National defense is one of the few legitimate functions of the federal government, but that doesn’t mean the military should get a blank check to spend unlimited amounts of money.
To make sure taxpayers get the best bang for the buck (no pun intended), there should be a sober assessment of threats to national security and a plan to defend against those threats without adding superfluous expenditures.
That being said, America already accounts for close to 50 percent of world military spending, with another 25 percent of the global total coming from nations that are allied to the United States, so I’m fairly confident that we’re not under-spending on the Pentagon.
That’s one of the reasons I don’t worry that much about the sequester, particularly since military spending actually climbs by about $100 billion over the next 10 years.
But I would like the Defense Department to have some flexibility to reallocate funds so that we spend money on national security rather than boondoggles.
And there are some absurd examples of waste at the Pentagon, including “green” jet fuel that costs 15 times as much as regular fuel. Here are some of the mind-boggling details from the Washington Examiner.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel recently warned that sequestration would cause “suspension of important activities, curtailed training, and could result in furloughs of civilian personnel” but the spending cuts haven’t killed the green fuels program, as the Pentagon has continued purchasing renewable fuel at $59 per gallon. “In March, Gevo entered into a contract with the Defense Logistics Agency to supply the U.S. Army with 3,650 gallons of renewable jet fuel to be delivered by the second quarter of 2013,” Gevo announced this week in its first quarter financial report. “This initial order may be increased by 12,500 gallons.
This is even worse than the bizarre $600,000 frog statue than the Defense Department selected to adorn a new $700 million office building.
I realize that the $700 million office building should be the bigger issue, but I can’t help but be irked by the thought that taxpayers are being raped and pillaged for the frog.
In any event, the $700 million for the office building is pocket change compared to the amount of money we misallocate to subsidize Western Europe to protect against a Warsaw Pact military alliance that no longer exists!
Yes, it’s true that America’s main fiscal problem is entitlement spending. And, yes, domestic discretionary spending is a bigger problem than the defense budget.
But wasting money in those areas is not a reason to also have waste at the Pentagon.
[…] if supporters of a strong military opposed some of the many ways that politicians insert waste, fraud, inefficiency, and pork in the Pentagon’s […]
[…] if supporters of a strong military opposed some of the many ways that politicians insert waste, fraud, inefficiency, and pork in the Pentagon’s […]
[…] that “I’m very sympathetic to the proposition that trillions of dollars that have been misspent on foreign adventurism this […]
[…] people that I’m very sympathetic to the proposition that trillions of dollars that have been misspent on foreign adventurism this century. Not to mention the human cost of dead and wounded American […]
[…] Unfortunately, wasting money is a Pentagon tradition. […]
[…] as defense hawks should be the ones most critical of wasteful spending by the Pentagon or misguided military commitments by […]
[…] Preposterous Waste, Pentagon Style […]
[…] Preposterous Waste, Pentagon Style […]
[…] There is a lot of talk about wasteful government spending, like $16 muffins and the like, but most of it is pretty petty stuff. In truth, our national deficit is primarily due to rising costs from health care and retirement entitlements, interest on our debt, and military spending. And we’re not doing a thing about any of those. Take military spending. Even with the sequester, we’re still spending as much as we did in 2006, and we’re spending more than we did at the height of the Cold War. We’re spending more than the next twelve countries military expenditures combined. And all that slush money leads to really poor spending decisions. […]
Anybody can defend the nation given enough men and a big enough budget. The skill is doing it with fewer men and a smaller budget.
I don’t think any body in DC or government at any level has gotten that simple message! While think the government does too much, it sure get the same job done on a lot less money!
[…] Preposterous Waste, Pentagon Style […]
had the cold war turned hot… the soviet union had planned to neutralize our surface navy with tactical nuclear weapons… no reason to believe that the strategy has changed today… china would likely employ the same tactic… big aircraft carrier battle group… gone in the blink of an eye… without even a direct hit… and the army? think we could occupy China or Russia? and if we were attacked by north Korea the bomb would likely arrive in a shipping container not by icbm… a lot of what we are doing is just plain silly… and paying $59.00 a gal. for kerosene and $600,000.00 for an ugly-assed frog statue… well… you be the judge… what are these people thinking? when was out last great military success? the invasion of Panama? Granada? and all of this nonsense brought to you by the democrat and republican fops and dandies in the halls of congress… sure wish the libertarians weren’t so creepy….
In one sense the US has to spend this much money because of all the security promises it has made to practically half the planet.
Now the dumbest part is that despite spending all this money the US is proving itself incapable of protecting its South Asian and Middle Eastern Allies against Iran and North Korea.
Also if you are offended by the frog statue, wait until you learn that the Navy is using a “green” fuel that is 16x more expensive than regular jetfuel.
This is madness.
[…] https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2013/05/03/preposterous-waste-pentagon-style/ […]
I would be interested to see a graph that compares healthcare spending of the US against other nations. The regular talking point being that the US spends more on defense than the next XX nations, it would be worth seeing that argument applied to healthcare as well. I did a rough calculation previously and it came out pretty close as per the ratio.
Either way both areas are disasters of finance and responsibility.