorist! We don't want them free in our country
Its hard to say if the war in Iraq was the best thing to do for the USA's interests. I suppose history will determine that.
The war is almost over, we pretty much met our goals, we got rid of one of the most brutal dictators/murderers the world has ever known. The country is a democracy, the people rule them self, and will be a good USA ally we hope. If you look back, if the United Nations had any teeth to back up their talks and sanctions, we would not have had to be there. The UN did not do its job, so we had to.
The distraction on Capitol Hill this week has to do with the jackpot bonuses that executives at AIG recently received. The argument is over a relative drop in the bucket. The total amount of bonuses given out was $165 million. The government has put $170 billion into AIG so far. Many now are demanding we get this money back. We ought to be spending our time and effort doing something more worthwhile, like figuring out how the Federal Reserve is handling the trillions of dollars they are creating and pumping into the economy, and how that is affecting the purchasing power of dollars in your pocket.
The big mistake was appropriating the TARP funds in the first place. A Johnny-come-lately bill of attainder won't stop the spending epidemic. This whole situation is a perfect demonstration of why “doing nothing” and letting failing companies fail would have been much better than sinking valuable money and resources into them.
When a company makes a profit, it is a signal that it is taking resources and increasing their value while controlling costs. When a company operates at a loss, it is a signal that it is decreasing the value of its resources or letting out-of-control costs outstrip any value it has created. A company operating at a loss is therefore an engine of wealth destruction. Bankruptcies are a net positive for the economy because more productive competitors are rewarded by opportunities to buy up remaining assets at bargain prices to strengthen their operations. In an economy that allows this kind of growth and change, any jobs lost by bankruptcy are soon replaced by new ones as the most efficiently managed businesses gain access to more assets and expand.
Bankruptcy was the stimulus that we needed in the case of AIG. More bankruptcies would clean out malinvested resources and enable economic growth again.
AIG, by losing money and maneuvering their operations to the brink of bankruptcy, was telling us that they were inefficient. So what did we do? We forced the taxpayer to assume the losses, and now we are supposed to be shocked that it is not working out. Had AIG gone bankrupt, it would have been impossible to hand out these bonuses. The taxpayer would have been fleeced for $170 billion less last year. Had they gone bankrupt, the world would not have come to an end, it would just continue on with one less engine of wealth destruction.
We should have learned from Japan. The 1990's is referred to as Japan's “lost decade” because of the zombie banks kept on life support by the Japanese government. Any productivity was redirected through these engines of wealth destruction, resulting in long term stagnation. We should and can avoid this outcome if we come to our senses.
A recession should be a time of strengthening and regrouping for an economy. But as long as the government insists on maintaining the status quo by propping up failed institutions, we will continue to dig a bigger hole for ourselves.
Posted by Ron Paul (03-23-2009, 11:00 AM) filed under Monetary Policy
ROME - A zealous policeman on a motorbike issued a citation to Pope Benedict XVI yesterday for multiple violations of the Italian vehicle code, including driving with an expired inspection sticker, incomplete registration, and driving without a license.
According to the Vatican Press Office, the Pope was running a few errands and neglected to take his wallet before leaving the Vatican.
The Holy See also explained that the Pope has been busy writing and editing a number of encyclicals lately, and “quite a few personal matters” have slipped through the cracks. ”His health club membership was up the first of the year and he hasn't even renewed that yet.”
Additionally, the Vatican chided Italian police for what they described as “aggressive behavior” by the officer who made the traffic stop. Inspector Luigi Parise agreed. ”The officer is just out of the Academy. When he asked for some identification, and the Pope told him he didn't have his license, he should have given him the benefit of the doubt. After all, he was wearing the mitre.”
The citations issued to the Holy Father total over three hundred and fifty lira in fines, as well as eight points on his driving record. This means the Pope will have to enroll in a safe driving class and retake his drivers test before he can operate a vehicle on Italian soil again.
Even worse, the cost of his insurance is expected to skyrocket. Inspector Parise said the Pope is no different than any other citizen when it comes to obeying the laws of the land.
“If the Holy Father wants to fight this thing, he should plead not guilty and take it to the magistrate. Who knows? Maybe the cop won't show.”
ROME - A zealous policeman on a motorbike issued a citation to Pope Benedict XVI yesterday for multiple violations of the Italian vehicle code, including driving with an expired inspection sticker, incomplete registration, and driving without a license. 
