Opportunity vs Catastrophe

To abuse a pun.... quite Frankly, Hoffman is making a lot of sense to me.

Only in Washington, D.C., could some of the cuts that are being contemplated — less than one percent between 2011 and 2012 — be called an “age of austerity,” said Frank G. Hoffman, director of the National Defense University Press.

Outside the Beltway, where people are living with 14 percent unemployment, this alarmist rhetoric would be laughable, he said. The facts are the facts, he added. “We are outspending the rest of the world on defense. We are outspending any combination of rivals by a factor of three. … We don’t need to spend more than we spent during the Cold War. I don’t see those threats out there,” he said. “We have to be honest about that.”

Even the worst-case scenario, which would call for defense budget reductions of 8-10 percent over the next decade, would be reasonable, he said. That is only half of what was trimmed in previous post-war military builddowns, he said.

While national security is a sacrosanct concern, it cannot be denied that it is contributing to the rising debt, Hoffman noted. “We borrow $200 billion a year for defense,” he said. “The idea that defense is immaterial to the deficit is something we have to be honest about. … Two trillion of our debt went into defense,” he said. “We are not in a crisis, we are not in an age of austerity.” What the nation is presented with is a “wonderful opportunity for strategic readjustment.”

Ok that pun was pretty horrible, but Frank can set me straight in person.

As I've been watching the defense budget battle unfold since early August, I note two distinct groups. There are those who see reduction in defense spending as an impending catastrophe, and those who see reduction in defense spending as an opportunity. That distinction is important, because I tend to find those who see an impending catastrophe have little or nothing to contribute to the strategic readjustment conversation, and those who see reduction in defense as an opportunity are almost entirely focused on the strategic readjustment part of the discussion. The impending catastrophe group is currently getting the most headlines, but the opportunity crowd is currently providing the more intelligent contributions worth consideration.

The impending catastrophe crowd producing scare material concerns me. For example, I have serious concerns regarding the House Armed Services Committee's recent reports on defense spending. When all they focus on is the impending catastrophe of cutting defense spending, the HASC gives the impression that are either ignoring or oblivious to the opportunities that are unique to their term at this time and place of their career now. Our leaders are theoretically elected to embrace opportunity when it is available, not ignore it.

Making difficult, important decisions that really matter and really makes a difference - that's hard work. I'm honestly skeptical if Congress is capable of that kind of hard work.