Overspending on Defense

dollars1Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI) writes:

I voted no on #HR4870, Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2015.

The bill spends $4.1 billion more than the current spending level and $200 million above the president’s budget request. It also includes nearly $80 billion for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO, i.e., war spending), which has effectively become a slush fund for the Pentagon, especially now that our involvement in Afghanistan has been winding down.

Under current law, OCO isn’t subject to the spending caps set in the Budget Control Act of 2011, so it’s no surprise that the Pentagon has reportedly been using OCO to skirt the spending caps on its base budget. It’s time to eliminate this off-budget account and bring this spending back into the normal budgeting process.

U.S. military spending comprises about 40 percent of the total military spending of the world. To be credible on deficit reduction, Congress must begin making reforms to military spending, which is the federal government’s second largest expenditure. When Congress passes spending bills like this one, no one should take Congress’s commitment to reining in deficits seriously.

H.R.4870 passed 340-73. Rep. Reed voted Aye. Tom says he favors deficit reduction, but he votes against it again and again.

© William Hungerford – July 2014


About whungerford

* Contributor at NewNY23rd.com where we discuss the politics, economics, and events of the New New York 23rd Congressional District (Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, (Eastern) Ontario, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben,Tioga, Tompkins, and Yates Counties) Please visit and comment on whatever strikes your fancy.
This entry was posted in 2014, Congress, Dept of Defense, Economics, Political, Reed's Views and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Overspending on Defense

  1. Jimmy Henry says:

    And yet Martha increased spending fifty-eight percent during her time in the Tompkins County legislator.


  2. whungerford says:

    When we discuss spending, we should ask if it is worthwhile. Rep. Amash opposes unnecessary spending. Tom Reed spends without restraint on things Republicans like.


  3. Barbara Griffin says:

    I seriously doubt that Martha increased spending single-handedly. Typically, it takes a majority vote. One must also consider whether or not it was worthwhile, as whungerford mentions. Military spending in this country, on the other hand, is off the charts.


  4. whungerford says:

    Thanks for your comment, Barbara. Rep. Amash’s conservatism is beyond question. Here Rep. Amash (R-MI) and Rep. Reed (R-NY) were on opposite sides of this issue, yet some regard Rep. Reed as a conservative. Tom votes with his party more than 9 times in 10. Rep. Amash votes with the GOP about 3 times in four. On votes that matter, the difference in party loyalty would be even more apparent.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.