Defense Spending

Recent months have seen a flurry of headlines about cuts (often called "threats") to the U.S. defense budget. Here, then, is a simple question that no one bothers to ask, no less answer: How much are we spending on national security these days?

Republicans and President Barack Obama are squaring off again over federal spending, only this time the president wants to cut it and the Republicans ...

WASHINGTON -- The House passed a defense budget Friday that exceeds the deal cut by Congress and President Barack Obama last summer, and that would ha...

The choice for most of us is clear. When asked, "What would you cut if you have to," Americans chose cuts in military spending over cuts in Social Security or Medicare -- three to one. But poll Congress and you get different answers.

WASHINGTON — The House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday backed construction of a missile defense site on the East Coast, rejecting Pentagon...

WASHINGTON -- A House panel has unveiled a $608 billion defense spending bill that restores some of the programs the Pentagon wanted to cut next year ...

Obama's proposed cuts, part of a strategic rebalancing towards greater investment in infrastructure, education, and other long-term sources of American strength, are relative -- at worst, they represent a flatlining of defense spending.

The Department of Defense is taking a major step in stopping the waste of taxpayer dollars. The legislative proposal is a huge improvement over the current definition, a broadly worded definition open to abuse.

By rejecting Obama's position on homeland missile defense, Congress would both ensure taxpayer dollars are used more effectively and our country is well-protected. That approach would be a new way of doing business at the Department of Defense and real change that Americans can embrace.

The United States is making a gigantic investment in the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, billed as the next generation of combat aircraft. It's no secret, however, that the program -- the most expensive in American history -- is a calamity.

For reasons that defy all logic, the administration wishes to spend yet another $400 million on MEADS, the Medium Extended Air Defense System, while simultaneously acknowledging that the missile system will never get off the ground.

We've collected our top ten charts related to federal taxes. Together, they provide useful context for the coming debates about how to reduce soaring budget deficits and reform the tax code.

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, many strategists suggested that the Cold War arms race had bankrupted its economy and caused its downfall. More than 20 years later, it appears that some in Washington are driving the U.S. toward a similar fate.

The GOP has defined itself indelibly as the party of moneyed greed and unfettered imperialism. The Republicans are a sick joke, and their narrow ideological stupidity has left rational voters no choice in the coming presidential election but Barack Obama.

President Obama and Speaker Boehner understood the parameters of a solution and came remarkably close to a deal. The solutions are not difficult to imagine, just the willingness of our leaders to embrace them, and their followers to follow.

On Wednesday, Nov. 7, the day after the next president is elected, the government as we have come to know it -- corrupt, bloated and controlled by big-money corporations, lobbyists and special interest groups -- will be largely unchanged.

If Paul Ryan, Congress and the president continue to let the Pentagon spend with impunity, the only things that will be hollow are taxpayer wallets.

WASHINGTON -- Defense spending has boomed in the post-9/11 era, creating new jobs and programs to support American military operations around the worl...

The organization for which I work, the Institute for Economics and Peace, released a new report this week detailing the macroeconomic effects of U.S. ...

In terms of actual cuts in defense spending, Obama is shifting the focus from what is known to work in missile defense to developing futuristic missile intercepts which will require years of experimenting at great expense to taxpayers while a vulnerable America waits.

More military capability equates to more security for the United States. This precept is so deeply embedded in our minds that no one sees a need to state it. Yet it may be false.

Our troops need to know that in this tight fiscal climate they still have our complete support. Former top commanders raking in seven figure salaries from taxpayers while active duty soldiers bear the brunt of the cuts sends the opposite message.