The Insanity of Placing Domestic Spending on a Par with Military Expenditures

In 2011, a budget battle between Democrats and Republicans was resolved by the sides agreeing that spending on domestic projects as well as military requests would be sequestered  with any increases to be in lock-step;.  An increase in defense spending would have to be matched, on a percentage basis, by domestic outlays. 

Certainly there were Republican legislators who resisted the proposal noting that the military needs took priority.  But the Democrats under Obama wanted the balance to tip the other way.  So the compromise was reached.

Pause for a moment.  The military’s role is to protect this country.  If it fails, the concern for perceived domestic needs will be meaningless.  A free, self-governing America will be no more. 

So how can there be a reasonable disagreement as to which recipient of taxpayer funds gets priority?

To be sure, there is disagreement but it is also foolish, so disconnected from real world concerns and worries that those who slight the military can only be ignorant, irresponsible or indifferent to the nation’s best interest.  It’s certainly understandable if one wants to call such people crazy.

It’s no surprise that Elijah Cummings is one of them.

Fortunately, the latest budget leans in the right direction (although not far enough) with defense receiving $160 billion more while domestic spending was hiked by “only” $128 billion.  [Budget hawks, and The Sensible Conservative is one, also are upset with the big increases in non-military spending.  That spending is not a national necessity.  But it was the price to get 60 votes for the budget bill in the Senate.  Without the compromise, there may have been no new money for national security.]