Nearly 50 advocacy groups representing a wide array of issue areas — from faith-based to government oversight organizations — sent a letter on Thursday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer advising them that adding additional money for the Pentagon any upcoming infrastructure legislation will do nothing to create jobs and modernize the U.S. economy, while making security challenges worse.
The groups — including Public Citizen, the Sunrise Movement, and Demand Progress* — note that President Biden’s proposed Pentagon budget is already too high and that DOD has never passed an accounting audit.
“We are a nation experiencing multiple crises,” they write. “We are recovering from a year of record unemployment and housing insecurity, reeling from the loss of loved ones, staggering under the weight of multiplying medical and student loan debt, confronting systemic racism and violent white nationalism, and combating the ongoing climate crisis. Militarized spending has not solved these problems, and in many ways has made them worse.”
The groups say that “[r]equests for additional Department of Defense spending have cropped up outside of the traditional budget authorization process, with legislators on both sides of the aisle attempting to tuck pet projects into the large-scale spending package.”
And this wouldn’t be the first time in the past year that the military industrial complex has benefited from unrelated spending. Last September, DOD funnelled most of the $1 billion Congress allocated for COVID relief to defense contractors, which were then used to, as the Washington Post reported at the time, “make things such as jet engine parts, body armor and dress uniforms.”
“[T]o add Pentagon pork to an initiative meant for the prosperity and safety of our communities would be truly callous,” said Erica Fein, Senior Washington Director at Win Without War, a group that also signed the letter. “Dollar for dollar, more jobs are created when invested in sectors like clean energy and education than in defense spending.”
*The Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft is also a signatory.
Ben Armbruster is the Managing Editor of Responsible Statecraft. He has more than a decade of experience working at the intersection of politics, foreign policy, and media. Ben previously held senior editorial and management positions at Media Matters, ThinkProgress, ReThink Media, and Win Without War.
It’s hard to see the past year in the Middle East as anything other than an unmitigated disaster.
Over 41,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza by Israel’s nearly yearlong bombardment of the territory, and significant obstruction of food and medicine shipments as a form of collective punishment against the population following Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack across the border that claimed 1,163 Israeli lives.
But not everyone has been harmed in the rapidly spiraling conflict. Investors in weapons stocks have enjoyed record gains over the past year, dramatically outperforming the major stock indexes in a stock rally that analysts are attributing to violence and instability in the Middle East.
The war has now spread to Lebanon, which Israel invaded last week, and Iran, where Israel assassinated leaders of the IRGC, Hezbollah and Hamas, actions that Iran retaliated against with massive strikes against targets inside Israel.
How Israel pursues its murky war aims in both Lebanon and the Gaza Strip, as well as a promised escalation against Iran, remains to be seen. The Biden administration, having spent the better part of the year promising an imminent ceasefire in Gaza and quietly urging Israel to show greater care for protecting civilian lives, has little to show for its efforts as the U.S. simultaneously continues to provide billions of dollars of weapons to Israel to execute on its rapidly expanding war.
That handout of taxpayer funds to Israel coupled with Israel’s, and global, demand increasing for weapons in a period of instability, has been jet fuel for stock prices.
Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest weapons firm and the manufacturer of the F-35 aircraft that Israel uses in its regular bombings of Gaza, at the close of trading on October 4, has produced a 54.86% percent total return in the one year following the October 7th attacks, outperforming the S&P 500 by about 18%.
Or, put another way, a $10,000 investment in the F-35 manufacturer right before the October 7 attacks would, one year later, have produced a $5,486 total return. A similar investment in an S&P 500 index fund would have produced only $3,689.
The weapons profits weren’t limited to Lockheed.
The second largest weapons firm, Raytheon, provides “bunker buster” bombs to Israel, weapons that are prohibited for use in areas with high civilian populations. Israel has repeatedly used these weapons in high density areas in both Gaza and Lebanon, producing high civilian casualties.
Demand for these weapons and others have driven up Raytheon’s stock price and generated massive returns for investors. Raytheon’s total return for investors in the past year is 82.69%, outperforming the S&P 500 by about 46%. A $10,000 investment in Raytheon before the October 7 attacks would have produced a $8,269 total return.
Another producer of bunker busters, General Dynamics, which produced the BLU-109 bombs used by Israel to assassinate Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in Beirut and leveled multiple residential buildings in the process, enjoyed smaller gains but still returned a 37% total return for investors, beating the S&P 500 by over 3%.
While profiting off war may be distasteful for some, defense analysts at major investment banks grilled weapons executives in earnings calls last October about how the companies, and their investors, might profit from the war in Gaza.
“Hamas has created additional demand, we have this $106bn request from the president,” said TD Cowen’s Cai von Rumohr, during General Dynamics’earnings call on October 25, 2023. In a question posed to General Dynamics executives on the call, von Rumohr asked, “Can you give us some general color in terms of areas where you think you could see incremental acceleration in demand?”
One year later, those analysts have been proven correct and Israel’s war grinds on as the White House finds its bids for ceasefires repeatedly rejected while, in seeming contradiction, supplying Israel with the weapons to continue fighting.
On September 26, the White House approved a $8.7 billion aid package for Israel that will largely be spent on munitions and armaments from major weapons firms, bringing the total U.S. security assistance to Israel since October 7 to nearly $18 billion. The same day, Israel, in defiance of the U.S., rejected a call for a ceasefire with Hezbollah, no doubt driving “incremental acceleration in demand” for weapons.
Of men in the U.S. who turned 18 in 2023, fewer than 40% signed up for the draft — down from more than 60% in 2020 before the start of the war in Ukraine.
The SSS is maintains a database of eligible male citizens who could be conscripted if and when Congress and the president institute a draft. Per the law, American males must register within 30 days of their 18th birthday or find it difficult to get a drivers license in some states.
“SSS is experiencing a significant decline in registrations by 18-year-old men. In 2020, the registration rate for 18-year-old men nationwide was 61.8%, today it is just 39.9%,” the agency reports.
Most men register eventually, but often years after their prime draft eligibility. The SSS allows men to register without penalty until their 26th birthday. Some men deliberately or inadvertently delay registering until they are close to age 26. This minimizes their exposure to a possible draft while preserving their eligibility for federal or state jobs or other programs later in life.
Furthermore, the SSS has withheld its cursory one-page cost estimate for automated registration. But the one-page letter it provided to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) makes clear how little consideration it has given to the real-world feasibility or cost of automating draft registration. It includes no funding for database integration or for collection or verification of information not available from existing databases, including current physical addresses for provable delivery.
Congress and OMB need to scrutinize the proposals for automation and/or expansion of Selective Service registration, which have been through no hearings or budget review, much more closely. At a minimum, Congress should remove these provisions from the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2025, and schedule full hearings next year specifically on Selective Service, with witnesses for and against continuation, expansion, automation, or repeal of draft registration.
Mainstream media has fact-checked this as false, but has failed to note that, while Harris hasn't directly called for a draft, 1) Democrats and Republicans have both supported planning and preparation for a draft, as part of their bipartisan national security consensus, and 2) Trump did nothing as President to end draft registration, which he could have done by executive order if he were really opposed to a draft.
Selective Service registration requires authorizing legislation (the Military Selective Service Act) and funding from Congress as well an order from the President. The order currently in effect was issued by Jimmy Carter in 1980, and could have been rescinded or revised by any subsequent President. If either Presidential candidate wants to show that they don't support a draft today, they could endorse Selective Service repeal legislation and/or promise to issue an order, if elected, ending draft registration.
In the meantime, more and more young people will take the decision of which wars to fight into their own hands by opting out of Selective Service registration, either by not registering or by not telling the SSS when they move.
keep readingShow less
In half a century of public life, U.S. President Joe Biden has demonstrated unwavering support for Israel. In this photo Biden is welcomed by Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu, as he visits Israel amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Tel Aviv, Israel, October 18, 2023. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo
In half a century of public life, U.S. President Joe Biden has demonstrated unwavering support for Israel. In this photo Biden is welcomed by Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu, as he visits Israel amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Tel Aviv, Israel, October 18, 2023. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein/File Photo
On Monday, Brown University’s Costs of War project released a report detailing America’s monetary commitment to Israel since October 7, 2023, which concludes that The United States has approved at least $17.9 billion on military aid to Israel, the highest given in a single year since the U.S. began giving Israel aid in 1959. Israel is also the biggest recipient of aid from the United States since World War II, and has multiple unique arms and aid agreements with the United States, although notably no formal defense treaty.
In addition to direct aid to Israel, the United States has increased its military footprint in the region to around 43,000 ever since the Hamas attacks in October 2023. The Associated Press, which covered the COW report, estimated that an additional $4.86 billion has been spent on this increase in military operations.
The increased military presence has included President Biden sending additional troops to the region, striking Iran-aligned Houthi targets in Yemen, sending two carrier strike groups to the Mediterranean, and assisting Israel in intercepting Iranian launched missiles. The report does not include any additional assistance that may be given to Israel after its invasion of southern Lebanon in late September.
Israel has been receiving billions every year since it signed the Camp David Accords in 1978, with President Obama setting the annual aid amount to $3.8 billion through 2028.
The report also states the uniqueness of Israel’s aid situation with the United States: “Israel receives favorable financing arrangements related to U.S. military aid. For example, U.S. aid is provided on a ‘cash flow’ basis, which means that Israel is able to finance multi-year purchases from the U.S. based on future commitments, before the funds have been officially appropriated by Congress.” The report also points out that “unlike any other country in the world, Israel is allowed to spend 25% of its routine annual military aid from the United States on its own arms industry.”
Besides the increased financial cost of participating in Israel’s escalations, the human toll must be accounted for. Hamas fighters killed around 1,200 people in Israel on October 7, and Israel has killed at least 42,000 people in Gaza since. Additionally, almost 700 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank since October 7, 2023, as well as 1,400 people in Lebanon (Hezbollah fighters and civilians alike).
American soldiers have also been placed in a position of higher vulnerability. The roughly 3,500 soldiers spread out across Iraq and Syria have been subject to increased attacks from Iranian-backed militia groups since October of 2023, and could serve as a tripwire for a larger conflict.
The United States is almost certain to further involve itself in this conflict. To assist Israel in its response to Iran’s missile barrage, the American CENTCOM chief was sent to meet with Israeli defense officials on Sunday. Messaging around supporting Israel has been consistent as well. In a State Department briefing from October 3, spokesperson Matthew Miller said, “We have made clear from the start that we are committed to the defense of Israel and that we will remain committed to the defense of Israel.” He added, “our security partnership with them dates back decades, and we expect it to continue well into the future. We are also having conversations with them about the shape of that campaign [against Iran], the scope of that campaign, what their targets are going to be, but I don’t want to get into it beyond that.”
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.