Deficit Doves
Getting out of the red is the new black.
Deficit hawks have swooped down on the U.S. budget. This week, they
attacked unemployment benefits.
Ultimately, they are going after Social
Security and Medicare/Medicaid, the venerable programs once considered
untouchable "third rails" of U.S. politics. These have been replaced by a
new third rail, the defense budget. To really deal with annual deficits
and a surging national debt, we are going to need to cut military
spending.
We need some deficit doves.
First, let's call it what it is: the war
budget. The government formed the Department of War in 1789, and only in
1949 renamed it the Department of Defense. The war budget President
Barack Obama recently sent to Congress, for fiscal year 2011, is $548.9
billion, with an additional $33 billion, which is the 2010 supplemental
that is currently being debated in Congress, and $159.3 billion more "to
support ongoing overseas contingency operations, including funds to
execute the President's new strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan."
Recall, "overseas contingency operations" is how the Obama
administration rebranded the "global war on terror."
This is just the publicly available war
budget. There is also a "black budget," kept secret, for clandestine
operations that former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair
revealed was about $75 billion. As The Washington Post exposed this
week, the post-9/11 security state has grown into a massive,
unmanageable and largely privatized "enterprise."
Over 2,000 for-profit firms and over 850,000 people with top-secret
clearance are engaged in military and intelligence activities,
ostensibly for the U.S. government, with seemingly little or no
oversight.
Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., has submitted a
bill, H.R. 5353, called "The War Is Making You Poor Act." Grayson, with a
few Republicans and a number of progressive Democratic co-sponsors,
wants to force Commander in Chief Obama to run his two wars with "only"
the $548.9 billion base budget. The $159.3 billion saved would be turned
into a tax break, making the first $35,000 of income tax-free, and
anything left over would be directed to paying down the national debt.
The bill is in committee now and may generate genuine bipartisan
support. Grayson, when introducing the bill, highlighted a fact worth
repeating: The U.S. war budget is greater than the military spending of
every other nation on Earth, combined.
Meanwhile, at the National Peace Conference
to be held in Albany, N.Y., this weekend, people are targeting the
military budget. Students are organizing around the connection between
war expenditures and education budgets that are being slashed, sparking
protests at campuses nationwide. Another effort, called "Bring Our War
Dollars Home," promotes action at the city council and statehouse level,
along with grass-roots campaigns to pressure members of Congress to
stop funding war.
The cost of the Iraq war was estimated by
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, with his colleague Linda
Bilmes, at $3 trillion, calculating not only hard, current costs, but
also the cost to society of caring for wounded veterans, and the
long-term costs of having so many families disrupted by caring for their
injured loved ones, or having a breadwinner killed in action. And
that's just Iraq. As of May, the monthly cost of the war in Afghanistan
surpassed, for the first time, the cost of war in Iraq.
Stiglitz was one of the many economists who
said the economic stimulus package (at $787 billion) was too small. He
argues that deficit spending, when done wisely, creates long-term
returns for an economy.
Conversely, he wrote recently, "Deficits to
finance wars or give-aways to the financial sector ... impos[e] a
burden on future generations."
Economist Dean Baker of the Center for
Economic and Policy Research says President Obama's Deficit Commission,
formally the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, is
a major cause for concern. The co-chairs are former Republican Sen.
Alan Simpson and Democrat Erskine Bowles, who is on the board of Morgan
Stanley, one of the bailed-out Wall Street firms. Baker told me: "Both
are on record saying they want to cut Social Security. This should have
people very, very worried. That isn't a balanced commission."
Cutting Social Security isn't the answer.
Cutting war spending, and bringing the troops home, is. This is the job
for the deficit doves.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to
this column.
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 |
Getting out of the red is the new black.
Deficit hawks have swooped down on the U.S. budget. This week, they
attacked unemployment benefits.
Ultimately, they are going after Social
Security and Medicare/Medicaid, the venerable programs once considered
untouchable "third rails" of U.S. politics. These have been replaced by a
new third rail, the defense budget. To really deal with annual deficits
and a surging national debt, we are going to need to cut military
spending.
We need some deficit doves.
First, let's call it what it is: the war
budget. The government formed the Department of War in 1789, and only in
1949 renamed it the Department of Defense. The war budget President
Barack Obama recently sent to Congress, for fiscal year 2011, is $548.9
billion, with an additional $33 billion, which is the 2010 supplemental
that is currently being debated in Congress, and $159.3 billion more "to
support ongoing overseas contingency operations, including funds to
execute the President's new strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan."
Recall, "overseas contingency operations" is how the Obama
administration rebranded the "global war on terror."
This is just the publicly available war
budget. There is also a "black budget," kept secret, for clandestine
operations that former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair
revealed was about $75 billion. As The Washington Post exposed this
week, the post-9/11 security state has grown into a massive,
unmanageable and largely privatized "enterprise."
Over 2,000 for-profit firms and over 850,000 people with top-secret
clearance are engaged in military and intelligence activities,
ostensibly for the U.S. government, with seemingly little or no
oversight.
Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., has submitted a
bill, H.R. 5353, called "The War Is Making You Poor Act." Grayson, with a
few Republicans and a number of progressive Democratic co-sponsors,
wants to force Commander in Chief Obama to run his two wars with "only"
the $548.9 billion base budget. The $159.3 billion saved would be turned
into a tax break, making the first $35,000 of income tax-free, and
anything left over would be directed to paying down the national debt.
The bill is in committee now and may generate genuine bipartisan
support. Grayson, when introducing the bill, highlighted a fact worth
repeating: The U.S. war budget is greater than the military spending of
every other nation on Earth, combined.
Meanwhile, at the National Peace Conference
to be held in Albany, N.Y., this weekend, people are targeting the
military budget. Students are organizing around the connection between
war expenditures and education budgets that are being slashed, sparking
protests at campuses nationwide. Another effort, called "Bring Our War
Dollars Home," promotes action at the city council and statehouse level,
along with grass-roots campaigns to pressure members of Congress to
stop funding war.
The cost of the Iraq war was estimated by
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, with his colleague Linda
Bilmes, at $3 trillion, calculating not only hard, current costs, but
also the cost to society of caring for wounded veterans, and the
long-term costs of having so many families disrupted by caring for their
injured loved ones, or having a breadwinner killed in action. And
that's just Iraq. As of May, the monthly cost of the war in Afghanistan
surpassed, for the first time, the cost of war in Iraq.
Stiglitz was one of the many economists who
said the economic stimulus package (at $787 billion) was too small. He
argues that deficit spending, when done wisely, creates long-term
returns for an economy.
Conversely, he wrote recently, "Deficits to
finance wars or give-aways to the financial sector ... impos[e] a
burden on future generations."
Economist Dean Baker of the Center for
Economic and Policy Research says President Obama's Deficit Commission,
formally the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, is
a major cause for concern. The co-chairs are former Republican Sen.
Alan Simpson and Democrat Erskine Bowles, who is on the board of Morgan
Stanley, one of the bailed-out Wall Street firms. Baker told me: "Both
are on record saying they want to cut Social Security. This should have
people very, very worried. That isn't a balanced commission."
Cutting Social Security isn't the answer.
Cutting war spending, and bringing the troops home, is. This is the job
for the deficit doves.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to
this column.
Getting out of the red is the new black.
Deficit hawks have swooped down on the U.S. budget. This week, they
attacked unemployment benefits.
Ultimately, they are going after Social
Security and Medicare/Medicaid, the venerable programs once considered
untouchable "third rails" of U.S. politics. These have been replaced by a
new third rail, the defense budget. To really deal with annual deficits
and a surging national debt, we are going to need to cut military
spending.
We need some deficit doves.
First, let's call it what it is: the war
budget. The government formed the Department of War in 1789, and only in
1949 renamed it the Department of Defense. The war budget President
Barack Obama recently sent to Congress, for fiscal year 2011, is $548.9
billion, with an additional $33 billion, which is the 2010 supplemental
that is currently being debated in Congress, and $159.3 billion more "to
support ongoing overseas contingency operations, including funds to
execute the President's new strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan."
Recall, "overseas contingency operations" is how the Obama
administration rebranded the "global war on terror."
This is just the publicly available war
budget. There is also a "black budget," kept secret, for clandestine
operations that former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair
revealed was about $75 billion. As The Washington Post exposed this
week, the post-9/11 security state has grown into a massive,
unmanageable and largely privatized "enterprise."
Over 2,000 for-profit firms and over 850,000 people with top-secret
clearance are engaged in military and intelligence activities,
ostensibly for the U.S. government, with seemingly little or no
oversight.
Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., has submitted a
bill, H.R. 5353, called "The War Is Making You Poor Act." Grayson, with a
few Republicans and a number of progressive Democratic co-sponsors,
wants to force Commander in Chief Obama to run his two wars with "only"
the $548.9 billion base budget. The $159.3 billion saved would be turned
into a tax break, making the first $35,000 of income tax-free, and
anything left over would be directed to paying down the national debt.
The bill is in committee now and may generate genuine bipartisan
support. Grayson, when introducing the bill, highlighted a fact worth
repeating: The U.S. war budget is greater than the military spending of
every other nation on Earth, combined.
Meanwhile, at the National Peace Conference
to be held in Albany, N.Y., this weekend, people are targeting the
military budget. Students are organizing around the connection between
war expenditures and education budgets that are being slashed, sparking
protests at campuses nationwide. Another effort, called "Bring Our War
Dollars Home," promotes action at the city council and statehouse level,
along with grass-roots campaigns to pressure members of Congress to
stop funding war.
The cost of the Iraq war was estimated by
Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, with his colleague Linda
Bilmes, at $3 trillion, calculating not only hard, current costs, but
also the cost to society of caring for wounded veterans, and the
long-term costs of having so many families disrupted by caring for their
injured loved ones, or having a breadwinner killed in action. And
that's just Iraq. As of May, the monthly cost of the war in Afghanistan
surpassed, for the first time, the cost of war in Iraq.
Stiglitz was one of the many economists who
said the economic stimulus package (at $787 billion) was too small. He
argues that deficit spending, when done wisely, creates long-term
returns for an economy.
Conversely, he wrote recently, "Deficits to
finance wars or give-aways to the financial sector ... impos[e] a
burden on future generations."
Economist Dean Baker of the Center for
Economic and Policy Research says President Obama's Deficit Commission,
formally the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, is
a major cause for concern. The co-chairs are former Republican Sen.
Alan Simpson and Democrat Erskine Bowles, who is on the board of Morgan
Stanley, one of the bailed-out Wall Street firms. Baker told me: "Both
are on record saying they want to cut Social Security. This should have
people very, very worried. That isn't a balanced commission."
Cutting Social Security isn't the answer.
Cutting war spending, and bringing the troops home, is. This is the job
for the deficit doves.
Denis Moynihan contributed research to
this column.