Oxymoron…Congress can solve the financial crisis they created

Today President Obama, in a hurriedly called appearance with the media that ended a day of uncertainty, said the proposed compromise on the budget would “allow us to avoid default and end the crisis that Washington imposed on the rest of America.” I think he should have said, “the proposed budget compromise that he and Washington thoughtlessly imposed upon America”, and added, ” by insuring we live within our means”.

He went on to say “The proposal ensures that we will not face this same kind of crisis again in six months, or eight months, or 12 months and it will begin to lift the cloud of debt and uncertainty that hangs over our economy.” Am I missing something here?  Congress just negotiated the country into spending another couple trillion dollars (we borrow more than 40¢ of every dollar the government spends), and that’s going to lift the cloud of debt we have over our head. Maybe we should be smoking whatever is that they are smoking up there in the White House.

Just before Mr. Obama spoke on television, Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell, the two Senate leaders, took the floor to endorse the pact as well. “I’m relieved to say that leaders from both parties have come together for the sake of our economy to reach a historic, bipartisan compromise that ends this dangerous standoff,” said the majority leader. The tentative agreement calls for $2.4 trillion in spending cuts over 10 years, but the debt ceiling was raised $2.4 trillion for this fiscal year. Hells bells, no wonder our kids are failing math in school; the Department of Education is teaching them…we cut an average of $240 billion a year but the government just got an increase in the credit ceiling…we’ll see what they say the next time they run us into the ditch and need even more money.

Every American family lives on a balanced budget or they soon go broke. Most of us were taught that when we were young. If we have to live that way, why have we let government run rampant with an unlimited credit card?

The impending limit on federal borrowing will trigger a lot of proposals for slashing future government outlays, but if and when the economy ever picks up, does anyone really take political promises for real? You may not like the Tea Party, and maybe you hate all politicians, but we really do need a “Balanced Budget Amendment”.  Most Americans who are not drinking the Kool Aid recognize that we can no longer afford Washington’s reckless spending binge, and even if they think the economy is picking up, Legislators will all be in the starting blocks with their sprint shoes on to see who can outspend who.  Don’t you love it when the same politicians that got the country into the financial mess are now the ones saying they can solve the problem?

Since the election of the current administration, the entire government has been in the hands of one party. Before that, during the Bush administration, the shoe was on the opposite foot. I wrote a column last week that was critical of “one party rule” and I was as serious as a heart attack when I made that claim that split party rule worked best for the country, as it creates checks and balances. Many conservatives, who otherwise claim they are for fiscal responsibility, believe in big government spending for at least one federal department – the Pentagon.  Unfortunately they are misguided into to thinking that all Pentagon expenditures are right on target.

Boeing overcharged the U.S. Army up to 177,000 percent on helicopter spare parts — $71.01 for a metal pin worth 4 cents that the Pentagon already had plenty of in storage — according to an audit by the Department of Defense’s inspector general and obtained by the Project on Government Oversight. Additionally The IG found that the Army should have only paid $10 million instead of the nearly $23 million it was charged by Boeing, for various parts, which are about 130 percent above “fair and reasonable” prices. When legislators think of budget cuts, the best place to start is with waste.

The Congressional Budget Office came up with a list 600 federal programs that often overlap and cover the same ground. The Department of Education takes control out of the hands of local schools and wastes billion in the process. The Department of Energy, established to eliminate US dependency on foreign oil back in 1977, a seemingly innocuous request, now has the US in a position where we are importing far more oil that we did back then, shut off oil exploration, and has oil comfortably sitting around $100 a barrel. The Department of Interior has taken control of nearly 650 million acres which is about 30% of the country, shutting off access to energy exploration and blocking job-creating commerce. The whole thing is a mess.

Well, you better hold on to your hat partner, we veterans may be in for a bumpy ride and can’t let our guard down. We should all know we are riding in the back of the bus when the military budget is up for review.

The military/industrial complex which waves around lucrative lobbying jobs and consulting opportunities to those who throw money in their direction always seems to have “first dibbs” at the government’s teat. Most of us who have served probably know a million ways the Defense Department can lower costs. Heck we had the Hawk Missile program when I was in the Corps and during its illustrious history was never shot in anger at an enemy aircraft. From a budget in excess of $700 million, our military account for 48% of the entire worlds’ military spending, so there’s no doubt a lot of fluff there without touching veteran’s services.

The rhetoric from the mouth of legislators is always the same… anyone suggesting a smaller U.S. government role in the world is an “isolationist”, and if you suggest slow planned spending increases or making cuts, you are out to “gut” the military. Let’s be honest here. Do we really need to be the world’s policeman? Can’t Western Europe take care of itself? Do we have to pay 75% of the NATO bill and 22% of the UN expenses? I mean there are 192 countries that are members of the UN, and none of their representatives even bother to pay their parking tickets!

Spending less on the military is equated with a desire to weaken defense.  For instance, one columnist accused President Obama of intending to hollow out the military and seeks to render our military neither well-armed nor well-planned which calls into question our nation’s ability to remain a free people for much longer. Adjusted for inflation our military outlays today are higher than at any point in the Cold War, Korean War, or Vietnam War. Military outlays are not the same as defending America, just as spending money on the Department of Housing and Urban Develop is not the same as housing America.  In fact, most of what the Pentagon does has little to do with protecting the nation.

America’s continuing security-guarantee afforded by military spending, subsidizes Europe’s generous welfare states.  Our support of continued high military spending in favor of cuts in Medicare at home allow us to help Western Europe preserve socialized medicine abroad, because they don’t have to pay much for defense.

In the next couple of days we will begin to see Congress’ ideas where to make cuts. We will write more about how cuts will affect veteran’s services as they develop.

.

Ed Mattson

Following his service in the Marine Corps Ed Mattson built a diverse career in business in both sales/marketing and management. He is a medical research specialist and published author. His latest book is Down on Main Street: Searching for American Exceptionalism

Ed is currently Development Director of the National Guard Bureau of International Affairs-State Partnership Program, Fundraising Coordinator for the Warrior2Citizen Project, and Managing Partner of Center-Point Consultants in North Carolina.

Mr. Mattson is a noted speaker and has addressed more than 3000 audiences in 42 states and 5 foreign countries. He has been awarded the Order of the Sword by American Cancer Society, is a Rotarian Paul Harris Fellow and appeared on more than 15 radio and television talk-shows.