In today's remarks by President Obama he points out that "The Government Accountability Office, the GAO, has looked into 96 major defense projects from the last year, and found cost overruns that totaled $296 billion, an amount of money that would have paid our troops' salaries and provided benefits for their families for more than a year."
What is a 'cost overrun' I wonder. And whatever it is where was the government or military 'oversight' that would have prevented those cost overruns from taking place? And if they were 'overruns' shouldn't they (the contractors) by told to give the monies back to the government (us) ? To figure this enormous sum let's just cut the $600 billion in half and it comes out to around $4,000.00 for each family of four in America. So, perhaps, these companies owe each of us $1,000 or $4,000 per family and need to send us checks for those amounts which it took by 'overruns.
Since the American public has been gouged to the sum of $296 billion from our government's 'oversight' of these 'overruns' are we to just trust another $600 plus billion to be given for the military defense budget?
The President, in his address, points out military 'programs' and specific weapons that have been eliminated and those which have been added onto the budget.
Perhaps they come out about even, who knows? To say though that this is a grand step forward is overstretching it a lot. To say it is a start of accountability and reasonableness too is overstating the choices and decisions made by the military, congress and the administration on this budget.
To be fair, since it is the money of the American people why don't we ask them (us) is we want to spend such sums for the military/national defense? I suppose we could do so with all the sophisticated technology available to us. If we can vote for candidates we could vote for money to be spent (called appropriations). It would take some doing but might not it be worth it?
Oh, but one might say that we do that already through our representatives in Congress. They vote of the budget for us. Yes, that is so but look, my friends, what they have done with that responsibility now and over the years!
Perhaps if we asked ourselves if we trust those representatives now or in the upcoming elections next year they might not be the people we really want to decide for us how to spend that $8,000 per family of four for the military budget.
Do I sense change in the wind?
When I listen to or read about the news I often hear the argument by politicians that they must vote according to their party or for the benefit of the next election results. And then there's those special interests, behind the scenes, that capture their attention along with campaign contributions from those companies who court the favor of our representatives in Washington.
In a recent video clip someone estimated that there are 3 lobbyists for every1 Congressperson. Three to one mind you. Can you imagine what it looks like in the Capitol, in its hallways and offices with over 1500 lobbyists milling around on any particular day. If we don't have any laws to prevent this pervasive influence wouldn't it best serve the interests of the American people to have such laws made?
Today President Obama signed the Defense Authorization Act but that decision and those monies can still be challenged. America is already the largest military power in the world, but it's future strength needs to be concerned with other ways of doing things. Diplomacy and disarmament are keynotes for a truly progressive society; types of perspectives and actions taken much more frequently by the European Union, 27 Nations bond together for peaceful purposes, for the most part.
Most, if not all of those countries believe in disarmament evidenced in the signing of International Treaties; i.e. the Land Mine Ban Treaty, the Cluster Munitions Ban Treaty and the Arms Trade Treaty.The United States has falled to sign onto any of them.These treaties greatly help to restore damaged property from previous wars, help victim's needs, prevent the manufacture, sale and transfer of those weapons, and do things that maintain and insure that communication between countries is necessary before any conflict is seriously considered. In other words it is peace first and war making last...
If we can budget $600 billion for national defense surely we can join with the peace-minded International Community and sign onto those International Treaties that save lives and limbs now and in the future. We, the activists, must insist that our representatives disregard the cries of the military industrial complex who may be faced with the need to stop producing certain weapons.
Disarmament needs to be seen as the way forward, along with diplomacy and negotiations in settling disputes and conflicts. More military funding and war fighting will not win us - or anyone- peace in the long-run. We must win over the hearts and minds of our Administration and Congress.
We need a new progressive vision for America that sees peacemaking as much more valuable than warmaking!
