Defense Spending and the Federal Deficit

If the Reagan administration is serious about reducing the federal deficit, it will have to look at reducing defense spending.
By David C. Morrison
November/December 1984
Add to My MSN

Cutting the 1985 defense budget could have reduced the federal deficit as much as 40%.
Photo by Fotolia/Dmitry


Content Tools

Related Content

Prepare for Pesticide Spray Season - Part VII: Pesticides and Your Emotions

The different emotions you may experience as you deal with Pesticide Drift on your property or your ...

Sustainable Food Lessons From Kenya

In Kenya, even for middle class families, much of what ends up on the dinner table is grown or raise...

Act Today -- Save National Bike Programs

It is hard to believe but after more than 20 years of successful federal investment in biking and wa...

How Would You Change the Way You Spend Your Time?

Time often isn't looked at as a resource - at least, not outside of corporate efficiency evaluations...

"We are faced with a threat, in my opinion, far more destructive than anything the Soviets can throw at us," Senator Barry Goldwater (R-Ariz.) warned this spring, "and that is the federal deficit."

Indeed, for all its lip service to a balanced-budget amendment, the Reagan administration is amassing record-breaking deficits. The Congressional Budget Office forecasts average annual deficits over the next five years of $204 billion, for a total addition to the national debt of more than $1 trillion by 1989. (More optimistic administration forecasts peg this budget shortfall at $896 billion.) As noted by former Treasury Secretary W. Michael Blumenthal, "Annual $200-billion deficits will add as much to the national debt in less than five years as has previously been accumulated in two centuries."

Deficit spending is a time-honored means of funding military programs—witness President Johnson's "guns-and-butter" approach to paying for the Vietnam War (and the wildfire inflation that ensued in the 1970's). The current scale of the problem, however, is unprecedented. High deficits raise the U.S. interest rate, attracting foreign funds and pushing up the exchange rate for the dollar. An overstrong dollar makes U.S. goods unattractive to foreign buyers, reducing U.S. economic competitiveness and feeding the trade deficit. Higher interest rates also put a damper on investment, capital formation, and the ability of consumers to buy goods.

Military spending's contribution to the deficit disaster is hotly contested but undeniable, as attested by a simple exercise: If the Pentagon's share of the 1985 budget were the same as it was in 1978, military spending would be $71 billion less—a reduction that would erase 40% of the $176-billion deficit projected for 1985.

This unwelcome fact was pointed out repeatedly by the president's ex-Council of Economic Advisors chairman, Martin Feldstein, who told Congress late last year that "the things that raise the deficit are defense spending, interest on the national debt, and the tax reduction. The thing that has reduced the deficit has been the decline in domestic spending [social programs], excluding social security." Social spending, of course, was all but squeezed dry in the first two years of the Reagan administration. Short of raising taxes, which the Republican platform swears not to do, little slack remains in the budget — save military spending.

All of this may seem grim, but more bad news is likely just around the corner. The General Accounting Office reported this spring that the Pentagon's present $1.9-trillion five-year plan is understated by at least $173 billion and at most $324 billion. Where the administration hopes to find the money is anyone's guess, but one thing is certain: We will all be paying the immediate and indirect costs of the Reagan buildup for many years to come.

David C. Morrison is a research analyst at the Center for Defense Information in Washington, D.C.

Previous | 1 | 2 | Next






Post a comment below.

 








Subscribe Today - Pay Now & Save 66% Off the Cover Price

First Name: *
Last Name: *
Address: *
City: *
State/Province: *
Zip/Postal Code:*
Country:
Email:*
(* indicates a required item)
Canadian subs: 1 year, (includes postage & GST). Foreign subs: 1 year, . U.S. funds.
Canadian Subscribers - Click Here
Non US and Canadian Subscribers - Click Here

Lighten the Strain on the Earth and Your Budget

MOTHER EARTH NEWS is the guide to living — as one reader stated — “with little money and abundant happiness.” Every issue is an invaluable guide to leading a more sustainable life, covering ideas from fighting rising energy costs and protecting the environment to avoiding unnecessary spending on processed food. You’ll find tips for slashing heating bills; growing fresh, natural produce at home; and more. MOTHER EARTH NEWS helps you cut costs without sacrificing modern luxuries.

At MOTHER EARTH NEWS, we are dedicated to conserving our planet’s natural resources while helping you conserve your financial resources. That’s why we want you to save money and trees by subscribing through our earth-friendly automatic renewal savings plan. By paying with a credit card, you save an additional $5 and get 6 issues of MOTHER EARTH NEWS for only $12.00 (USA only).

You may also use the Bill Me option and pay $17.00 for 6 issues.