CNN reports on the growing rift in the GOP on defense spending.
The report quotes mainly past statements from the likes of Tom Coburn, Rand Paul, Mark Kirk and Pat Toomey on why the defense budget cannot be off limits to budget cuts.
And the article also quotes Buck McKeown, the ranking House Armed Services member
The growth in the department's top line is insufficient to address the future capabilities required by our military. One percent real growth in the defense budget over the next five years is a net cut for investment and procurement accounts. A defense budget in decline portends an America in decline.
This is the money quote right now, however, since it seems that November 2's results have huge repercussions for the defense community:
The Tea Party movement is going to have more fights with the status quo Republican leadership than it will with the Democrats," said retired Col. Douglas Macgregor. "And what we're going to witness over the next two years is whether or not this political movement, which is quite powerful, will succeed in asserting itself and taking control of the Republican party.
It seems that someone should draw up a list of what the actual effects of certain considered cuts would be. If x were reduced in the budget, y would be the effect on the ground. Without some such tool, the debate will be driven by interest and ideology. The freshman class, driven to Washington almost entirely by domestic concerns, could benefit from some clear-headed analysis like that.
Comments