Why us spends on military

In late July, both the U. House and Senate failed to keep military spending in check. If there is any place to start cutting the military budget, it is the nuclear arsenal. The United States far outspends every other member of the nuclear club. There is no legitimate security justification for maintaining the outsized U. A single U. One full salvo from a single sub could wipe out two dozen cities —and the Navy has a fleet of 12 at sea.

Top Pentagon officials concede that the U. The first to go should be the U. Russian missiles could reach them within a half hour, giving a president 10 minutes or less to decide whether to launch them before they can be destroyed by a perceived attack. That increases the possibility of mistaken nuclear war triggered by a false attack warning. Indeed, there have been a number of close calls over the last six decades due to human and technological errors.

While ICBMs are sitting ducks, nuclear-armed submarines are virtually undetectable when they are at sea. ICBMs also are superfluous. They may have made sense 60 years ago, when they were more accurate and powerful than submarine-launched ballistic missiles and communications links with subs were unreliable.

The other two legs of the nuclear triad—subs and bombers—are more than adequate to deter a nuclear attack or, in the unlikely event of a nuclear attack, to retaliate. According to the Air Force itself, however, there is no reason to buy new missiles. The amendment lost, but received 93 yea votes in the House and 24 in the Senate—a level of support that would have been implausible not that long ago.

Among the elected officials supporting the cuts was California Representative Ro Khanna. These new threats impact our health, safety and economy, requiring new funds to address them. Cutting annual U. Last year, Pentagon watchdog groups offered proposals for much deeper cuts that could still maintain a robust military. As the United States begins the Herculean task of digging itself out from the worst economic downturn in generations, policy makers need to focus on rebuilding in smart and farsighted ways, and that means cutting unnecessary and wasteful spending whenever possible.

As they do, one thing is clear: In the unprecedented era of tight budgets that lies ahead, the time is ripe to reevaluate and rein in a level of military spending that has delivered little true security and stolen from critical domestic priorities for far too long. Elliott Negin is a senior writer at the Union of Concerned Scientists. Credit: Nick Higgins. Already a subscriber? Sign in. Thanks for reading Scientific American. Create your free account or Sign in to continue.

See Subscription Options. Discover World-Changing Science. Get smart. Sign up for our email newsletter. Sign Up. Support science journalism. Knowledge awaits. Even by Washington and overall U. As more than 20 Democratic presidential candidates seek to distinguish themselves from not only Donald Trump but each other, pressure is growing from the left of the political spectrum to take dramatically different positions from the president on matters of national security.

A coalition of activist groups is now pushing candidates to pledge to cut the […]. Voter Vitals Non-partisan, fact-based explainers on important issues for American voters.

Multimedia Videos and podcasts on key election issues. About Policy For Media. Stay Informed Sign up to get Policy updates in your inbox:. Facebook Twitter Instagram. Voter Vitals. The Vitals. While the current U. A Closer Look. In , U. Additional funding goes to each department for readiness development. Ironically, the DoD base budget does not include the cost of wars.

That falls under Overseas Contingency Operations. Here's a summary of military spending in billions of dollars since The Defense Department knows it needs to become more efficient.

It now spends a third of its budget on personnel and maintenance. That leaves no funds for procurement, research, and development, construction, or housing.

These necessary support programs now take up more than a third of DoD's budget. How could the DoD become more efficient? First, it needs to reduce its civilian workforce instead of resorting to hiring freezes and unpaid furloughs. The civilian workforce grew by , in the last decade,.

Second, it must reduce pay and benefits costs for each soldier. Instead, it plans to raise both. Third, and most important, it should close unneeded military bases. Congress won't allow DoD to close bases. The Bi-Partisan Budget Act of blocked future military base closings. Few elected officials are willing to risk losing local jobs caused by base closures in their states. Instead, the Pentagon will need to reduce the number of soldiers so it can afford the benefits of bases.

Congress is also reluctant to allow DoD to cut other costs, like military health benefits and the growth of military pay. Many in Congress said the cuts jeopardize national security. They are concerned about a cutback of about , troops, closure of domestic military bases, and termination of some weapons systems. All of those cuts cost jobs and revenue in their districts. At the same time, U.

It also raises the U. There is no realistic way to reduce either without cutting defense spending. The White House. Accessed Feb.