• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Panetta—Pentagon’s Friend or Obama Stalking Horse?

    According to news reports, “Pentagon chief Leon Panetta vowed Wednesday to fight any across-the-board cuts to defense spending that could be triggered in the next phase of deficit reduction that he says could do ‘real damage to our security, our troops and their families, and our ability to protect the nation.” That makes him a hero at the Pentagon, right? And, it puts him on record as bucking his own President, who has long talked about putting big defense cuts “on the table,” right?

    Probably not. The flimflam man calls this the old “bait and switch” bit. The President has tried to outflank conservatives in the deficit debate by framing the choice as “big defense cuts” or “big tax increases,” knowing that conservatives hate both. Indeed, of late more and more conservative leaders in the Congress have come online waving red flags that the proposed cuts are just nuts. More than likely, rather than echoing their concern, Panetta is trying to turn up the heat, forcing conservatives to cave on big tax hikes or take the blame for massive defense cuts.

    Conveniently for President Obama, there was no mention from Panetta of the third option for getting federal overspending and over-borrowing under control—reforming ever-expanding and ever-expending entitlement programs. This is the best option and, as The Heritage Foundation’s “Saving the American Dream” plan shows, is certainly achievable.

    Still, no one in Congress is likely to be fooled by Panetta’s sudden conversion to a defense hawk. “It’s impossible to support the kind of defense budget that the Republican Party has been advocating for without any revenue unless you are willing to cut entitlements literally in half,” said Representative Adam Smith (D–WA), ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, who voted against the deal because the cuts to discretionary spending, including defense, were ‘unacceptable.”

    More than likely, going forward Panetta will play both sides of the street. On the one hand, he will continue to fan the flames of conservative worry that they will get blamed for the coming defense crisis because they did not cave on tax hikes. On the other hand, he will hand Obama a roles-and-missions report that rubber stamps the hundreds of billions Obama has already slated to cut the budget, concluding that forcing the military do a lot less with a lot less won’t compromise national security.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    2 Responses to Panetta—Pentagon’s Friend or Obama Stalking Horse?

    1. bill waldo says:

      Once you are taken over by another country economically and then you are taken over militarily because of defense cuts and down grading your force, entitlements will not provide you freedom to successed and/or fail. You will just exits and serve underneath someone else.

    2. PK Howard says:

      I could join conservatives when they take up arms against the extraordinary amounts of our budget that goes to our defense. The cold war is long over and we've killed Osama, bring our boys home!!!! These so called entitlement programs like social security are all separate programs that we ALL contributed a fair amount whether poor or rich. We are entitled to these benefits as they are separate from the budget. We can not help these assets we all contributed fall into the war-chest and poor financial management of Congress.

      Congress approves the budget not the President. Congress should do its job and cut the defense budget. If you are training our brave troops on our soil then the support system that feeds our economy is also spent right here on our soil. This helps all Americans, not just those that flourish on a war economy.

      If Congress rationally considers cuts to the defense budget I would approve of cuts to our other entitlement programs(not SS or Medicare) Like tax cuts for the elite and corporations like big oil entitlements, mono-food culture corporations, and school voucher programs. Why do corporations need entitlements? They are not people but property of the rich and powerful.

      -A former conservative

    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.

    ×