tool name

close
tool goes here

Helping lawmakers get re-elected isn't Army's mission

Many members of Congress stumping for re-election back in their districts decry government spending and those awful earmarks. Except (wink, wink) our earmarks, that is.

Published: Aug. 7, 2012 at 12:05 a.m. PDT
0 comments

Many members of Congress stumping for re-election back in their districts decry government spending and those awful earmarks. Except (wink, wink) our earmarks, that is.

That’s as good an explanation as any for why the House more than tripled funding for a 70-ton tank the Army doesn’t need or want – and added hundreds of millions more for other items the Pentagon didn’t request, including an anti-drug program that duplicates one performed by the Drug Enforcement Administration.

It’s all about jobs that lawmakers can brag about preserving in their districts. If it means the Army gets more tanks that have little use in the kinds of war it’s been fighting in the 21st century, so be it.

These earmarks have heavy hitters going to bat for them, including House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. Lima, Ohio, produces more than fictional glee club sensations; it also manufactures Abrams tanks at a plant operated by General Dynamics, a big donor to legislators’ re-election efforts. The company also has employees in Pennsylvania, Florida and Michigan – states whose lawmakers are pushing hard to continue the tank program.

It’s a program in search of a purpose. In the military’s so-called “pivot” away from Europe and the Middle East and toward Asia, it will rely more on special forces, drones, and naval and air power, and less on such Cold War-era weapons as tanks. Even in the current war in Afghanistan, they haven’t been valuable assets. Plus they get lousy gas mileage – half a mile per gallon – and are vulnerable to improvised bombs.

An important function of tanks is to destroy other tanks. The Taliban and al-Qaida have a limited tank inventory – 0, in fact. Designed to go turret to turret against Soviet tanks in Central Europe, they’re not as useful against modern counterinsurgencies.

Another consideration is that the military needs to devote an increasing share of its budget in caring for those injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s costly to evaluate and treat post traumatic stress syndrome, and many veterans who have suffered head injuries or amputations will need expensive long-term care and therapy.

Given the tighter budgets taxpayers want to see, it doesn’t make sense to waste money on unneeded weapons systems like the Abrams tank just so lawmakers can win brownie points with big donors and the folks back home.

JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here

We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.

CONTESTS

Similar stories

  • Outdated Stryker parts piled up in Auburn

    The Army program charged with keeping thousands of eight-wheeled Strykers running over the past decade had its eye so much on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that it neglected to keep its books.

  • Outdated Stryker parts piled up in Auburn warehouse

    The Army program charged with keeping thousands of eight-wheeled Strykers running over the past decade had its eye so much on wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that it neglected to keep its books.

  • Norm Dicks' decades in Congress brought a lot of money back to home state

    Norm Dicks is a master of the earmark, congressionally steered funding that was once a badge of honor but has become, Pentagon chief Leon Panetta said, an unfair symbol of government waste and pork-barrel spending. Dicks’ retirement Jan. 2 will further thin the ranks of an already vanishing breed: lawmakers who work together across party lines and view bringing home federal largess as a key part of their core duty to help their districts and their states.

  • Outgoing S.C. Sen. Jim DeMint shook up Washington

    For his first eight years in Washington, Jim DeMint was like most members of Congress – relatively quiet, fairly innocuous and pretty much unknown outside his state.

  • Military presence makes Washington vulnerable to cuts

    Defense spending soared in Washington state last year, even as the specter of long-anticipated budget cuts drew closer.