It’s pretty clear that
militaries around the world are growing in size and sophistication. Notable in
this group are China (which finally has a modern, operating aircraft carrier),
Russia and, oh yes, Iran. Notwithstanding that the U.S. accounts for 41% of
global military spending with a force that has not won a major conflict since
World War II, Trump and the GOP have prioritized a much larger military. Over
supporting education. Research. And even on infrastructure, while Trump sees
the need, the Congressional leadership has told the President-elect that he can
expect less and will have to wait, since this rather large expense is not a
Republican priority by any means. Unless you count the “Wall” with Mexico as
infrastructure.
So the United States has
pledged to accelerate our military spending to counter these global trends from
our traditional foes. Nobody seems to stop and ask what our military is
protecting when we will not educate our children into a competitive world, are unwilling
to repair and enhance one of the most inefficient and dilapidated
infrastructures in the developed world and are unwilling to spend money in
scientific research that once created the innovation that pushed us to the top
spot among global economies.
Trump has already
signaled a willingness to engage in an arm’s race with nuclear powers, and no
one has begun to put a price tag on that expansion. You have to wonder how many
nukes it really does require to kill every living thing on this planet… when we
have long had that power with our existing arsenal. This is a late December
Trump-Tweet: ““The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear
capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.”
No specifics. No numbers. No clear goals. You’d think that cyber-security,
where we really are vulnerable, would be the focus. But you know that’s not
something Trump really wants to champion.
However, there are more
concrete areas where the numbers are easier to analyze. Let’s look at the
estimates in one of the most sensitive areas of American military procurement:
sea power. “The Navy on average has spent $15.9 billion annually on ship
building over the past three decades, according to a new report by the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO). In order to meet the Republican
president-elect's goal, the navy shipbuilding account would have to be boosted
to $25 billion a year, 60 percent higher than the historical average.
“That will mean having to
find a way to lift the budget cap on defense spending by about $9 billion a
year... Trump is far from alone in his ambitions for expanding the U.S. fleet
to counter Russia, China, Iran and other global adversaries. Last month, the
Navy released a new force structure assessment – a blueprint for the future --
which calls for building a fleet of 355 ships. That is in sharp contrast to a
previous long-term goal of 308 ships.
“As of last November, the
U.S. fleet numbered 272 battle force ships, according to CBO. That included
aircraft carriers, submarines, surface combatants, amphibious ships, combat
logistics ships and some support ships. The proposed buildup would include an
additional aircraft carrier, more large warships and more attack submarines.”
AOL.com, January 8th. That’s just the ship building aspect of this proposed
expansion. Nobody has run the numbers yet on the tens of thousands, maybe more,
of sailors and operational vendors it will take to man those new boats and keep
that massive new fleet capacity afloat.
And while direct
engagement of workers by the government has been the horrible that Republicans
have railed against for years, Mr. Trump clearly sees this effort as
job-creation. “As our fleet is rebuilt, we'll need to invest in recruiting the
skilled American craftsmen we need, like welders and pipe fitters and so much
more… We will establish centers of excellence in places like Philadelphia and
Portsmouth, New Hampshire and Hampton Roads in Virginia to produce the master
craftsmen we need to rebuild our Fleet,” said Trump recently. Should the catchy
slogan that has been associated with Trump ascent be changed to “A Bigger
Better Swamp”?
And then there’s other
government make-work project, the great Mexican wall. Even though Trump pledged
that Mexico would pay for that construction, something the Mexican government
has promised never to do, Trump wants the U.S. to foot that bill in the
“interim.” “The Trump transition] team told GOP officials the real estate mogul
had signaled that the building of the wall be funded by American tax dollars
and not by Mexico, as he had previously claimed, CNN reported Thursday citing
House Republicans. Officials are looking to fund the construction using the
appropriations process as early as April.
“Trump’s team cited a
2006 law signed by former President George W. Bush that grants them the
authority to build the wall but the team is unclear of how it will fund the
construction. In October, the 70-year-old president-elect said Mexico would
reimburse the U.S. for the cost of the wall.
“The 2006 law allowed the
construction of a ‘physical barrier’ running for 700 miles on the country’s
southern border, Politico reported earlier Thursday [12/5]. The law was never
fully implemented and did not include a sunset provision allowing Trump to continue
where Bush left off using the funds Congress would allocate for the project.
“‘It was not done in the Obama administration,
so by funding the authorization that’s already happened a decade ago, we could
start the process of meeting Mr. Trump’s campaign pledge to secure the border,’
Indiana Rep. Luke Messer told CNN on Thursday [12/5].
“The GOP lawmaker said
the project would involve ‘big dollars, but it’s a question of priorities,’
citing Homeland Security Chairman Mike McCaul’s $10 billion border security
bill that he proposed last year…
‘Democrats may well find themselves in the position to shut down all of
government to stop the buildout of a wall, or of a barrier, or of a fence,’
Messer added.” UKProgressive.co, January 8th.
Trying to figure out
exactly how this wall benefits most of us is a tough one, particularly since
its greatest probable impact will be an excuse for cartels to raise the price
of illicit narcotics sold in the great drug-demanding northland. And trust me,
getting drugs into the United States has been and will continue to be a slam
dunk for these time-tested experts.
Add the promised tax
cuts, and some very, very big questions for exactly how we’re going to pay for
stuff we don’t need, cut the educational/research job-building programs that
would generate the kind of future income tax dollars we will need to sustain
all this and avoid a massive increase to an already unmanageable deficit. And
screw the sick and disabled as we dismantle the Affordable Healthcare Act that
could cost the country hundreds of billions simply to undo.
I’m
Peter Dekom, and it’s hard to believe that the federal government has not yet
made marijuana legal when it seems that the President-elect and his GOP cadres
must be smoking the stuff to come up with plans like this.
No comments:
Post a Comment