Politics and Military Spending

Posted Thursday, September 24, 2009, at 10:12 PM

Politics often gets in the way of the obligation of Congress to oversee and if necessary restrain spending. Even recommendations of military leaders are undercut by earmarks and pork barrel projects brought on by the eagerness of some elected officials to do favors and fund pet projects.

Here are some examples.

Rep. Bill Young, R-Fla., secured funding for 20 F-22A jet fighters, which will go on through 2009 at a total cost of $1.2 billion. The planes were designed for use against the Soviet Air Force.

Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, has funded many projects including $11.5 million for a large aperture telescope developed to prevent space objects from colliding with Earth.

Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., and former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens got together and secured $9.5 million for something called the Extended Cold Weather Clothing System.

Before he became majority leader Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., bragged that he had secured millions of dollars for his state's defense projects including $1.95 million for electronic systems heat dissipation and $1.3 million for the study of smart munitions effect on lightweight structures.

The House recently added $5 million to the defense budget request to fund the purchase of breath alcohol testers to counter what was called the leading cause of accidents, injury and death in the services.

Citizens Against Government Waste provides an entertaining analysis that includes these and other federal programs with its cynical but comprehensive tally of the annual cost of Congressional pork. The organization's 2008 compilation identified 11,610 such projects at a cost of $17.2 billion.

Oversight is the duty of Congress and the framers of our government felt that the debate and give and take between legislative and executive branches would provide the necessary checks and balances and produce the best possible decisions about defense appropriations and other public policy. But according to one report, Congressional oversight of the Bush administration on foreign policy virtually collapsed because the former president and his staff asserted an overly broad definition of executive privilege or simply ignored requests for information--Berkley Bedell.

Berkley Bedell Blog

By Berkley Bedell and Jim Frost

- Recent posts
- Archives
- Blog RSS feed

- Comments RSS feed

- Login

Berkley Bedell--Retirement from the U.S. Congress in 1987, neither dulled my interest in the well-being of the people of the United States nor my worries about our governance. I began work in 2006 on a book outlining the country's problems and offering solutions. Jim Frost--I share Berkley's concerns and in 2007 began the job of researching, editing and assisting with writing his book. By early 2009, after finally weathering George W. Bush and recognizing how much the past eight wasted years have set the world back, our focus changed. We had seen no meaningful progress in the efforts to stem the threat of nuclear weapons, reverse global warming, preserve natural resources, reduce military spending, fight disease and hunger, improve health care, deal with the increasing gulf between rich people and poor people, establish a workable economic system, or clean up the political process. For us, these three things became self-evident: First, the problems are global; the U.S. cannot by itself control or solve them. Second, the perfect storm of worldwide catastrophe is already upon us; what must be said cannot wait. Third, in seeking solutions, the problems must be put before as many people as possible as quickly as possible. This blog is the result. There will be much more. We invite you to participate.

Hot topics

Cronies All
(1 ~ 6:51 PM, Aug 24)

Signing Off for Now
(0 ~ 1:25 PM, Jan 8)

Perilous Times, Drastic Measures
(2 ~ 8:10 PM, Dec 20)

Step Six: Homeland Security
(1 ~ 1:14 PM, Dec 12)

Step Five: Intelligence Gathering
(1 ~ 3:01 PM, Dec 8)

Home