Is Obama Pulling Out the Rug on Defense Cuts?

Is Obama Pulling Out the Rug on Defense Cuts?

Is Obama Pulling Out the Rug on Defense Cuts?

 Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta told Congress yesterday that President Obama opposes any further reductions in defense spending.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has, for months now, said that the initial $450 billion in defense cuts that were part of the debt ceiling deal are all that he wants to see—meaning that Panetta doesn’t think the supercommittee should cut a single cent from defense spending when it decides on up to $1.5 trillion in additional deficit reduction.

Panetta reiterated this view to the House Armed Services Committee yesterday, and added an explosive revelation—that President Obama agrees with him:

During a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee, Mr. Panetta was asked by Representative William M. Thornberry, Republican of Texas, whether he believed that no further cuts in the military budget should be made beyond those already enacted.

“Correct,” Mr. Panetta replied.

When asked whether Mr. Obama shared that view, the defense secretary stated, “He does.”

If the supercommittee were to forgo any further defense reductions, then every dollar it cut would necessarily have to come from discretionary spending, which funds most of the government’s domestic functions, or from programs like Medicare and Medicaid. If Obama does endorse that principle, it would likely set off a firestorm in the Democratic base.

In the past, Obama has said that defense cuts are needed and that everything needs to be on the table for the supercommittee. But Panetta’s testimony raises important questions about where the president now stands.

The White House did not respond to my request for comment, but Representative Barney Frank, a longtime proponent of defense cuts, had some strong words of warning for the president. “It’s inconceivable to me that [Obama] would be for further reductions in military cuts, because he would be for saving military spending and cutting housing, education, environmental protection and other areas,” Frank told me.

“I hope that’s not true,” Frank added. “I’m not confident that it’s not true.”

Support independent journalism that exposes oligarchs and profiteers


Donald Trump’s cruel and chaotic second term is just getting started. In his first month back in office, Trump and his lackey Elon Musk (or is it the other way around?) have proven that nothing is safe from sacrifice at the altar of unchecked power and riches.

Only robust independent journalism can cut through the noise and offer clear-eyed reporting and analysis based on principle and conscience. That’s what The Nation has done for 160 years and that’s what we’re doing now.

Our independent journalism doesn’t allow injustice to go unnoticed or unchallenged—nor will we abandon hope for a better world. Our writers, editors, and fact-checkers are working relentlessly to keep you informed and empowered when so much of the media fails to do so out of credulity, fear, or fealty.

The Nation has seen unprecedented times before. We draw strength and guidance from our history of principled progressive journalism in times of crisis, and we are committed to continuing this legacy today.

We’re aiming to raise $25,000 during our Spring Fundraising Campaign to ensure that we have the resources to expose the oligarchs and profiteers attempting to loot our republic. Stand for bold independent journalism and donate to support The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel

Editorial Director and Publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x