Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1330695797-scaled

Protecting the people means cutting Pentagon spending

Our current level of military spending wastes resources on senseless instruments of destruction, while failing to address the security threats that people in the country actually face.

Analysis | Washington Politics

Across the country people are rightfully protesting systematic racism and the failures of their police departments. The COVID-19 pandemic has killed over 177,000 people since January. Millions of people are newly unemployed, and millions face evictions. And the new $740 billion military budget passed by Congress didn’t prevent and doesn’t address any of these immediate threats.  

The ability to tackle these threats exists, just not in the military. Instead, our military spending draws resources away from programs and departments that have the ability to create safety rather than add to the chaos. In the midst of a pandemic it is absurd that the budget for the Department Health and Human Services is a fraction of what the military receives. The Pentagon, like the police, should be defunded. 

The initial proposed Pentagon budget for this year is $740.5 billion, which is more than half of the annual discretionary budget. The budget fails to address the hundreds of thousands of fatalities in the U.S. from COVID-19. Our “national security” spending is supposed to keep us safe, yet hundreds of thousands of people have died and millions more are struggling. Instead of focusing on protecting the lives of people in the country, plans have been proposed for the modernization of nuclear weapons and the resumption of nuclear testing, both which create danger rather than security and ignore the actual problems we face. The Air Force's accidental leak of their hope to obtain a hypersonic nuclear weapon further illustrates the military’s misplaced focus. Nuclear weapons cost taxpayers around $22.4 billion a year, a monster number compared to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which for the fiscal year of 2020 received less than $7 billion. At a time when there is a pandemic, massive unemployment, and other issues raging in the country, creating new and dangerous toys is unreasonable and inconsiderate. 

The pandemic has made programs that fall under the discretionary budget such as food assistance for Women, Infants, and Children and the Workforce Investment Board that helps the unemployed find jobs even more important. As the military budget grows, which it has each year since 2016, funding for most of these programs and their departments tend to shrink. This is true of the Department of Education, whose budget was proposed to be cut by 8 percent or $6.1 billion dollars for 2021. Defunding the Pentagon would mean reallocating parts of its budget to departments and programs like these which are better equipped to manage the real threats to the people’s security.  

Had funding in the past been better invested in nonmilitary priorities, we would be better off now. Pertinent departments would be better equipped to handle the shockwaves from the pandemic. An example of this is in the economic security category of the discretionary budget. In 2019 these programs received $87 billion for housing, the homeless, and food and nutrition programs. Increased levels of income loss coupled with food insecurity because of the pandemic exacerbated the financial strain on these programs, forcing them to receive further aid from the CARES Act.

Emergency and major relief packages like the CARES Act were needed immediately and picked up where non-military departmental and program funding fell short. The $2 trillion economic rescue package filled in the gaps caused by the pandemic, such as in unemployment and healthcare programs. But in the future, we need to rebalance the funding so relief needs are not as high.

In July, Senators Bernie Sanders, Edward Markey, and Elizabeth Warren, and Representatives Barbara Lee and Mark Pocan introduced an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have reduced the topline military budget by 10 percent, freeing $74 billion dollars to be redistributed to other departments. While this unfortunately failed to pass, it cannot be the end of the fight to defund the military. The Pentagon could be defunded by 50% and the United States would still have the largest military budget in the world. This would allow for $370 billion dollars to be reallocated to programs directly benefiting people. That could fund 10.3 billion COVID-19 tests a year or create over 6 million jobs.

Our current level of military spending wastes resources on senseless instruments of destruction, while failing to address the security threats that people in the country actually face. Even worse, it draws resources away from departments that address these security threats to the country. It is vital that we, as well as lawmakers, continue working to defund the military in order to free up and allocate resources to match the priorities and needs of the people in this country.

Tucson, USA — March 2, 2018: A U.S. Air Force F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (Lightning II) jet at Davis Monthan Air Force Base. This F-35 is assigned to Luke Air Force Base. (Michael Fitzsimmons / Shutterstock.com)
Analysis | Washington Politics
Ukraine landmines
Top image credit: A sapper of the 24th mechanized brigade named after King Danylo installs an anti-tank landmine, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, on the outskirts of the town of Chasiv Yar in the Donetsk region, Ukraine October 30, 2024. Oleg Petrasiuk/Press Service of the 24th King Danylo Separate Mechanized Brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces/Handout via REUTERS

Ukrainian civilians will pay for Biden's landmine flip-flop

QiOSK

The Biden administration announced today that it will provide Ukraine with antipersonnel landmines for use inside the country, a reversal of its own efforts to revive President Obama’s ban on America’s use, production, transfer, and stockpiling of the indiscriminate weapons anywhere except the Korean peninsula.

The intent of this reversal, one U.S. official told the Washington Post, is to “contribute to a more effective defense.” The landmines — use of which is banned in 160 countries by an international treaty — are expected to be deployed primarily in the country’s eastern territories, where Ukrainian forces are struggling to defend against steady advances by the Russian military.

keep readingShow less
 Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva
Top image credit: Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva attends task force meeting of the Global Alliance against Hunger and Poverty in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, July 24, 2024. REUTERS/Tita Barros

Brazil pulled off successful G20 summit

QiOSK

The city of Rio de Janeiro provided a stunningly beautiful backdrop to Brazil’s big moment as host of the G20 summit this week.

Despite last minute challenges, Brazil pulled off a strong joint statement (Leaders’ Declaration) that put some of President Lula’s priorities on human welfare at the heart of the grouping’s agenda, while also crafting impressively tough language on Middle East conflicts and a pragmatic paragraph on Ukraine.

keep readingShow less
Ukraine Russia
Top Photo: Ukrainian military returns home to Kiev from conflict at the border, where battles had raged between Ukraine and Russian forces. (Shuttertock/Vitaliy Holov)

Poll: Over 50% of Ukrainians want to end the war

QiOSK

A new Gallup study indicates that most Ukrainians want the war with Russia to end. After more than two years of fighting, 52% of those polled indicated that they would prefer a negotiated peace rather than continuing to fight.

Ukrainian support for the war has consistently dropped since Russia began its full-scale invasion in 2022. According to Gallup, 73% wished to continue fighting in 2022, and 63% in 2023. This is the first time a majority supported a negotiated peace.

keep readingShow less

Election 2024

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.