Pentagon spending has skyrocketed in the past few years, to the point that it is far higher than at the peaks of the Korean or Vietnam Wars or the height of the Cold War. The department’s budget is spiraling toward the point where it could reach $1 trillion in the next year or two, an outrageous and unsustainable amount given our nation’s many other urgent, unmet needs.
The recent debt deal, which cut domestic programs while leaving the Pentagon untouched, is just the latest example of our nation’s skewed priorities. But Congress will have a chance to stem the tide of runaway Pentagon spending next week when an amendment sponsored by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Rep. Mark Pocan (D-WI) comes to the floor of the House as part of that body’s consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The amendment would cut $100 billion from the Pentagon’s budget, while making sure not to reduce spending on military personnel or defense health care. The amendment is modeled on their stand alone bill, the People Over Pentagon Act.
The Lee-Pocan amendment offers an opportunity for Congress to push back against the misguided assumption that throwing more money at the Pentagon will provide a more effective defense. Nothing could be further from the truth. The most likely result of further pumping up the Pentagon budget will be to enrich arms contractors, their executives, and their shareholders at the expense of the rest of us.
Pentagon budget boosters maintain that we need to spend more and more in order to support the troops. But more than half of the Pentagon budget goes to contractors, and the top five alone split well over $100 billion per year in taxpayer funds. All of this largesse comes at a time when the Pentagon has yet to pass an audit, which means it is open season for unaccountable spending and waste, fraud, and abuse.
To give a sense of the scale of giveaways to Lockheed Martin
LMT
Lockheed Martin and Boeing
BA
Or, to cite another example, the Pentagon is slated to spend $11 to $12 billion on the troubled F-35 combat aircraft program this year, which is more than the entire core budget of the Centers for Disease Control.
To underscore the fact that more money for contractors doesn’t mean more money for defense, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has pointed out that the big weapons makers have spent tens of billions of dollars on stock buybacks in recent years — a tactic that drives up their share prices but does nothing to increase our defense capabilities. Add to this the fact that the big five pay their CEOs on average over $20 million per year, and it becomes clear that jacking up Pentagon spending will do more for the bottom lines of weapons makers than it will for our troops or our security.
Furthermore, as a recent investigation by CBS 60 Minutes has documented, price gouging by weapons contractors is running rampant. The CBS showed footage of former Pentagon procurement official Shay Assad holding up an oil pressure switch that was purchased by NASA for $328. The Pentagon purchased a similar component for $10,000. And it’s not just parts. As 60 Minutes noted, “[t]he Pentagon . . . overpays for almost everything – for radar and missiles … helicopters … planes … submarines… down to the nuts and bolts.”
As long as the funds keep increasing with little or no accountability on the part of contractors, any additional money for the Pentagon is more likely to fuel waste, fraud and abuse than effective equipment, innovative research, or necessary training. Ultimately what is needed is a complete revamping of U.S. strategy that puts more effort into preventing wars with nuclear-armed powers like China and Russia than it does into preparing to fight them. But in the meantime Congress can take a step towards slowing the Pentagon gravy train and holding unscrupulous contractors to account by supporting the Lee-Pocan amendment when it comes to the House floor next week.
Read the full article here