Deficit-Minded Lawmakers Eye Defense Cuts

With the White House's Deficit Commission hard at work being a bunch of budget-fussing fussbudgets, one wonders if their "everything on the table" approach is going to involve a substantive run at the waste in the Department of Defense, or if it's simply going to be a swift round of gutting Social Security benefits.

The defense budget has been, historically, the greatest sacred cow since the Golden Calf, but the whole point of the deficit commission is to keep lawmakers from having to publicly appear to be making the sort of tough choices that could cost them their precious Congressional seats. Nevertheless, some lawmakers are starting to loudly call for an examination of defense priorities and targeted cuts to a defense budget that's bloated to $549 billion in the past ten years.

Per Pat Garofalo, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) is on it:

Any conversation about the deficit that leaves out defense spending is seriously flawed before it begins...The savings in front of us deserve a careful look and a thorough debate; but I fear that if we can't decide what we can afford to do without today, we'll be forced to make much more draconian cuts in the years to come. Of course, we must conduct such a review with the intent of maintaining a strong and sufficient armed force to deter and defeat any enemy that puts our nation and our people at risk. We can do both.

But surely these are just the ravings of an unserious Democrat, right? Actually, someone better run and get David Broder a fresh pair of boxer-briefs because this call for defense budget cutting is covered with bipartisanship sauce! As Tim Fernholz points out at TAPPED, GOP wonderboy Representative Paul Ryan is singing the same tune. He offered the following commentary on the radio yesterday:

HOST: What about on the military side of things as well, do we not have to cut back on military spending as well?

RYAN: Yeah, I think within it you have to prioritize. Now obviously, we've got troops over in Afghanistan and they need everything, every piece of equipment they need. But there are lots of areas, I just had a hearing on this, there are lots of areas for waste to get out of it. Like, the procurement budget is completely out of control. The Pentagon's budget itself is not working right, so there are billions of dollars of waste you can get out of the Pentagon, lots of procurement waste. We're buying some weapons systems I would argue you don't need anymore.

Ryan added, "You know the current Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, he's going a pretty good job of identifying obsolete weapons systems that are costing tens of billions of dollars that aren't needed. So, yes, there is waste in the Pentagon." Bully for Ryan, he's right on both counts.

RELATED:
Hoyer: 'Any Conversation About The Deficit That Leaves Out Defense Spending Is Seriously Flawed' [Wonk Room]
Paul Ryan's Defense Budget Real Talk [TAPPED]

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Comments

[Oldchef]

10:25 AM on 06/25/2010

How about any cuts in Social Security are paired with similar cuts in the military's retirement plan for the many retired generals and cuts to the Congressional retirement plan. I suspect if they were forced to cut their own plans perhaps they wouldn't be so quick to cut the retirement safety net for the poor bastards that worked hard for 40 or more years paying into Social Security.

[research]

03:43 PM on 06/25/2010

SS is an independent program paid for by employees.

remove the income cap on SS,

Give conservatives the flat tax

They claim they want.

Get the trillions back from the Bankster,

Outlaw Bankster derivative casinos.

Invest in green upgrades for all gov buildings immediately.

problems solved.

[Oakland]

02:19 AM on 06/25/2010

Defense? I'll believe it when I see. It is twice as likely they will destroy Social Security and Medicare. They always have money for tax cuts for the rich, bombs and jail; but not a dime for unemployment extensions or health care. We really need a revolution.

[duxguts]

01:17 AM on 06/25/2010

Pat Garofalo might want to be careful in case the empire strikes back.

[henrypapillon]

11:45 PM on 06/24/2010

Any more money spent on defense than the exact penny needed to repel an attack is a waste of money that could be spent on domestic programs.

[From the Raft]

06:23 PM on 06/24/2010

It is more likely that China, not Congress, will cut our defense spending. By then America will not have the assets to cover any more borrowing from them.

Both Canada and Mexico will build walls along the borders and Cuba will ban travel from the States.

[joeerato]

06:09 PM on 06/24/2010

Paul Ryan is my boy

[catbite]

05:30 PM on 06/24/2010

I don't have a problem with a defense budget. We need to protect our rights and our country. But I disagree strongly with a military budget that is funding 2 wars amongst all the other waste. Total insanity.

[JaCar]

06:04 PM on 06/24/2010

How does anybody not have a problem with our defense budget?! It's a hodgepodge of corporate and state welfare programs that have bloated our military budget to more than the rest of the world combined and 11X greater than our next closest rival, China! A strong defense does not mean we need to p is s money down the drain. I just love Republicans' strong military mantra and their absurd notion that while there's waste in government, none of it could possibly be in the military. Unbelievable. Paul Ryan may now be my favorite Repug, actually speaking the truth and taking what he preaches seriously. If you want to reduce the deficit and balance the budget, you HAVE to make military and Social Security cuts. Tea baggers just don't get that.

[Free2BeMe]

02:07 AM on 06/25/2010

Money we've paid into Social Security, and Medicare goes into the general fund. Much of it was diverted to the tax cuts that Bush gave when he first took office. This is a large part of why Social Security and Medicare are in such peril now.

Perhaps before we decide to cut Social Security benefits, we should try to recoup some of the money taken from the working classes' retirement fund.

Why aren't we talking about restoring the tax structure to what it was before republican's started their systematic transference of wealth.

[den1953]

05:19 PM on 06/24/2010

Here is two new defense cuts that everyone but the chicken hawks would like end the two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan,shut down that damn prison in Cuba,get out of Japan and Germany, and stop sticking or noses where we don't belong!

[From the Raft]

06:12 PM on 06/24/2010

Let's do it!

[rikster]

04:14 PM on 06/24/2010

we can't do it..the Pentagon needs another 500 tanks....

[brycecovert]

03:52 PM on 06/24/2010

God, I've been wondering this question the whole time! If deficits are so scary, why aren't we cutting such an obviously bloated budget? The answer is probably because they know that the danger is as overblown as defense spending, somewhere deep down inside. Marshall Auerback has been on this topic since day 1, and just today wrote a piece about the defense budget, it's very smart and worth the read: http://www.newdeal20.org/2010/06/24/social-securitys-family-benefits-and-the-fiscal-commission-13306/

[Oldchef]

10:16 AM on 06/25/2010

Could it possibly be because most of the Senators and Congresspeople are heavily invested in defense contractors?

[Huffingbrownbag]

03:16 PM on 06/24/2010

"Our national debt is our biggest national security threat," said Admiral Mike Mullen.

According to Steny Hoyer (D. Md), the House Majority Leader, Social Security is our biggest national security threat:

"It isn’t possible to debate and pass a realistic, long-term budget until we’ve considered the bipartisan commission’s deficit-reduction plan, which is expected in December. I believe that Congress must take up and vote on that plan.

“To share sacrifices fairly, and to be politically viable, the commission’s proposal can only have one form: an agreement that cuts spending and raises revenue when the economy recovers.

“On the spending side, we could and should consider a higher retirement age, or one pegged to lifespan; more progressive Social Security and Medicare benefits; and a stronger safety net for the Americans who need it most. We also need the in-depth scrutiny of defense spending that Secretary Gates has demanded."
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/56495

[kinogod]

02:01 PM on 06/24/2010

It is about friggin time that defense felt the axe as well as the American people. There is way to much fraud and over spending that has nothing to do with protecting our country n everything to do with what Prez Eisenhower warned us about.

[Nickolette Sanello]

12:44 PM on 06/24/2010

What's the point!! You know warmonger senators like Geriatric Johnny McCain will just put a secret hold on it or filibuster in the dysfunctional Senate!!!

[jasongrundy]

11:34 AM on 06/24/2010

No one and I mean absolutely no one can EVEN BEGIN cutting the deficits or raining in government spending until they agree that the defense budget needs to have MAJOR cuts.

[ALCThomas]

11:51 AM on 06/24/2010

Fat chance of that. All of these so called fiscal conservatives will never do that. If you did that the income from their third world states in the south would perish. Look at the static SecDef took for recommending a cut in the F22 from 750 to 190 of the $200+ million dollar jets. And the Pentagon wants to purchase nearly 3000 of the $300+ million F35 jets. Lets not forget we will soon need replacements for the fleet of 12 aircraft carriers, at around $10 billion apiece, not counting the aircraft. And that is not counting the expected cost overruns.

How unpatriotic of you to even suggest a cut in the "Ark of the Covenent" called the Pentagon Budget.

Won't even begin to talk about Medicare and SS. Those two along with the DoD budget eat up most of the Federal budget so getting rid of deficits is out of the question until those 3 items are put ON the table.

[Golfer59]

10:54 AM on 06/24/2010

This is the first thing I heard from Pual Ryan's mouth that made any sense. He's my House Represenative from Wisconsin and I can't stand he politics We high umemployment issues in his districs and GM is going to close another plant in his back yard of Janesville, WI. I wonder how he will vote when the extension of unemployment benefits come up??