Defense Spending Cuts
Muldoon
The average American has probably heard the term “Fiscal Cliff” more times
in the past few months than they would have liked. However, there is merit to the
overuse of this catchy phrase. America faces heavy consequences if a deal is not
made in congress soon to address the astronomical debt in our economy
(MacGuineas). The most severe consequence is sequestration, or mandatory budget
cuts to many areas of the government, primarily the Department of Defense. If
something is not done to stop the proposed sequestration, thousands of military
men and women will lose their jobs, the private sector economy will worsen, and
America may become more vulnerable to attack, both overseas and possibly on the
home front.
To understand why these budget cuts are even being proposed, one must
first understand why we are even in this atrocious financial situation in the first
place. The most obvious reason that has driven America deeper into its deficit is the
overall cost of the war since 2001. The Department of Defense needed to increase
the size of the military during wartime, it needed more training, it needed pay for
new equipment, weapons, ammunition, fuel, salaries for the service members, and
all the other expenses involved with a war. All these factors have added up to almost
$600 Billion dollars, and in 2008 alone, the average monthly cost of the war peaked
at $11.1 Billion dollars (CNN). However, this number is just a small fraction of the
US public debt, which is over $16 Trillion dollars, and always rising (US Debt Clock).
The US debt is always rising due to something called compounding interest, which
means that as time goes on and the loan that America took on from its creditor, the
amount that is owed increases, almost exponentially. To break it down a little more,
Defense Spending Cuts
Muldoon
according to the NY Times, $3.6 Trillion dollars of the US debt comes from
individuals, banks, businesses and the States. More than $4 Trillion dollars comes
from debt owed to other countries, mainly China. Lastly, more than $6.2 Trillion
dollars of the debt can be pinned on the US governments itself (“Charting the
Crisis”). President Obama took on the challenge when he took office to try and lower
the debt, but it proved to be a daunting task, as the debt and deficit rise by the
Trillions (Calmes). After looking at the numbers, it seems nearly impossible for
America to pull itself out of the “fiscal downward slope” that is leading up to the cliff.
However, this is where the defense cutbacks come in.
Downsizing the military is not the issue that anti-sequestration proponents
have with the proposed sequestration. The foreign policy in America is always
fluctuating. The needs of the country will be different today than they were 5 years
ago or 50 years ago (ProQuest Staff). In fact, now that America is out of the more
intense periods of the War on Terror, the need for troops has decreased from what
was needed, say, in 2004. The real problem that people, like Secretary of Defense
Leon Panetta, have with the sequestration is that the amount of money that will be
cut from the military alone is enormous. Rep. Buck McKeon, chairman of the House
Armed Services Committee, outlined in his report what sequestration really means
for the military. In the report, he talked about how the Budget Control Act, the act
that will take place if a deal is not made in congress before it adjourns, outlines how
the cuts will be enforced. The BCA bill specifically states that more than half of the
sequestration, about $500 Billion over the next 10 years, will come directly from the
Military. Later in the article, McKeon summarized a letter that Secretary Panetta
Defense Spending Cuts
Muldoon
wrote to congress. In that letter, Panetta said that on top of the proposed cuts, the
Department of Defense could see an additional $500-$600 Billion dollars lost as a
result of these cuts (McKeon). None of the above information can spell good news
for anyone who is serving in the military.
America’s brave service members have enough burdens on their shoulders to
be worrying about job security. Unfortunately, that is exactly what the sequestration
will do to our troops. Among all the departments, the Army will experience the
largest drawback in their forces. A report from CNN said that the Army is projected
to lose around 40,000 troops from the defense cuts. The Marine Corps will also see a
significant decrease in size, but an accurate estimate could not be made about the
exact number (Shaughnessy). The Navy will also see serious reductions as well,
although not in the form on personnel. In Panetta’s letter, he stated that if the
sequestration is put into effect, then the Navy could lose the next generation of high
tech submarines, the Navy would lose many of their current submarine force, many
ships would be decommissioned and the brand new Littoral Combat Ship, a hightech vessel tailored to match the threats that present themselves to our Navy today.
Overall, the Navy would have the smallest fleet since about 1915. The military’s
ground force will be the smallest since the Second World War. The Air Force will
have its smallest combat fighter wing in its history, and the civilian Department of
Defense workforce will be smaller than it has ever been. If one were to look at the
BCA bill, they could see that there is a way that the President can exempt personnel
from the cuts. This seems to be a solution, but Obama were to exercise this power,
the exemptions would have to be compensated for in other areas of the Department
Defense Spending Cuts
Muldoon
of Defense, like training, thus decreasing readiness and effectiveness the same way
personnel cuts would (McKeon). Aside from the brave men and women who will be
losing the jobs that they love, that they volunteered for, and that they do to protect
the American people, the military reductions might also open America up for attack,
at home or abroad.
It is true that an attack like 9/11 will probably never happen again, but that
doesn't mean America is immune to attacks. For instance, earlier this, during the
election period, it seemed that America was somewhat divided. Terrorists in the Middle
East obviously took advantage of this sign of vulnerability, and attacked a U.S. consulate
in North Africa, killing 4 Americans. If the terrorists took the election as a sign of
weakness, would they hesitate to attack if America’s military was the smallest it has
been in a hundred years? The answer is most likely not. These defense cuts do more
than just make the military smaller, too. If soldiers are cut, then the invaluable attribute
of experience will exit the ranks of the military, and the younger soldiers will have no
one to learn from. Along with eliminating experience, when a military contract is
terminated early, then the military has to pay a fee to the person that it cut, adding to
the mountain of money that the military is already losing (McKeon). Also, what happens
when we a major crisis occurs, and America needs to mobilize the strongest force it
possibly can, but half of the military has been cut? It seems that nothing good can come
of the proposed cuts, for the military or the nation itself.
Private defense contractors employ tens of thousand of civilians and former
military personnel, and are a huge part of the economy. If the military doesn't need as
Defense Spending Cuts
Muldoon
many ships or planes, then companies who assist the military in building these vessels,
like Lockheed Martin, will also feel the effects. In an announcement to his whole
company, CEO of Lockheed Martin, Bob Stevens, said that the company might have to
cut upwards of ten thousand employees (Stevens). Lockheed is not unique in losing
business, either. Every government contracting business, from those who provide
workers to help build ships, all the way to the companies building the newest, high-tech
speedboat for the Navy, will have to cut employees.
As one can see, the sequestration that starts with the Department of Defense
becomes sort of a domino effect that touches almost every part of America. Thankfully,
these cuts have not yet taken effect, so there are still measures that can be taken to
prevent the sequestration from happening, but Congress will need to act fast. The safety
and future of America lays in the hands of those on Capitol Hill and what they do in the
coming weeks.
Defense Spending Cuts
Muldoon
Works Cited
Calmes, Jackie. "Test for Obama As Deficit Stays Over $1 Trillion." New York Times.
26 Sep 2012: A.1. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 10 Dec 2012.
"Charting the American Debt Crisis." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28
July 2011. Web. 15 Dec. 2012.
CNN Wire, Jason Hanna, and Diana Laposta. "CNN Fact Check: Comparing Costs of
Iraq, Libya Missions." CNN. Cable News Network, 01 Jan. 1970. Web. 19 Dec.
2012.
MacGuineas, Maya. "5 Myths About the Fiscal Cliff." Washington Post. 18 Nov 2012:
B.2. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 10 Dec 2012.
McKeon, Buck. "What Sequestration Really Means." Armedservices.house.gov. Armed
Services Committee, n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2012.
ProQuest Staff. "Topic Overview: U.S. Foreign Policy." ProQuest LLC. 2012: n.pag.
SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 10 Dec 2012.
Shaughnessy, Larry. "Pentagon Cuts to Include Trimming Troop Strength, Grounding
Drones." CNN Security Clearance RSS. Cable News Network, n.d. Web. 15 Dec.
2012.
Stevens, Bob. "Reunion." Lockheedmartin.com. Lockheed Martin, n.d. Web. 15 Dec.
2012.
"U.S. National Debt Clock: Real Time." U.S. National Debt Clock: Real Time. N.p., n.d.
Web. 15 Dec. 2012.