E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSA lot of rhetoric is being thrown about in discussing the Pentagon budget. Reporter R. Jeffrey Smith from the Center for Public Integrity takes a look at what's actually been proposed by President Obama, in his explainer, "Puncturing the hot air balloons on defense spending: A reader's guide to the debate in 2012." The Center for Public Integrity is a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigative reporting group in Washington.
Smith's takeaway summary:
Obama’s national security spending plan does not cut the defense budget. Even if his proposal is enacted, U.S. defense spending will continue to dwarf the rest of the world’s. The new U.S. military strategy was concocted to accommodate the proposed budget trims, not vice versa. Sequestration is a threat, not a promise. And no matter what politicians say or do this year, U.S. defense spending will remain vulnerable to real cuts. The important question in the years ahead is, which military programs will survive and which will go away.
Read the full story here from the Center for Public Integrity.
Leave a Comment:
And the republicans breath a sigh of relief
Been there- too bad you don't get it: The federal budget is rigged and it's all political rhetoric when they talk about cuts. I'll explain. Federal spending, sorry for that budget misnomer as they haven't had a passed federal "budget" in over 1,000 days, has expansion built in it- to the tune of 3.5-5% per year, so when a politician (the President, Congress, etc.) gets up and says, "we are going to cut spending" it's all code words. They then proceed to "cut" 1% from that 3.5-5% increase, so they are still spending MORE.
The biggest issue I see with the military is what to do with all of the new veterans coming back from overseas. As you've seen, there aren't new jobs around so it will be increasingly hard for our soldiers to go back into civilian life. They are going to need jobs to support their families, but there aren't many to go around. THAT will be the big issue coming up.
beentheredonethat, your comment is old hat
I knew Obama would be too Chicken Sh!t too follow through on another promise, defense spending cuts. Come on Republicans, throw me someone worth MY vote and we can deal. You stick with Romney or Gingrich and Obama's got 4 more coming on.
I think we need to wait to see what 2012 brings. Due to some things out of our control, the predicted outlook is that the economy will grow only slightly. Even if they only cut projected increases for now, it is a step towards a more balanced budget. Bernanke is putting a cap on inflation growth until 2016 (I think). This will help keep government spending and the deficit from turning the economy into one of chaotic inflation. He also plans to keep interest rates at 0+ for some time to come. This gives the central government more time to budget and adjust their fiscal short comings.
sounds Like; a ball tossing political game here..how can anyone give a candid comment here ??....
We got big problem. RIght now the banksters are trying to settle out of court for the fraud they committed.
The SEC and OCC are a failed institutions and Have Eric Holder , with zero convictions on these top ten banks who are serial fraud abusers. In the past 4 years all the top 10 banks have been settling with SEC with fraud of one kind or another.
Why is this important with defense spending?
We have a chance again to get the economy moving. We have 62 million homes in MERs that will be effected by the outcome of the possible 25 billion proposed settlement the banks have offered.
Its too small. We want a settlement that will jump start the economy. We can start at 30% off the principal of the home and reduction in interested rates irrespective of credit score to 2 basis points for all mortgages in MERs.
Thats the starting point. Else these pigs can do jail time.
WE have criminals hiding behind the corporations law and the banks pay the fine when the criminality was done by individuals. This is totally wrong. These people are not the investors. They are the employees and they made decisions willfully to de-fraud people and accounting control fraud for phoney profits.
OBama , if you make a deal, help the economy. F+k the banksters.
The economy grows, The taxes increase. Win win, Banksters go jump.
The main reason we are in this hole of debt is the rich folk are not paying enough tax. Under FDR they paid 93%, Obama only asks for 30%. Its not enough f+k the b+tchs. They pay 50% more on income.
Do not believe the rubbish that they cant afford or some crap. Tax the rich F+king liars.
* We got big problems.
Rich F+kers pay your damn tax. Your gonna pay it one way or another. You stole it anyhow. You know it. I know it.
Religion stops the poor murdering the rich.
They got another 2 Trillion increase while the economy shrunk by 5 to 10 trillion.
Hey johny, can't even spell your name right, quit being jealous/envious of people that have done something with there lives, get off you ass, get a job, and contribute to society like most people. I am sure people, like myself who pay taxes, are tired of supporting you lazy ass. And no, I am not rich, but I work hard, pay my taxes, keep myself living within my means and have a good life. So quit with the Robin Hood crap, "Steal from the Rich to give to the Poor" and make something of yourself, besides a whiner!
tiredofitall14: Well, whatever wrong you felt was done to you by Johny doesn't really give you the right to assume things about him either. Thats called being hypocratic. Look, how do you know Johny doesn't have a job? But Johny, religion doesn't stop the poor from murdering the rich. Religion is a vehicle of war for the poor and rich alike. In any event, Johny isn't far off. The "rich f*ckrs" Johny refers too is not you or me, but the golden parachute boys and friends. This idea that we must cut taxes to create jobs is a sloppy unproven supply-side economic theory. It's a theory that fails every time in practice because the ONLY way a business will hire another person is if they need to. Johny is tired of the income gap in this country and the fact that those who enjoy more that 50% of the wealth in this country do so unscrupulously. You could almost say Johny is "tiredofitall"
Well stated and Johny's critic cannot spell either. It is "their" not "there." Sometimes these commentators make me wonder just what motivates them to comment. Anger thus hurried responses that are faulted and biased due to emotional fervor.
Ron Paul actually would cut the defense spending, firstly, by bringing home our troops stationed around the globe doing noone any good at all! Bring the troops home, vote Ron Paul 2012!
trust2112 I knew Obama would be too Chicken Sh!t too follow through on another promise, defense spending cuts. Come on Republicans, throw me someone worth MY vote and we can deal. You stick with Romney or Gingrich and Obama's got 4 more coming on.
Before you attack the President, why not educate yourself. JoeNY hit the nail squarely on the head. Budgets are proposed years in advance and once they are approved they can be cut back if needed. ( For example: if the budget is 500 Billion and it's reduced by 5 Billion do you really notice the difference?) The POTUS did not go back on any promises ok? get it yet, or are you going to prove that you can't think for yourself and you believe everything negative that you read?
Panetta and the generals say there is a 13% cut in military spending. A far left think tank says it isn't. I'll go with Panetta and the generals. More bullshiite we've come to expect from MessNBC and Obama.
The cuts in defense spending are by SoD Panneta. Obama can and does say that he doesn't propose it, though. NOW do you understand? (I don't.)
Why bother reading the article if your mind is already made up? From the text of the original piece:
Do you get it? We're increasing what we're spending on the military - and we spend more than the next 10 or so nations combined. We are increasing by a smaller amount than we'd planned to initially.
A smaller increase is not the same as a cut. I'm not sure why that's a difficult concept for you.
Are we talking about a cut in actual, non-inflation adjusted dollars over the next 10 years? Inflation-adjusted dollars? Cuts in proposed spending? Or are we talking about a cut in the % of GDP we allocate towards military spending?
There are many ways to evaluate military spending, and both sides can claim opposite positions and believe themselves right. Here is an interesting analysis of the matter:
http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2011/aug/05/randy-forbes/forbes-says-us-defense-spending-measured-against-g/
That being said, this article is pure pro-Obama propaganda from a source well known for its' leftward lean.
Finally, whenever the GOP proposes cutting future spending for something the left supports, the Democrats always scream about "budget cuts". But the "cuts" are the exact same as the ones Obama is proposing here...cuts to future proposed spending. Actual dollar spending NEVER goes down when government is involved.
You can make your assumptions about a 'left think tank' all you want, but I'd argue the proof is in the pudding when you compare Obama's record with the military over the past three years and what Bush did in his 8.
Military with Obama as Commander: Killed Bin Laden, wiped out hundreds of leading Al Qaeda members, ended the war in Iraq, worked with the international community to end the Ghadafi regime in Libya without killing any Americans.
Military with Bush: None of the above.
Sorry to disappoint you Jack, but Bush had already put in place the end of the Iraq war before he left office. All Obama had to do was watch it happen. And the trail to get Osama was also in place before Obama took office. All he had to do was finish it.
Funny how he takes credit for some things Bush started which worked out to make him look effective, and is blameless for the rest, like the economy.
It all depends how you look at it. Inflation affects the military, too. They'll get reduced increases, which in turn will make them cut bases and weapons systems. Frankly, I'm all for it. Now that we're not fighting on two fronts, we don't need the ramped-up military spending we've engaged in since 9/11. The enemy is small and asymmetrical. We need highly specialized troops and weapons to combat them, not umpteen squadrons, warships, and combat brigades.
In the simplest possible terms - what I get from this is, no, the President isn't actually going to cut defense expenditures, but his plan is to lower them percentage-wise from years past.
This may be a case of semantics though. One man's reduction is another man's cut?
Hey I'm 100% with you Liberals and Progressives on this. This isn't a real cut at all. It's a reduction in increased spending. It's saying we're going to spend more but not as much more as we planned. Now the real question: why are you guys taking this tack with this issue and but pointed at Obama's "cuts" with his debt deal all last year? You guys bragged and bragged about his "cuts" and how they were the answer to everything and mana would soon fall from heaven. It's the exact same thing and I call bull@!$%# on your newfound fiscal "integrity". You're parroting the same bull@!$%# the establishment Republicans spout and I want to know why the flippity flip flip flopping. I'm beginning to think there is no such thing as intellectual integrity anymore. So just to make sure I understand: you call them cuts if it makes you look "responsible" and then spout out a bunch of smoke and mirrors crap when it doesn't? Got it.
Obama isn't technically lying. He is cutting the spending in the US and giving it to China and other foreign countries.
Really? I love how right wingers come here and complain that the site is 'left'. I see it as mostly independent with a little left attitude sometime. It's not like when I went to Fox News the other night the the article about the state of the union focused more on the republican response than about Obama's address. I don't go to Fox and complain that the people there are too right, I EXPECT IT! I'm an independent, but I like reading news that has a little less bias, than one that's so biased they don't produce real news(i.e. fox)!
Rob Rob Rob- Really there is video proof, that Bush had lost interest in OBL, and when Obama took office he said this is a #1 priority, and they made it so! Yes Bush did set up the timeline to get out of the Iraq War, HE STARTED IT.... How many in the GOP came out against, leaving Iraq and why? So Obama could be blamed!
Ask Bin Laden, Ask those recently rescued in Somalia, lol!!!!!!! Bush started Iraq for Personal reasons - and our kids died - Now that's a great president, lol. Obama is so clean that all they can do is twist his words, lol. Better get your ammunition boys, cause we're going to be taken over if Obama cuts spending, lol. Right Wingers are war mongers and racists now and Lincoln would be rolling over in his grave as this is NOT what his Republican Party was created for. You and your hypocritic vulture capitalists don't have enough money to beat us 99%, lol.
Yes, Bush established the date to leave Iraq. How many of you believe that if he had been around that we would have completely left, or even partially left, by that date? Hell no! There would be excuse after excuse, exactly like we heard from the republicants, why we can't leave, that we need to increase our troops, and other BS.
Bush talked the talk, but Obama walks the walk. Militants and terrorists are getting to be as afraid of Obama as the republicants are of Muslims.
So tired of hearing how the Bush administration had the location of OBL, how Bush's administration tactics of interrogating(aka waterboarding) gave us the whereabouts of OBL? Then why didn't Bush kill OBL on his way out the door? Wouldn't that have boosted John McCain's bid like it did Bush when he caught Saddam so conveniently before the 2004 election? He didn't know where the man was! It's pretty hard to find intel from Gitmo prisoners who have been out the loop for 5 years! People make it seem that Gitmo held #3,4, and 5 on the terror watch list!
I hope the budget for the DoD does get cut. We are spending a rediculous amount on a war maching hence the Military Industrial Complex that brought down the USSR will do the same for this country. We must get back to producing and increasing our GDP period. As for the vets coming back this is sad, but they do have GI educational benefits that they can take advantage of for tech training, a college degree or whatever area they qualify for. By doing so they will not put a immediate demand and load on the jobs market and unemployment lines. Of course many will not take advantage of the benefits offered to them. I see it everyday as a federal employee.
Many of these vets coming back try to fit into civil service positions without proper training and are unable to get jobs unless they invoke their five point system and in many instances are not qualified for the jobs but do get preference in hiring. Too bad the vets do not take the time and make the effort to go for and use their GI education benefits. It would be better for America if they did thus providing us with an educated workforce prepared for the positions they apply for.
what about bush mess and the dad
ITs a good thing. We dont have to spend all that cash over there. its cost a fortune for porta looes and buy inflated turkey for thanks giving over in iraq. The iraq turkeys are small too.
Them damn iraqies inflated the price all over. Then the private contractors and sh+t.
Now finally there is a drop in the spending. :).
We can build up for Iran. Don't you worry. We can pay for it. Seize the 20 trillion in assets from our own rich. Yes sir. Here is your problem. Those Evil Iranians. What?, its wrong to seize the assets of our own?
No they are patriots. TO make the USA safe. They hand it over to use.
WE can call it the Patriot making america better act. :) We can all send them letters in exchange with pictures of Obama sitting on a toilet with presidential seal.
Iran. Its dangerous for us all. ;) I learn from our Repubturds. :)
OMG you mean this was all just Republican BS I'm so surprised! /sarc
Leon Panetta's a republican? Dude, someone should tell him that. He was a sitting representative for the Democratic party for decades (1977-1993).
His take? Well, it's another article right here on the good 'ol MSNBC:
Panetta: Military cuts to hit 'all 50 states'
Actually it is libitard propaganda. You people still do everything to deny the fact. A cut is a cut in the increase, always has been. You libitards and DNC media only tell the truth when it comes to the military. When it comes to the handout programs it is a cut
R. Jeffrey Smith from the Center for Public Integrity is almost right. A cut is a cut no matter how you try to spin it! The Pentagon can't even do a simple audit to tell us what is being spent and you want me to believe that we can't spend our tax payer money more cautiously, Please! I also stated before that we as a nation have to get cash out of the hands of politician's and into the hands of the people! No more government programs, ear marks, Entitlements, or food stamp presidents! Cut, but cut everyone, NOW!
Get us out of the Bush/Cheney wars and we could cut defense spending by 50% still dwarfing the rest of the world by 50%
Comparing our defense spending to what the rest of the world spends is not an accurate measurement of whether we're cutting defense spending or not. But that's government-speak, I guess.
I would never trust the right wingers on something like this. On the other hand I would never trust a worthless fascist traitor like Obama either. As far as I'm concerned, Liberal Democrat = Nazi.
heartfart- Just love all the hyperbolic terms, we are Nazi's now LMAO... And give some facts on how President Obama is a worthless fascist traitor? Quick the clock is ticking...... crickets.... thanks for playing I don't ever know what I'm talking about game show! YOUR A WINNER!
Don't worry iran is next when we get another Repubturd president.
Are you surprised there are no cuts? Has government ever cut spending on anything? Has anyone in government ever told the truth?
I believe we spend more than the wold combined. I believe it protects the interest of US big money corporations and billionaires around the world. My question is why me and you foot the biggest part of the spending?
Furthermore we are protecting other nations for free and watching their economies thrive (S Korea). Should not our protected countries/friends contribute at lest 50-75% of that cost (protection money fees)? Shouldn't we just close 50% of our bases around the world and dump that into the Navy to deploy as needed? Just my 2 cents, any other common sense thoughts are welcome!
Either way you look at it, it is cuts.
This is hogwash.
If you cut ANYTHING the military community and the private sector suffer.
Realignment would be a better option.
And, Rick has a valid point.
If we are to be responsible to police why not have other countries pay into the tab?
I will tell you why.
Because then it will make us look like we are planning to take over the planet.
Wheels, we're out of the Bush/Cheney war......the one we're fighting now with no clear path to victory is Obama's war. He could have ended it long ago, instead he has tripled the troops fighting it.
More political double-speak. Personally, I feel strongly - both ways. "I voted against it before I was for it".
Haven't we had enough? Throw them all out, POTUS included, at the earliest opportunity, and get a clue: their stock-in-trade is to polarize us, get us to label ourselves under false pretenses, and have us fighting each other instead of addressing the problem, which is THEM!
If you still believe: "The Republicans are for Big Business, and the Democrats are for the Working Man", I have some nice ocean-front property in Wyoming to sell you. Wake the F up! They are using us, and we are buying into it! Good Grief! Take a step back, look at what's going on, and try to see how we are being shined on by these miscreants that call themselves "public servants".
So now MSNBC is giving Obama credit for proposing defense cuts to appease his far left base and then saying he isn't proposing defense cuts in order to appease mainstream America. Your dishonesty in promoting Obama's re-election campaign while pretending to be objective journalists demonstrates a deep disrespect for the intelligence and integrity of the American people. Shame on you.
Sorry, dougjmiller, but we're not MSNBC. That's a TV network in New York. We're msnbc.com, a Web site in Redmond, Wash. We're half-sister companies, but not the same company.
Usually better to aim before firing.
Dear Bill Dedbrain, a lame attempt at justifying your lack of integrity. If you had integrity you wouldn't use the NBC to hide your left wing advocacy. The criticism of what you write is still true, no matter what name you hide behind.
Mr. Dedman,
Who wrote and edited "No President Obama isn't actually proposing to cut defense spending"?
Isn't it customary and ethical for the author of an article to identify himself/herself/themselves? Did you write the article?
Way to go Obama!! Cut the stuff we don't use and need anymore, invest in drones, and other tech, keep the good stuff. Actually for those that don't know, defence spending is actually GOING UP, so this article is true. Getting rid of assets you don't use EVER and don't need is a good thing.
BTW: PolitiFact has now been PROVEN to be BIASED and NOT BASED on FACT.
Republicans soon forget, that if Obama wasn't in office, we would NOT be leaving IRAQ, and we WOULD have left Afghanistan, and Bush decided Osama bin laden was no longer worth going after. Are you kidding me? The person behind the attack on USA is no longer important to capture or kill? Good ole, Obama made good on his promise and signed an order as soon as entering office to capture or kill him as a top priority.
Fact: We killed Osama bin laden via directive from Obama.
Fact: We pulled out of IRAQ due to directive from Obama.
Fact: We are pulling out of Afghanastan due to directive from Obama.
Fact: Obama increased drone strikes 100 fold against what Bush did, and because of it, we are killing terrists in 7 DIFFERENT countries right now. Have wiped out most of Al-Q.
We may actually not be fighting wars soon, and that is crazy after 2 decades.
I work in the Defense industry. My company and those just like us are down 40% in the last year. 10s of thousands of breadwinners flushed from that Middle Class teleprompter man says he supports. They have cancelled the rockets, they are making headlines with projects funded before this administration.
They are still building the next generation manned capsule but have canceled the only rocket that could put it up.
They have cancelled the next weather satellites, probably because they do not want real data that is showing Global Warming is also happening on Mars and Venus at the same pace an Earth.
Obama like his SEALS headlines but future presidents will not know where to send them OR have a way to get there.
It would be easier to take 40% plus layoffs if we saw even 1/40th of a cut to welfare, bonuses to those Wall Streeters who caused this mess, or medicare fraud etc etc etc.
What Obama is doing in ACTIONS is 180 degrees from his campaign rhetoric talk. He is gutting our military so start learning Chinese. By the way the Chinese do not have medicaid etc so that will stop when they take over
"gutting the military"...while still spending huge amounts? Maybe its just your company that got unlucky.
and if we aren't doing the exact right things in terms of spending every dollar, i doubt that is obama's fault. He's not exactly issuing purchase orders.
The Defense Industry is another name for a bunch of crooks sucking on the government teat. They are worse than welfare queens in that they only produce death and destruction at huge expense to the taxpayer. Remember the $600.00 hammers and $1000.00 commode seats?? Go and do something for the betterment of your fellow man, not something to kill him.
So cutting the military back means that we are going to be taken over my the Chinese? Really? Why haven't they tried in all their glorious years? They knew we were strapped thin with Iraq, Afghanistan, and watching/aiding Japan or South Korea! Why didn't they take over in 2001 when 9/11 happened or 2003 when we started with "Shock and Awe"? So if Obama cut down 60,000 military jobs, we all of sudden lose? Wow! You do know that during my term in the military, they had three BRAC (Base Realignment and Closure) rounds of closures! The last one was in 2005. Nobody cried for the military then! Why are you crying now?
Now we leave iraq. Thats just plain wrong. If we were still in iraq we could attack Iran. They got to attack iran because they are going nuclear. Then who is next? Damn Im stumped.
Don't you worry we get another republican president and then i will feel safer in constant war. :)
Don't worry our banksters are making enemies for us around the world.
Then we shoot at them with drones. Its fun shooting some towel head on a donkey with half a million missile.
I'm tired of "plausible deniability".
jajaja!!! You are a d!@$ person if you think the Chinese are taking over. Stop being scared of them they aren't taking over anything. Their gdp is about 5 trillion us is 15 trillion. We have assets worth more than 230 trillion dollars. How much do you think theirs is?
Anyone who tells you otherwise, anyone who tells you that America is in decline or that our influence has waned, doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
And you sir don't know what you are talking about.
It won't be this year or the next. But, I'll say it: DRAFT. It's a good thing they added Chief of the National Guard Bureau to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Citizen Army....nah, a force in reserve that we don't have to draft, WHEN the time comes. BOHICA! Bend Over Here It Comes Again. Increase out of pocket for retirees? VA Med Ctr's get ready for major influx. Cut the young military's retirement benefits? We sure as heck didn't work for the paycheck.
Unionize the military. Yep, that's the ticket. Overtime would be such a bugger. Where's OSHA? Have you seen the unsafe working conditions? Where's my shop stuart? I'm not taking that hill, it's not in my job description. Wake up and UNIONIZE, my military brothers and sisters. Good enough for fed workers? Good enough for Obama and his minions to go to battle for?
Well, it should be good enough for our military. You'd get better benefits and would become millionaires on the union backed COLA's for retirees. Hmmm.
Bull @!$%#. He has cancelled four destroyers, aircraft and, four needed aircraft carriers, and killed the American Space Program and he calls it beget cuts when in fact the Military not only is his largest budgets target and has been cut by every president as a ploy. Military programs also creates jobs and technology discovers new medical and other advances that help society. It is a job killer. MSNBC are liars too. China will not only be a stronger military and Iran will not only begin a nuclear arms race and sell oil cheaper to China's industries, they will make new breakthroughs in to help society in better ways as they stand on the moon and their children can still dream unlike ours. This is all a Crap story of a socialist and Harry Reed and Pelosi running the Senate that have given $1.2 Trillion dollars for green energy that is 1/20 of the solution.
The Unions and Volt built batters the direst from of energy that explode for GM a government company against the constitution. He has no budget cuts just smoking mirrors. Obama the Liar King.
Military programs also creates jobs***
I guess that is an exception to the Republican doctrine that government doesn't create jobs.
JG:
I propose your whole post is Bull$#!t. When we have 11 carriers currently and the next nation closest to us has 2, we need not build more. China recently got 1, and that they purchased from the Russians and outfitted the carrier with their electronics ect.
When we spend more than the next 10 nations combined on defense, there is a problem. While the technologies developed do benefit some areas of the economy, the newest is usually so SECRET, that they don't want anyone using the stuff so it's not released to the general public. While most medical advances come from the private sector, and universities, NOT the military.
It's so obvious that you listen to FAUX, RUSH, and Glen. Just because you call someone a socialist doesn't make it true. And if you'd read the whole story, it is far from being complimentary of the POTUS, rather pointing out that rather than reducing spending, they are but decreasing the amount that was to be spent in the future. Try growing a brain ....
No. The chinese have a stamp with that is blue coloured . Its a sign that they challenging us.
We have to make a bigger stamp and put turkey on it .
:)
Funny, I have just been let go by one of the largest if not the largest defense contractor here in Michigan, I was told directly due to buget cuts
so basically one of Obama's "secretaries" proposes a cut to spending in whatever area they are responsible for, making Obama look like the good guy by not proposing it himself. He will however have final say and sign off on it since it was most likely his motives that pushed the secretary to make the proposal.
I love politics.
Let's see, less troops doing more work for the same pay. Yup, sounds like a cut to me. Nailing the retirees with more fee's for healthcare. Ditto. Civilian jobs in support of military operations cut. Yes. Executive or legislative branches of government taking any reductions in their pay or benefits? Hell no! I'd personally like to see the entire lot of them in Washington packed into a few transport planes and dropped off, let's say, in balmy Afghanistan or across the border of Iran, or perhaps Syria. Gear em up with M-16's and see if they would do anything on a soldier's pay. I would imagine the closest the president has ever been to firing a gun is playing "duckhunt" on the old Nintendo.
ron paul 2012
I know, he doesn't ever cut spending. That's why if he is re-elected we will be worse off than Greece.
All presidents lies, this one no different!