
![]() |
|
|

| [-] |

| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
Prev | List | Random | Next |

Barney Frank on defense in a home state paper:
In a meeting with the editorial board of The Standard-Times, Rep. Frank, D-Mass., also called for a 25 percent cut in military spending, saying the Pentagon has to start choosing from its many weapons programs, and that upper-income taxpayers are going to see an increase in what they are asked to pay.Lot's of folks are outraged, outraged I tell you, over Frank's stated desire to implement what would amount to lethal cuts in defense spending in time of war.Frank further clarified: "We don't need all these fancy new weapons. I think there needs to be additional review."
Here's the defense budget, in billions of dollars:
Operations and maintenance-----------------------------$179.8
Military Personnel-------------------------------------------$125.2
Procurement-------------------------------------------------$104.2
Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation----------$79.6
Military Construction----------------------------------------$21.2
Family Housing--------------------------------------------------$3.2
Resolving and Management Funds---------------------------$2.2
Total Base Spending-----------------------------------------$515.4
Eliminate 100% of procurement - eliminate every American job making armor and bullets and "fancy new weapons" in multiple House districts across the country - and you've reduced that budget by 20% - five short of Frank's goal. Of course, there's no further need for that R&D spending (15%) any more (or that silly "personnel" and "operations" waste...)
But frankly folks, that's not what Barney wants to do. The budget was just passed this month. President Bush signed it into law on October 15th (with 5 billion in pork - America was too distracted by the financial crisis to notice...) - it's so new that some numbers above might be incorrect. (It also already includes the suplementals for Iraq and Afghanistan) But if Frank wanted it lowered, he missed his big chance.
So if destroying the nation's military isn't his goal, what is?
While cutting the 8.8 billion dollars spent on missile defense (at nearly two percent the largest "fancy weapon" piece of the defense pie) sounds great to folks who know what they'd do with that money, Frank's goal is more short-term: damage defense stocks on the market. (Gasp! Surely you can't be serious? Investors certainly won't respond to threats of falling stock prices and higher taxes on those falling profits, will they?)
Yes. This little market assault is well-disguised as a slap at defense spending - an always popular tactic in economic downturns except among greedy Wall Street tycoons and, um, those Americans who earn their paychecks in defense plants. But they're a real minority, and the number of folks who know what they'd do with that money is far larger (though their odds of getting even a tiny piece of it are microscopic). So neither that slap or the market fall will hurt Frank (or his Party) at the polls. Quite the opposite, in fact. Ironically, that boost will drive those stock prices down even more - etc., etc., etc...
Later, when they're in full control, they can do what they want with defense spending (within the confines of Barack Obama's pledge to pull some - but not all - troops from Iraq and put them in Afghanistan). That will be none of your damn business, by the way, because they've got a mandate, and who gives a damn what long-forgotten comment Barney Frank said in October - he isn't even on a defense committee.
Besides, he'll be much too busy (as House Banking Committee chairman) in his efforts towards fixing this damn housing mess Bush got us into:
He said he also wants some effort placed on building affordable rental housing, since there are a great many people for whom home ownership is either out of reach or doesn't make sense for other reasons. That would be a departure, he said, from the Bush era emphasis on home ownership to the point where people were given mortgages they could not afford to pay.What's that you say? You didn't know that was all Bush's fault? It's not - in fact, many would argue Barney Frank bears much more of the blame. But that matters little - like determining the defense budget, assigning blame and rooting out the Ephraimites is part of the mandate, the sort of thing the next congress will get to do. (I suspect they'll tackle both tasks with gusto. And if you can't say "affordable rental housing" without shedding a tear or cracking a smile, you are indeed an Ephraimite.)
But don't worry, if all else fails on economic rescue, the Goodwar will do the trick (and pssst, you didn't hear it from me, but look how cheap these defense stocks are...) and defense spending can be ramped up much faster than you can say "buy Northrup!"
It's a win-win.
By the way, I don't give stock market advice - don't consider the above to be that in any way. But I will offer this advice to those of you - male and female - under age 30: start doing some pushups, situps, and running now. It's good for you no matter what, but it will make basic training (and forget about using that "I'm gay" option to avoid the draft) a lot easier if you get the call.
So that's a win-win for you, too.