Should the enormous US military budget—which is more than double the
combined levels of military spending by China, the United Kingdom,
France, Russia and Germany—be cut? This question is finally on the
table, thanks to the winding down of combat activities in Iraq and
Afghanistan and to Washington’s obsession with tamping down the federal
deficits that have arisen from the Great Recession. Many who would like
to protect the military from the budget knife raise economic arguments
to make their case: Won’t cutting military spending be bad for jobs,
just when we need to maintain focus on reducing unemployment? Won’t it
threaten the country’s long-term technological capabilities?
The matter assumed increased urgency in November after the
Congressional supercommittee failed to agree on a deficit-reduction
plan. This failure set in motion an agenda for automatic cuts—or
“sequestration” of funds—from military and nonmilitary budgets beginning
in January 2013. According to the sequestration scenario, absent the
adoption of a large-scale deficit-cutting plan, military and nonmilitary
spending would face $55 billion per year in automatic cuts over a
decade, relative to previously established spending levels. If Congress
and the White House devise a way to exempt the Pentagon from the
automatic cuts—as seems increasingly likely—the cuts will instead be
taken from healthcare, education, social spending, infrastructure and
the environment.
