Foreign Policy in Focus - A Think Tank Without Walls
Foreign Policy In Focus

FPIF Commentary

“Guns vs. Butter” Returns

Miriam Pemberton | January 27, 2005

Editor: Emily Schwartz Greco, IPS

printable PDF version

Email this page to a friend

Comment on this article

Foreign Policy In Focus

When President George W. Bush sends his budget to Congress on or about February 7, look for “guns vs. butter” to make a comeback. Debating the surging defense budget and its effect on domestic spending went out of fashion after 9-11 with all that talk about Homeland Security.

Bush administration officials won’t use these terms, of course. Their choice of words is likely to be along the lines of “crusading deficit hawks attack the deficit.” They will bank on the public’s short-term memory loss about what created the deficit in the first place, namely their massive tax cuts and war spending. In their newly-minted role as deficit hawks, they will turn around and solve the problem they created, by cutting all non-defense, non-entitlement spending. Simultaneously, by other means, they’ll go after entitlements. Social Security is already under attack.

The White House has already told all departments to get ready for these cuts. When documents forewarning of the new budget policy leaked out, officials dismissed them as hypothetical. Now they are about to be real. The rumor most widely circulating on Capitol Hill pegs the cuts at 10 percent, across the board. This will do serious damage to programs that curb the spread of weapons of mass destruction and clean up toxic waste, and programs like Head Start, the works.

In early January the Pentagon leaked a new document indicating that its budget would take a hit too. This document laid out a long list of weapons systems slated to be cut over the next six years.

But let’s be clear that the military budget is not being cut at all, at least not as we ordinary mortals understand the term “cutting.” The administration isn’t talking about spending less on the Pentagon next year than this year. These would be cuts to the increases the Pentagon had been planning for next year.

The overall defense budget is likely to continue to rise. And spending for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will continue to be funded with extra money “off the books.”

Most of the cuts won’t even happen for several more years, during which time defense industry lobbyists will work to ensure that they don’t happen at all. Leaking news of impending cuts to weapons systems is a well-worn Pentagon technique to gin up an outcry, and mobilize congressional support to restore the cuts. The outcry has begun, right on schedule.

While these cuts in military spending will remain mostly in the realm of the theoretical next year, the cuts to the domestic side of the budget will be real. Until now the Bush administration has waged an unnecessary war, cut taxes on the rich, and asked no sacrifices from most Americans—those of us, at least, who are not members of military families or in the Reserves. The best symbol of this surreal situation is the most costly inaugural spectacle in history, during the most costly war since Vietnam.

Two weeks after the spectacle is over, the budget will be announced. The sacrifices will be unveiled. Let the guns vs. butter debate begin.

Miriam Pemberton is the Foreign Policy In Focus (online at www.fpif.org) peace and security editor at the Institute for Policy Studies (online at www.ips-dc.org) in Washington, DC.

 

Subscribe to
World Beat

FPIF's weekly ezine


Support FPIF


Published by Foreign Policy In Focus (FPIF), a project of the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS, online at www.ips-dc.org). Copyright © 2009, Institute for Policy Studies.

Recommended citation:
Miriam Pemberton, “‘Guns vs. Butter’ Returns,” (Silver City, NM & Washington, DC: Foreign Policy In Focus, January 27, 2005).

Web location:
http://fpif.org/fpiftxt/975

Production Information:
Author(s): Miriam Pemberton
Editor(s): Emily Schwartz Greco, IPS
Production: Chellee Chase-Saiz, IRC

Latest Comments & Conversation Area
Editor's Note: FPIF.org editors read and approve each comment. Comments are checked for content only; spelling and grammar errors are not corrected and comments that include vulgar language or libelous content are rejected.
Discussion for this article has been closed.
 
Contact FPIF's webmaster with inquiries regarding the functionality of this website.
Copyright © 2009, Institute for Policy Studies.
 

Support FPIF

You Might Also Like:
 

Related Coverage of U.S. Agencies

The Return of the Non-Aligned Movement?
Oct 2, 2009

The Hayden Letter
Sep 29, 2009

Neocons 1, Obama 0
Mar 16, 2009

Related Coverage of Military Issues

Fort Hood: The War at Home
Nov 20, 2009

The Conventional Arms Control Challenge
Nov 18, 2009

Poem, 'When I was Torn by War'
Oct 6, 2009

Related Coverage of Terrorism Issues

The Blame Game
Oct 11, 2006

Why Do They Hate US?
Sep 21, 2006

Bush on 9/11: Annotated
Sep 13, 2006