The conservative Republican commentator opines about possible defense cuts: "Initially, liberals in Congress set up a plan called 'sequestration'
that has held the U.S. military hostage to their desire to raise taxes.
The original plan was to convince other congressmen to cave to tax
increases to prevent those defense cuts. Now those cuts are scheduled to take effect in January, and they would harm our military readiness."
He continues his commentary: "Instead of accepting lazy and dangerous across-the-board defense cuts,
Republicans must be at the negotiation table prepared with ideas for how
to reduce military spending intelligently. When it comes to our
military budget and vital national security programs, a scalpel is
better than an indiscriminate budget ax. And there are plenty of opportunities to find savings. On Thursday, Sen.
Tom Coburn of Oklahoma released a study of Defense Department cuts
which could easily save taxpayers $68 billion over 10 years. For too
long, Congress has perpetuated a system that protects redundant,
wasteful and failing programs that bilk taxpayers and provide no
benefits to our brave men and women in uniform."
Booker Rising response:
My response remains the same as when Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) and Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.) separately brought up this issue over the past three months. The proposed military budget cuts are piddly. Yes, $500 billion in
military cuts over 10 years (or $50 billion per year) is piddly when you're talking about a $930 billion per year military budget.
Those "dangerous" cuts are only 5% of the total military budget, so they will hardly harm military readiness. We all
know that there is plenty of fat to be trimmed off the military budget. That budget could be slashed in half (especially shutting down bases in countries that can more than handle their own defense) and America would still be doing very well on the military front.
Ken Blackwell Op-Ed: Winning The Defense Spending Debate
