• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Sacrifice Spending to Pay for the War

    Liberals in Congress and out are calling for a new tax to pay for the war on terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq. At the same time, rising unemployment and falling political prospects have driven President Obama and friends to fumble for stimulus 2.0, the first $787 billion Obama stimulus having now so obviously if predictably failed. Only liberals could propose higher taxes and a jobs summit at the same time and not notice the conflict.

    Of course, the real purpose of the tax proposal is to bring additional leftwing pressure on Obama to force him to surrender in Afghanistan. Whatever the purpose, there is a legitimate debate here. In addition to disrupting families and costing thousands of American lives in America’s defense, these wars are also expensive (over $100 billion annually), have gone on a long time (8 years for Afghanistan), and appear likely to continue for years to come.

    In this context Chairman David Obey (D-WI) of the House Appropriations Committee talks about fiscal responsibility and “shared sacrifice” like Santa Claus preaching renunciation. In truth, he has a point but then draws the wrong conclusion. Congress should offset the costs of the war with spending reductions elsewhere. Congress’ pet projects should share and bear the full sacrifice.

    The federal government is projected to spend almost $3.8 trillion in 2010. Between welfare payments to farmers, income support to academics, trips to the moon (been there, done that), Medicare fraud, subsidies to seniors, and so on, the Congress should be able to harness the brainpower of its legions of congressional staffers to cut spending just 2.6 percent. Not only would they then offset the costs of the war, but the serious gesture of fiscal responsibility to credit markets could also be the centerpiece of their new stimulus package, giving the Congress a badly needed two-fer.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to Sacrifice Spending to Pay for the War

    1. Ozzy6900, CT says:

      Liberals should take the time to read the Constitution because if they did, they would find that it is the DUTY of the Federal Government to "keep it's citizens safe from foreign and domestic enemies". THIS is the primary job of the Federal Government, NOT bailing out banks and businesses. The Federal Government MUST protect the Land and it's People and that is not something that they can "charge a fee" for! You don't stand up there on your podiums and spout "If they want a war, they have to pay for it" when you are throwing money around like a drunken sailor! In all my years, I have never heard such a statement! Why would our elected officials say such a thing? What would these officials have said in WWII? Would they have pulled out of that war too?

    2. Monica St. Clair says:

      Sacrifice Tax Cuts to Pay for the War

    3. Freedom of Speech, T says:

      Chairman Obey D WI just does not get it.

      National Security is always the first priority and we're doing a terrible job of that on the home front. Just look South.

      How any sane person could even think about gouging the taxpayers for more money should be punishable by immediate expulsion from office.

      This tax, borrow, and spend will do to us what the enemy has not been able to – bring us to our knees.

      Moreover, our foes are watching every move.

      Will they never learn? The answer is – no.

    4. Bobbie Jay says:

      Cut all "special interests" that are discriminative and bias. Cut all programs that violate, infringe and or distort the founding documents. Reduce entitlements to military and elderly, ONLY! The elderly, because it was promised, as the elderly paid for it throughout their lives. The military because of the position they took to defend America and all people. Give back the freedom and civil responsibility of citizens, to be in charge of their own welfare!

      no tax increase necessary. REDUCE THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.