The Defense Rusts

[admin]

The Defense Rusts

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, January 29, 2008 4:20 PM PT
Military Spending: Ronald Reagan won in 1980 in part by pledging to rebuild a military eviscerated by Jimmy Carter. Who'll challenge Hillary Clinton on the damage her co-president husband did to America's defenses?
Related Topics: Military & Defense | Budget & Tax Policy
After a Missouri Air National Guard F-15 came apart in early November, the Air Force grounded its fleet of 450 F-15Cs. At a time when Russia was resuming its long-range bomber patrols that it had curtailed after our victory in the Cold War, the Canadian air force volunteered its F-18s to patrol the skies over and near Alaska.
We ought to be ashamed, just as we ought to worry that no presidential candidate has made an issue of a steady decline in military capability. The Democrats will say this is because we have spent too much on Iraq. Even if true, that's no reason to spend too little defending against other threats.
Our lack of capability is a direct legacy of the Clinton years. While President Bush has reversed Clinton's failure to confront America's enemies, he has not had time while fighting the war on terror to reverse the damage done to the military Clinton loathed.
As China builds and Russia rearms, we face other threats than just al-Qaida
During Operation Desert Storm, the active duty Army had 18 combat divisions. Clinton cut them down to 10 by 1994, roughly their size today. The number of tactical air wings in the Air Force fell from 37 at the time of Desert Storm to 20 on Clinton's watch. As the Heritage Foundation's Baker Spring puts it, we went on a "procurement holiday" in the '90s and the military is still paying for it.
In the first six years of the Clinton administration, Bush 41's budget projections for weapons procurement were slashed by $160 billion. For fiscal 2000, the Congressional Budget Office said $90 billion a year was needed to hold procurement steady. The Clinton procurement budget was a mere $55 billion. During the Reagan buildup (fiscal 1981-87), we spent an average of $131 billion on procurement.
Our defense budget was at a postwar high of 14.2% of GDP in 1953 during the Korean War, 9.5% in 1968 at the height of Vietnam and 6.8% in 1986 at the height of the Reagan buildup that doomed the evil empire. At the end of the first (and we hope last) Clinton presidency, we spent just 3% of GDP on defense.
Because we didn't spend enough on defense and procurement during the Clinton years, it's going to be expensive to catch up. Because we're still spending too little on defense, the Air Force's original plans for 750 F-22 Raptors to replace the aging F-15 has been reduced to just 183.
MacKenzie Eaglen, senior policy analyst for national security at the Heritage Foundation, told Cybercast News Service:
"The U.S. Air Force has been engaged in continuous combat for the last 17 years with fewer airplanes today than in 1990 — only increasing their age more quickly. Moreover, current Air Force plans call for retiring two F-15s for every new F-22 brought into service."
The politicians in Washington ponder sending checks to people to stimulate a sluggish economy. This money will probably be used to pay bills. But if it's spent at the mall, it will likely be spent on something made in China.
We suggest the money be spent on our manufacturing sector and durable goods made in America. You know, things like F-22 Raptors, M-1 Abrams tanks and Virginia-class attack submarines.