Ron Paul
Ron Paul


Ron Paul: The Sequester ‘Crisis’ And What Should Be Done – OpEd

By

Despite what the media and politicians would have us believe, the United States did not collapse last Friday when the package of spending reductions known as “sequestration” went into effect. The financial markets hardly blinked, as they have come to be more skeptical about these periodic government-hyped “crises.”

What had been portrayed as a drastic reduction in government spending was merely a decrease in the projected rate of increase in government spending over the next decade. Under sequestration, government spending increases by $2.4 trillion over the next 10 years rather than $2.5 trillion without it.

So we are speeding toward collapse at only 100 miles per hour instead of 110 miles per hour.

Some in Congress are using the panic over sequestration to justify another surrender of legislative authority to the executive branch. These members want to “pass the buck” on prioritizing federal programs by giving the president, cabinet officials, and high-level bureaucrats authority to set spending priorities. However, it is Congress’s job to set priorities in federal spending.

The drafters of the Constitution give the legislature the authority over spending because they recognized it was a threat to liberty to allow this power to be concentrated in the executive branch. Congress’s willingness to cede more authority to the executive should be opposed by everyone who values liberty and limited government.

Some of the loudest objections to sequestration have come from the champions of the military-industrial complex. Yet under sequestration defense spending will still increase by 18 percent over 10 years as opposed to 20 percent without sequestration.

There are claims that the military will face a one-time real reduction back to 2007 levels of spending, before beginning to climb again next year. That remains to be seen. However, few claimed at the time that 2007 levels of military spending, occurring as they did during the huge post 9/11 build-up, were inadequate.

But despite the fact that the US spends more on military than the rest of the world combined, we are told that even this modest, short-term reduction would be, in the words of outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, “shameful” and “irresponsible.” A return to 1980’s levels of military spending in real dollars – a time of significant military build-up – is considered outrageous even though the US faces no Soviet Union or equivalent threat.

In fact, the entire $1.2 trillion dollars that the sequester is supposed to save could be realized by cutting one unneeded, wasteful boondoggle: the $1.5 trillion F-35 fighter program. The F-35, billed as the next generation all-purpose military fighter and bomber, has been an unmitigated disaster. Its performances in recent tests have been so bad that the Pentagon has been forced to dumb-down the criteria. It is overweight, overpriced, and unwieldy. It is also an anachronism: we no longer face the real prospect of air-to-air combat in this era of 4th generation warfare. The World War II mid-air dogfight era is long over.

As defense analyst Winslow Wheeler wrote last year:

“It’s time for Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the U.S. military services, and Congress to face the facts: The F-35 is an unaffordable mediocrity, and the program will not be fixed by any combination of hardware tweaks or cost-control projects. There is only one thing to do with the F-35: Junk it.”

We should not look for cancellation of the F-35 program any time soon, however. The military industrial complex understands the political necessity of spreading its military Keynesianism as widely across Congressional districts as possible.

That is why F-35 manufacturer Lockheed-Martin can boast on its website that “the F-35 provides 127,000 direct and indirect jobs in 47 states and Puerto Rico.” What is unfortunately not understood is that these 127,000 workers would be far better utilized producing needed goods and services rather than treated as a jobs program disguised as national defense.

Despite the alarm over cuts that are not real cuts, it is clear that the US government is not serious at all about changing its ways. In a recent tour of the Middle East, newly-confirmed Secretary of State John Kerry announced that the US would be sending another $60 million to the rebels seeking to overthrow the Syrian government – in the midst of the sequester “crisis”!

Despite the rhetoric, there appears no intention on the part of the government to take our fiscal crisis seriously or abandon the idea that we should run the rest of the world.

Ron Paul

Ronald Ernest "Ron" Paul (born August 20, 1935) is an American physician, author, and politician who served as the U.S. Representative for Texas's 14th congressional district, which includes Galveston. He was a three-time candidate for President of the United States, as a Libertarian in 1988 and as a Republican in 2008 and 2012.

Source: Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity.

2 thoughts on “Ron Paul: The Sequester ‘Crisis’ And What Should Be Done – OpEd”

  1. Total 2012 budget: $3,795.547 billion
    Total 2013 budget: $3,803 billion

    Total 2012 defense budget: $683.0 billion
    Total 2013 defense budget: $672.9 billion

    Got these numbers from Wikipedia, are they correct?
    If so, that is a real cut of 1.47% in military spending, but a real increase in the overall budget.

    I wish the media would talk about the real budget, with the sequestration, and compare them to 2012 numbers.

    Another thing to think about is why should the spending always go up? One year, I might buy a car, but that does not mean that I need to spend more money next year on a more expensive car (or TV or carpet or furniture or laptop …) Doesn’t any expensive military equipment last for more than one year? Do the troops get big raises every year? What keeps getting more and more expensive to maintain?

  2. The REAL problem with the country seems to me the fact that “the PEOPLE” either don’t see, or don’t WANT to see what is actually going on today. Folks, the ‘MACHINE’ is broken. It is not being repaired. There is no “mechanic” working on it either. And it’s going to throw a rod. Oh, there does seem to be a lot of ‘diagnoses’ going on but, unfortunately, about 99 per cent of us will be “killed” in the “accident” when it occurs. It should be quite obvious that “it” is running out of control. You must “SEE” that the engine is GREEDY and needs to be repaired immediately. Actually it is a small problem, but it will take a lot of “tools” to make the repair, and a lead mechanic who who doesn’t overcharge. Is there anyone who will stand for us? Are we really going to let this country and all it’s principals and values die? If we eliminate the GREED, and flush the Washington Toilet, and fill it with fresh water, we can have our “dream” back. It’s going to take COURAGE…and “common sense” with the values of morality, honor, and patriotism. ( No longer instilled in our youth)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>