B is for Billion: What Military Cuts?
This week we'll hear proposals to massively increase military spending in the face of last year's outcries about "draconian" cuts to our defense budget and criticism of "out of control" spending on public services. But don't be fooled by the hyperbole. In fact, our military budget, still at historically unprecedented highs, was cut by less than one percent last year. The president's proposed FY16 budget again preserves our outsized military spending while continuing a long, dangerous trend of underfunding human needs.
This week we'll hear proposals to massively increase military spending in the face of last year's outcries about "draconian" cuts to our defense budget and criticism of "out of control" spending on public services. But don't be fooled by the hyperbole. In fact, our military budget, still at historically unprecedented highs, was cut by less than one percent last year. The president's proposed FY16 budget again preserves our outsized military spending while continuing a long, dangerous trend of underfunding human needs.
I might describe cuts that will displace thousands of children from Head Start programs as ugly, or cuts to low-income families already struggling to survive as brutal. And cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program that might send millions of kids to bed hungry could be described as draconian. But the military spending cuts that we've had so far are as gentle and easy as cuts come. A better grasp on how much our government is actually spending on the military might be the first step to an honest debate about our spending priorities.
It's hard to follow the money, even for those of us who study the budget process. For example, the original cuts slated for military spending under the Budget Control Act in FY14 amounted to around $56 billion. However, there was a $20.3 billion reduction in cuts through the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, then another $20 billion of non-war funding that was requested by the Pentagon, and an additional $10.8 billion from a Congressional war funding account (read slush fund) to cover regular military expenses. The final Pentagon reduction: $3.6 billion.
Is that a big cut? Not to an overall military budget of well over half a trillion dollars annually, a mindboggling amount that represents nearly half of the entire world's military spending. But the money we spend on the military in the name of security becomes even more astounding when you consider what we're not willing to invest federal dollars in.
I recently started attending meetings with other community members to discuss the U.S. non-military budget, and the newly imposed cuts in this sequestration era. In my first meeting, the chair began listing the millions of dollars in cuts on the table to several domestic human needs programs. "Excuse me," I said. "Didn't you mean billions with a B?" Everyone laughed and said it would be a dream for even $1 billion to be spent on any of the programs being discussed.
It's hard for most of us to understand the difference between a million and a billion. But think about it this way: a million minutes ago it was March of 2013. A billion minutes ago was just after the time of Jesus. What a difference a letter makes!
Not many Americans realize that the vast majority of the U.S. discretionary budget goes to military spending. This is the spending that Congress has authority to determine every year -- a good indicator of our priorities as a nation. Although the official Pentagon budget in 2015 is "only" $495 billion, the actual budget for all Pentagon expenses is $645 billion. If we add the cost of nuclear weapons (usually classified under the Department of Energy) the total is around $665 billion, which is more than 57 percent of this year's discretionary spending. The rest -- less than 43 percent -- will cover a broad set of public services, including education, environmental protection, job training, scientific research, transportation, economic development, and a bunch of low-income assistance programs.
No sticker shock yet? Wait until you hear about our so-called "National Security Budget." When you add the Pentagon expenses to all the other money we spend on veteran's affairs, non-Department of Defense national security, and the share of interest on our national debt attributed to military spending, the number in 2015 is $1,009.5 billion. That is one trillion - with a "t" -- and 9 billion bucks. It looks like this: $1,009,000,000,000.
Meanwhile, since 2011, members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have scrambled to add billions back to the military budget, even as they've cut a further $87 billion - a staggering 15 percent - from regular non-defense discretionary spending. These programs are now in the fifth year of an austerity drive that is a true security crisis.
I'll leave you with this: While a million seconds adds up to less than two weeks, a trillion seconds ago is almost 32,000 years to date. This is right around the time Neanderthals were discussing their national security (no offense to creationists).
It's about time for us to mind our Ms, Bs, and Ts and bring our budget priorities into the 21st century.
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
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 from the outset was 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 and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just four days to go in our Spring Campaign, we are not even halfway to our goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
This week we'll hear proposals to massively increase military spending in the face of last year's outcries about "draconian" cuts to our defense budget and criticism of "out of control" spending on public services. But don't be fooled by the hyperbole. In fact, our military budget, still at historically unprecedented highs, was cut by less than one percent last year. The president's proposed FY16 budget again preserves our outsized military spending while continuing a long, dangerous trend of underfunding human needs.
I might describe cuts that will displace thousands of children from Head Start programs as ugly, or cuts to low-income families already struggling to survive as brutal. And cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program that might send millions of kids to bed hungry could be described as draconian. But the military spending cuts that we've had so far are as gentle and easy as cuts come. A better grasp on how much our government is actually spending on the military might be the first step to an honest debate about our spending priorities.
It's hard to follow the money, even for those of us who study the budget process. For example, the original cuts slated for military spending under the Budget Control Act in FY14 amounted to around $56 billion. However, there was a $20.3 billion reduction in cuts through the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, then another $20 billion of non-war funding that was requested by the Pentagon, and an additional $10.8 billion from a Congressional war funding account (read slush fund) to cover regular military expenses. The final Pentagon reduction: $3.6 billion.
Is that a big cut? Not to an overall military budget of well over half a trillion dollars annually, a mindboggling amount that represents nearly half of the entire world's military spending. But the money we spend on the military in the name of security becomes even more astounding when you consider what we're not willing to invest federal dollars in.
I recently started attending meetings with other community members to discuss the U.S. non-military budget, and the newly imposed cuts in this sequestration era. In my first meeting, the chair began listing the millions of dollars in cuts on the table to several domestic human needs programs. "Excuse me," I said. "Didn't you mean billions with a B?" Everyone laughed and said it would be a dream for even $1 billion to be spent on any of the programs being discussed.
It's hard for most of us to understand the difference between a million and a billion. But think about it this way: a million minutes ago it was March of 2013. A billion minutes ago was just after the time of Jesus. What a difference a letter makes!
Not many Americans realize that the vast majority of the U.S. discretionary budget goes to military spending. This is the spending that Congress has authority to determine every year -- a good indicator of our priorities as a nation. Although the official Pentagon budget in 2015 is "only" $495 billion, the actual budget for all Pentagon expenses is $645 billion. If we add the cost of nuclear weapons (usually classified under the Department of Energy) the total is around $665 billion, which is more than 57 percent of this year's discretionary spending. The rest -- less than 43 percent -- will cover a broad set of public services, including education, environmental protection, job training, scientific research, transportation, economic development, and a bunch of low-income assistance programs.
No sticker shock yet? Wait until you hear about our so-called "National Security Budget." When you add the Pentagon expenses to all the other money we spend on veteran's affairs, non-Department of Defense national security, and the share of interest on our national debt attributed to military spending, the number in 2015 is $1,009.5 billion. That is one trillion - with a "t" -- and 9 billion bucks. It looks like this: $1,009,000,000,000.
Meanwhile, since 2011, members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have scrambled to add billions back to the military budget, even as they've cut a further $87 billion - a staggering 15 percent - from regular non-defense discretionary spending. These programs are now in the fifth year of an austerity drive that is a true security crisis.
I'll leave you with this: While a million seconds adds up to less than two weeks, a trillion seconds ago is almost 32,000 years to date. This is right around the time Neanderthals were discussing their national security (no offense to creationists).
It's about time for us to mind our Ms, Bs, and Ts and bring our budget priorities into the 21st century.
This week we'll hear proposals to massively increase military spending in the face of last year's outcries about "draconian" cuts to our defense budget and criticism of "out of control" spending on public services. But don't be fooled by the hyperbole. In fact, our military budget, still at historically unprecedented highs, was cut by less than one percent last year. The president's proposed FY16 budget again preserves our outsized military spending while continuing a long, dangerous trend of underfunding human needs.
I might describe cuts that will displace thousands of children from Head Start programs as ugly, or cuts to low-income families already struggling to survive as brutal. And cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program that might send millions of kids to bed hungry could be described as draconian. But the military spending cuts that we've had so far are as gentle and easy as cuts come. A better grasp on how much our government is actually spending on the military might be the first step to an honest debate about our spending priorities.
It's hard to follow the money, even for those of us who study the budget process. For example, the original cuts slated for military spending under the Budget Control Act in FY14 amounted to around $56 billion. However, there was a $20.3 billion reduction in cuts through the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, then another $20 billion of non-war funding that was requested by the Pentagon, and an additional $10.8 billion from a Congressional war funding account (read slush fund) to cover regular military expenses. The final Pentagon reduction: $3.6 billion.
Is that a big cut? Not to an overall military budget of well over half a trillion dollars annually, a mindboggling amount that represents nearly half of the entire world's military spending. But the money we spend on the military in the name of security becomes even more astounding when you consider what we're not willing to invest federal dollars in.
I recently started attending meetings with other community members to discuss the U.S. non-military budget, and the newly imposed cuts in this sequestration era. In my first meeting, the chair began listing the millions of dollars in cuts on the table to several domestic human needs programs. "Excuse me," I said. "Didn't you mean billions with a B?" Everyone laughed and said it would be a dream for even $1 billion to be spent on any of the programs being discussed.
It's hard for most of us to understand the difference between a million and a billion. But think about it this way: a million minutes ago it was March of 2013. A billion minutes ago was just after the time of Jesus. What a difference a letter makes!
Not many Americans realize that the vast majority of the U.S. discretionary budget goes to military spending. This is the spending that Congress has authority to determine every year -- a good indicator of our priorities as a nation. Although the official Pentagon budget in 2015 is "only" $495 billion, the actual budget for all Pentagon expenses is $645 billion. If we add the cost of nuclear weapons (usually classified under the Department of Energy) the total is around $665 billion, which is more than 57 percent of this year's discretionary spending. The rest -- less than 43 percent -- will cover a broad set of public services, including education, environmental protection, job training, scientific research, transportation, economic development, and a bunch of low-income assistance programs.
No sticker shock yet? Wait until you hear about our so-called "National Security Budget." When you add the Pentagon expenses to all the other money we spend on veteran's affairs, non-Department of Defense national security, and the share of interest on our national debt attributed to military spending, the number in 2015 is $1,009.5 billion. That is one trillion - with a "t" -- and 9 billion bucks. It looks like this: $1,009,000,000,000.
Meanwhile, since 2011, members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have scrambled to add billions back to the military budget, even as they've cut a further $87 billion - a staggering 15 percent - from regular non-defense discretionary spending. These programs are now in the fifth year of an austerity drive that is a true security crisis.
I'll leave you with this: While a million seconds adds up to less than two weeks, a trillion seconds ago is almost 32,000 years to date. This is right around the time Neanderthals were discussing their national security (no offense to creationists).
It's about time for us to mind our Ms, Bs, and Ts and bring our budget priorities into the 21st century.