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
President Joe Biden speaks during a visit to the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. on February 10, 2021. (Photo: Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)
The Largest Pentagon Budget Cut in History Is a Great Idea
Complaining that domestic priorities are being sacrificed, these Democrats want to slash military spending by $100 billion.
https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/06/13/reps-lee-pocan-want-to-exact-the-l…
Jun 15, 2022
Reps Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) introduced a bill Monday that would cut $100 billion from the defense budget--the largest single-year budget cut in Pentagon history.
Lee and Pocan offered a range of ways to spend the $100 billion, claiming it could be used to create over one million green jobs or to provide healthcare for more than 28 million people.
The text of the proposed People Over Pentagon Act says "many of the most urgent threats to the United States are not military in nature," and argues that Americans would be safer if this money was used to pay for major domestic projects.
"It is time that we realign our priorities [to] reflect the urgent needs of communities across the country that are healing from a pandemic, reeling from ongoing economic insecurity, and confronting an international energy crisis, none of which will be addressed by more military spending," Lee and Pocan wrote in a letter to other members of Congress.
The representatives added that the government's budget has long "put profits over people," arguing that "[n]owhere is that more apparent than in our Pentagon topline."
Lee and Pocan offered a range of ways to spend the $100 billion, claiming it could be used to create over one million green jobs or to provide healthcare for more than 28 million people. They added that the priority shift would "ensure that our concept of national security centers our people and builds upon our strengths as a nation."
This messaging could help build support among Democratic colleagues, though some in the military restraint movement worry it could alienate fiscal conservatives who have called for less defense spending but are skeptical about investing in progressive priorities.
Notably, the bill would not try to save money by firing Pentagon employees or cutting their benefits. Instead, the Pentagon would follow a recent Congressional Budget Office report that lays out how America could maintain a strong defense strategy for a lot less money.
The proposal is nothing new for Lee and Pocan, who have pitched major Pentagon spending cuts several times in recent years. If their prior attempts are any indication, the bill is unlikely to become law. But advocates say that attention-grabbing proposals like this provide important opportunities to convince the public that defense spending may not be the best way to keep Americans safe.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. 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. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 Responsible Statecraft
Connor Echols
Connor Echols is a reporter for Responsible Statecraft. He was previously an associate editor at the Nonzero Foundation, where he co-wrote a weekly foreign policy newsletter. Echols recently completed a fellowship with the Arabic Center for Study Abroad in Amman, Jordan, and he received his bachelor's degree from Northwestern University, where he studied journalism and Middle East and North African Studies.
Reps Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) introduced a bill Monday that would cut $100 billion from the defense budget--the largest single-year budget cut in Pentagon history.
Lee and Pocan offered a range of ways to spend the $100 billion, claiming it could be used to create over one million green jobs or to provide healthcare for more than 28 million people.
The text of the proposed People Over Pentagon Act says "many of the most urgent threats to the United States are not military in nature," and argues that Americans would be safer if this money was used to pay for major domestic projects.
"It is time that we realign our priorities [to] reflect the urgent needs of communities across the country that are healing from a pandemic, reeling from ongoing economic insecurity, and confronting an international energy crisis, none of which will be addressed by more military spending," Lee and Pocan wrote in a letter to other members of Congress.
The representatives added that the government's budget has long "put profits over people," arguing that "[n]owhere is that more apparent than in our Pentagon topline."
Lee and Pocan offered a range of ways to spend the $100 billion, claiming it could be used to create over one million green jobs or to provide healthcare for more than 28 million people. They added that the priority shift would "ensure that our concept of national security centers our people and builds upon our strengths as a nation."
This messaging could help build support among Democratic colleagues, though some in the military restraint movement worry it could alienate fiscal conservatives who have called for less defense spending but are skeptical about investing in progressive priorities.
Notably, the bill would not try to save money by firing Pentagon employees or cutting their benefits. Instead, the Pentagon would follow a recent Congressional Budget Office report that lays out how America could maintain a strong defense strategy for a lot less money.
The proposal is nothing new for Lee and Pocan, who have pitched major Pentagon spending cuts several times in recent years. If their prior attempts are any indication, the bill is unlikely to become law. But advocates say that attention-grabbing proposals like this provide important opportunities to convince the public that defense spending may not be the best way to keep Americans safe.
Connor Echols
Connor Echols is a reporter for Responsible Statecraft. He was previously an associate editor at the Nonzero Foundation, where he co-wrote a weekly foreign policy newsletter. Echols recently completed a fellowship with the Arabic Center for Study Abroad in Amman, Jordan, and he received his bachelor's degree from Northwestern University, where he studied journalism and Middle East and North African Studies.
Reps Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) introduced a bill Monday that would cut $100 billion from the defense budget--the largest single-year budget cut in Pentagon history.
Lee and Pocan offered a range of ways to spend the $100 billion, claiming it could be used to create over one million green jobs or to provide healthcare for more than 28 million people.
The text of the proposed People Over Pentagon Act says "many of the most urgent threats to the United States are not military in nature," and argues that Americans would be safer if this money was used to pay for major domestic projects.
"It is time that we realign our priorities [to] reflect the urgent needs of communities across the country that are healing from a pandemic, reeling from ongoing economic insecurity, and confronting an international energy crisis, none of which will be addressed by more military spending," Lee and Pocan wrote in a letter to other members of Congress.
The representatives added that the government's budget has long "put profits over people," arguing that "[n]owhere is that more apparent than in our Pentagon topline."
Lee and Pocan offered a range of ways to spend the $100 billion, claiming it could be used to create over one million green jobs or to provide healthcare for more than 28 million people. They added that the priority shift would "ensure that our concept of national security centers our people and builds upon our strengths as a nation."
This messaging could help build support among Democratic colleagues, though some in the military restraint movement worry it could alienate fiscal conservatives who have called for less defense spending but are skeptical about investing in progressive priorities.
Notably, the bill would not try to save money by firing Pentagon employees or cutting their benefits. Instead, the Pentagon would follow a recent Congressional Budget Office report that lays out how America could maintain a strong defense strategy for a lot less money.
The proposal is nothing new for Lee and Pocan, who have pitched major Pentagon spending cuts several times in recent years. If their prior attempts are any indication, the bill is unlikely to become law. But advocates say that attention-grabbing proposals like this provide important opportunities to convince the public that defense spending may not be the best way to keep Americans safe.
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.