Momentum to Stop Defense Cuts Mounts

[ellisonz]

Momentum to Stop Defense Cuts Mounts
George Zornick on March 22, 2012 - 2:11 PM ET

At a press briefing this morning, House Speaker John Boehner made it official: Republicans in the lower chamber will advance a bill this year to undo automatic defense cuts that were a result of the super-committee’s failure to agree on a deficit reduction plan.

If the super-committee had not failed, there would only be one spending cap on all discretionary spending until 2021—meaning that Congress could theoretically take all the money from domestic programs and leave the Pentagon untouched in order to stay under it. But as an incentive to get Republicans on the committee to work seriously towards a deal, failure meant a separate cap for defense spending—which guarantees steep reductions.

TPM’s Brian Beutler quotes Boehner this morning pledging to undo that defense spending cap and citing presumed support from the White House:

“We should never have had the sequester. I always thought that the Super Committee had a real chance to do good work, to produce savings so that the sequester wouldn’t kick in. I think that the sequester will hurt our Department of Defense, will hurt our ability to do what Americans believe is our most basic responsibility, and that’s to provide security for the American people. I believe that Secretary Panetta believes the same thing. And for that matter, I think the White House believes that the sequester is totally unacceptable. That’s why the House will act this spring to replace that [defense] sequester."

More: The Nation Story

All in favor of slashing the Defense budget as part of promoting "progressive values and fiscal responsibility," say AYE.

[think]

1. AYE! /nt

[Arctic Dave]

2. Aye

[Blue Owl]

3. AYE

n/t

[Dawson Leery]

4. AYE

[th1977sk]

12. +1

[villager]

5. The question is whether the guy in the Oval Office will keep his nerve in the face of said

..."momentum..."

[msongs]

6. well he blocked the pipeline didnt he? nt

[villager]

7. heh. "exactly."

[bvar22]

11. "blocked the pipeline" ?

Christian Science Monitor

Obama fast-tracks part of Keystone XL pipeline

"Unresolved concerns” over the original 1,700-mile pipeline from Alberta to the Gulf Coast refineries – including energy security, economic effects, and environmental impacts – caused Mr. Obama in January to reject the overall pipeline application. Environmentalists cheered the president then, while noting Obama's caveat that the decision could change after environmental reviews are completed. But few expected the White House to be banging the drum for Keystone XL so soon."



"Right now a company called TransCanada has applied to build a new pipeline to speed more oil from Cushing to state-of-the-art refineries down on the Gulf Coast," Obama said, flanked by rows of stacked oil-and-gas piping wrapped in green insulation. "Today I'm directing my administration to cut through the red tape, break through the bureaucratic hurdles, and make this project a priority, to go ahead and get it done."--- President Obama, March 22, 2012


http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2012/0322/Obama-fast-tracks-part-of-Keystone-XL-pipeline-video

You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their promises.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Vincardog]

8. Aye

[Swede Atlanta]

9. AYE

These slime balls drove the agreement on automatic cuts. Now they have to live with them. We spend 45% of the total amount spent by all nations on military. The time has come to reduce our military to a level of being able to defend the U.S. and not the world.

[Jim Lane]

10. No, I don't favor slashing the defense budget. I favor slashing the MILITARY budget.

Most of that money isn't for defense. I would feel quite securely defended with a much smaller military.