SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Forget Air Force One, Pentagon Wastes Billions and Billions Every Month
President-elect Donald Trump's focus on single Boeing contract ignores enormous waste of bloated Pentagon budget
Dec 05, 2016
President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday suggested that he would cancel what he claimed was a $4 billion Boeing contract to build a new fleet of Air Force One planes, saying he wanted the manufacturer to "make a lot of money, but not that much money."
Trump's comments came just after the Washington Post published a bombshell investigation showing the Pentagon had hidden a study which uncovered $125 billion in bureaucratic waste, fearing that Congress would cut defense funding if lawmakers found out.
The Post's Craig Whitlock and Bob Woodward reported:
Pentagon leaders had requested the study to help make their enormous back-office bureaucracy more efficient and reinvest any savings in combat power. But after the project documented far more wasteful spending than expected, senior defense officials moved swiftly to kill it by discrediting and suppressing the results.
The report, issued in January 2015, identified "a clear path" for the Defense Department to save $125 billion over five years. The plan would not have required layoffs of civil servants or reductions in military personnel. Instead, it would have streamlined the bureaucracy through attrition and early retirements, curtailed high-priced contractors and made better use of information technology.
"The cost-cutting study could find a receptive audience with President-elect Donald Trump," Whitlock and Woodward write. "He has promised a major military buildup and said he would pay for it by 'eliminating government waste and budget gimmicks.'"
But Trump's unpredictable temperament means it may be impossible to know if he will heed his own call. As the Guardian's Trevor Timm noted in an op-ed Tuesday, cutting government waste, including at the Pentagon, was Trump's "go-to cliche whenever someone asked him how he was going to pay for something he proposed...In fact, it's been the Republican party's mantra for years anytime they bring up the debt or the deficit."
"So Trump and his Republican colleagues want to get rid of 'waste,' there's literally never been a more giant and obvious example. Here's their time to act!" Timm wrote.
But, he continued, "It's unlikely that the Republicans will hold the Pentagon accountable for its free-spending ways even as they try to nickel and dime social programs. In the Republicans' fantasy world, the Pentagon's enormous budget is never a problem," adding:
Defense conglomerates and weapons makers fill the coffers of Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) each year, and spread large construction projects across virtually every state in the country, so lawmakers are loathe to cut funding for jobs in their respective districts. Add to that a hawkish tendency to support multiple wars around the world, and the Pentagon budget becomes virtually untouchable.
"Next time you hear Republicans complaining about food stamps for poor people, or calling for a reduction of social security benefits, or proposing to privatize Medicare, make sure to throw this report back in their face," Timm concluded. "Because whatever the waste problems in one government program or another, they pale in comparison to this."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday suggested that he would cancel what he claimed was a $4 billion Boeing contract to build a new fleet of Air Force One planes, saying he wanted the manufacturer to "make a lot of money, but not that much money."
Trump's comments came just after the Washington Post published a bombshell investigation showing the Pentagon had hidden a study which uncovered $125 billion in bureaucratic waste, fearing that Congress would cut defense funding if lawmakers found out.
The Post's Craig Whitlock and Bob Woodward reported:
Pentagon leaders had requested the study to help make their enormous back-office bureaucracy more efficient and reinvest any savings in combat power. But after the project documented far more wasteful spending than expected, senior defense officials moved swiftly to kill it by discrediting and suppressing the results.
The report, issued in January 2015, identified "a clear path" for the Defense Department to save $125 billion over five years. The plan would not have required layoffs of civil servants or reductions in military personnel. Instead, it would have streamlined the bureaucracy through attrition and early retirements, curtailed high-priced contractors and made better use of information technology.
"The cost-cutting study could find a receptive audience with President-elect Donald Trump," Whitlock and Woodward write. "He has promised a major military buildup and said he would pay for it by 'eliminating government waste and budget gimmicks.'"
But Trump's unpredictable temperament means it may be impossible to know if he will heed his own call. As the Guardian's Trevor Timm noted in an op-ed Tuesday, cutting government waste, including at the Pentagon, was Trump's "go-to cliche whenever someone asked him how he was going to pay for something he proposed...In fact, it's been the Republican party's mantra for years anytime they bring up the debt or the deficit."
"So Trump and his Republican colleagues want to get rid of 'waste,' there's literally never been a more giant and obvious example. Here's their time to act!" Timm wrote.
But, he continued, "It's unlikely that the Republicans will hold the Pentagon accountable for its free-spending ways even as they try to nickel and dime social programs. In the Republicans' fantasy world, the Pentagon's enormous budget is never a problem," adding:
Defense conglomerates and weapons makers fill the coffers of Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) each year, and spread large construction projects across virtually every state in the country, so lawmakers are loathe to cut funding for jobs in their respective districts. Add to that a hawkish tendency to support multiple wars around the world, and the Pentagon budget becomes virtually untouchable.
"Next time you hear Republicans complaining about food stamps for poor people, or calling for a reduction of social security benefits, or proposing to privatize Medicare, make sure to throw this report back in their face," Timm concluded. "Because whatever the waste problems in one government program or another, they pale in comparison to this."
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
President-elect Donald Trump on Tuesday suggested that he would cancel what he claimed was a $4 billion Boeing contract to build a new fleet of Air Force One planes, saying he wanted the manufacturer to "make a lot of money, but not that much money."
Trump's comments came just after the Washington Post published a bombshell investigation showing the Pentagon had hidden a study which uncovered $125 billion in bureaucratic waste, fearing that Congress would cut defense funding if lawmakers found out.
The Post's Craig Whitlock and Bob Woodward reported:
Pentagon leaders had requested the study to help make their enormous back-office bureaucracy more efficient and reinvest any savings in combat power. But after the project documented far more wasteful spending than expected, senior defense officials moved swiftly to kill it by discrediting and suppressing the results.
The report, issued in January 2015, identified "a clear path" for the Defense Department to save $125 billion over five years. The plan would not have required layoffs of civil servants or reductions in military personnel. Instead, it would have streamlined the bureaucracy through attrition and early retirements, curtailed high-priced contractors and made better use of information technology.
"The cost-cutting study could find a receptive audience with President-elect Donald Trump," Whitlock and Woodward write. "He has promised a major military buildup and said he would pay for it by 'eliminating government waste and budget gimmicks.'"
But Trump's unpredictable temperament means it may be impossible to know if he will heed his own call. As the Guardian's Trevor Timm noted in an op-ed Tuesday, cutting government waste, including at the Pentagon, was Trump's "go-to cliche whenever someone asked him how he was going to pay for something he proposed...In fact, it's been the Republican party's mantra for years anytime they bring up the debt or the deficit."
"So Trump and his Republican colleagues want to get rid of 'waste,' there's literally never been a more giant and obvious example. Here's their time to act!" Timm wrote.
But, he continued, "It's unlikely that the Republicans will hold the Pentagon accountable for its free-spending ways even as they try to nickel and dime social programs. In the Republicans' fantasy world, the Pentagon's enormous budget is never a problem," adding:
Defense conglomerates and weapons makers fill the coffers of Republicans (and a lot of Democrats) each year, and spread large construction projects across virtually every state in the country, so lawmakers are loathe to cut funding for jobs in their respective districts. Add to that a hawkish tendency to support multiple wars around the world, and the Pentagon budget becomes virtually untouchable.
"Next time you hear Republicans complaining about food stamps for poor people, or calling for a reduction of social security benefits, or proposing to privatize Medicare, make sure to throw this report back in their face," Timm concluded. "Because whatever the waste problems in one government program or another, they pale in comparison to this."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.