Where to cut waste? The Pentagon

2010-05-19T05:00:00Z Where to cut waste? The PentagonCapital Times editorial madison.com
May 19, 2010 5:00 am  • 

George Bush’s secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, who also happens to be Barack Obama’s secretary of Defense, has identified a free-spending governmental agency that will have to be reined in if the United States is going to balance budgets and cut deficits.

The agency? The Department of Defense.

Gates used a speech marking the 65th anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe to argue that blank-check spending does not make the country or the world safer.

In a speech that was as welcome as it was remarkable, the Pentagon chief explained that the Congress, Department of Defense officials and defense contractors had allowed military spending to grow unchecked after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

Warning that budgeting without checks or balances is unsustainable, Gates called for a radical shift in direction.

“What it takes is the political will and willingness … to make hard choices — choices that will displease powerful people both inside the Pentagon and out,” Gates declared on May 8 in a speech at the Eisenhower Presidential Library in Abilene, Kan. The secretary of Defense noted that, like many military men, the commander of U.S. forces in Europe during World War II worried about excessive defense spending and warned about the threat posed by the “acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military/industrial complex.”

“Eisenhower was wary of seeing his beloved republic turn into a muscle-bound, garrison state — militarily strong, but economically stagnant and strategically insolvent,” explained Gates, who reminded the crowd that when Ike was president, “real choices were made, priorities set and limits enforced.”

The great truth that Eisenhower spoke in 1953 remains every bit as vital to the current debate as it was during the Cold War: “Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. This is not a way of life at all in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.”

Only by assessing military budgets as carefully and seriously as we do all other budgets, Eisenhower argued, can the United States strike the right balance when it comes to spending — internationally, in Washington and right down to the hometown level in communities such as Madison, Middleton, Monona and Mount Horeb.

In the spirit of Eisenhower, Gates used his May 8 speech to announce that he had directed military officials and defense contractors to slash overhead, and take a “hard, unsparing look” at their spending.

The secretary of Defense also challenged members of Congress to stop funding expensive weapon systems and spending boondoggles — including multibillion-dollar ships and submarines, additional Boeing C-17 cargo airplanes and the General Electric-Rolls Royce secondary engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — that the Pentagon has made clear are not needed to defend the United States.

Gates admitted that making hard — and right — choices “will mean overcoming steep institutional and political challenges, many lying outside the five walls of the Pentagon.”

It will, as well, require the asking of serious questions.

“For example, should we really be up in arms over a temporary projected shortfall of about 100 Navy and Marine strike fighters relative to the number of carrier wings, when America’s military possesses more than 3,200 tactical combat aircraft of all kinds?” asked Gates, who was referencing the current congressional push to allocate money for the purchase of more Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter jets, despite the fact that the Pentagon has made clear they are not needed.

“Does the number of warships we have and are building really put America at risk when the U.S. battle fleet is larger than the next 13 navies combined, 11 of which belong to allies and partners?” Gates continued. “Is it a dire threat that by 2020 the United States will have only 20 times more advanced stealth fighters than China?”

One does not need to agree with Gates’ politics or his past actions — in Iraq, Afghanistan or Washington — to recognize that these are the rational questions of a rational man — a man considering what he refers to as a “wider real world context.”

The question, of course, is whether members of the House and Senate — Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals — are prepared to recognize that real world context and operate within it.

The fact of the matter is that no discussion of cutting spending, balancing budgets and reducing deficits is serious if it does not include a discussion of how to cut Pentagon waste and abuse.

The secretary of Defense is ready for that discussion.

Is Congress?

Share your opinion on this topic by sending a letter to the editor to tctvoice@madison.com. Include your full name, hometown and phone number. Your name and town will be published. The phone number is for verification purposes only. Please keep your letter to 250 words or less.

Copyright 2015 madison.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

No Comments Posted.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick

Get daily Cap Times alerts


First Name:

Last Name:

What's hot



Will you be attending any Madison Mallards games this summer?

View Results