-Republican Leader highlights consequences of massive new debt on the future of America’s national security-
‘The national debt threatens our way of life; it threatens the value of our national currency; and it threatens our ability to pay for entitlements that millions of Americans depend on. Yet, just as importantly, the national debt also endangers our position in the world, the long term capabilities of our military, and the long-term viability of the all-volunteer force that is currently serving us so ably and courageously in two very challenging wars’
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor Thursday regarding the debate on the Defense Authorization bill and our national debt:
“Earlier this year I came to the Senate floor and outlined a number of foreign policy principles that have served our nation well in the past and which I believe would serve us well in the future. In doing so, it was my hope that these principles would serve as the basis of steady bipartisan cooperation between the Senate and the new administration. These principles transcend party; they’re time-tested; and they can be summed up in a single sentence: the cornerstone of U.S. national security policy lies in maintaining a strong and ready defense and in keeping our alliances strong.
“As the Senate continues to debate the Defense Authorization bill, I’d like to take the opportunity to reiterate the importance of this fundamental principle of action and to highlight something that seriously endangers our ability to uphold it. I’m referring to our nation’s staggering national debt.
“The national debt threatens our way of life; it threatens the value of our national currency; and it threatens our ability to pay for entitlements that millions of Americans depend on. Yet, just as importantly, the national debt also endangers our position in the world, the long term capabilities of our military, and the long-term viability of the all-volunteer force that is currently serving us so ably and courageously in two very challenging wars. And that’s why it’s increasingly urgent that we focus on this growing threat — and do something about it.
“Let’s put the current situation in context. The story of the American military over the past century reflects what historians have described as a feast or famine approach to defense. The pattern goes back at least as far as our entry into World War I, and extends through our involvement in World War II, the Korean War, and Vietnam. In every case, the U.S. military underwent an abrupt expansion of manpower and armaments only to be followed by calls for a drawdown in the size of our force and a reduction in defense spending. This pattern, though not always well-advised, may have been understandable in some cases in the past. But the nature of our current threats and position in the world makes it indefensible today.
“With developments in weapons technology, America no longer has the luxury of isolation. And September 11th showed us that we can no longer leave ungoverned territories unwatched. The demands on today’s military are constant. We’re either on offense, or we’re at risk. Feast or famine and isolationism no longer work.
“And this is why our ever-growing national debt is so perilous — because even those who believe as I do that a strong and ready defense is the cornerstone of our security won’t be able to guarantee it if current fiscal trends persist. Put simply: if we do nothing to pay down this debt and address the needs of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, then America risks finding itself so weakened financially that some day in the not-too-distant future we just won’t have the resources we need to equip and maintain our forces in the places they’re needed most.
“Consider the fact that the federal government is now spending an average of $100 million dollars a day just to pay the interest on a single piece of legislation, the Trillion Dollar Stimulus Bill that Congress passed earlier this year. Or that it’s estimated we’ll pay $347 billion in interest on just this one bill over the next ten years. At current rates of spending, that’s enough to provide health care for our nation’s veterans for more than five years. It’s enough to cover the salaries and benefits of all our active duty and reserve forces for two and a half years. Or it’s nearly $350 billion we could put back into the pockets of the American people at a time when they could really use it.
“And that’s just one piece of legislation. Now imagine what it costs to finance our entire national debt. By the end of the decade, it’s estimated that under the President’s budget we’ll spend nearly $800 billion dollars a year just to cover the interest on the national credit card—not reducing what we owe, but just keeping the creditors from knocking on the door. Here’s the frightening part of where we are: by 2017, the amount of money we’re expected to spend on interest alone will exceed the amount of money we’re expected to spend that year on all of Defense.
“The implications of this for our national security are clear. More and more, our ability to deploy forces with state-of-the-art weaponry is in competition with our financial obligation to the countries that hold our debt, and we get closer to the day when countries that hold large amounts of U.S. debt, such as China and Saudi Arabia, could directly influence the foreign policy decisions of a future president.
“We also get closer to the day when our allies and partners will rethink the value of a relationship with the United States.
“Sooner or later, we’ll have to face the fact that we’re on a path that leads to some very unpleasant choices. Either we default on our debts, which we will not do, print more money to cover those debts and tempt a massive inflationary spiral, or be forced to withdraw from our security commitments, just as Great Britain did at the end of the Second World War. America’s all-volunteer force costs a lot of money to maintain. Indeed, one of the major reasons we’ve been able to avoid conscription in this country since the Vietnam War has been our ability to maintain recruiting and retention policies through an attractive retirement system, recruiting bonuses, incentive pay and sensible housing allowances. In current dollars, military personnel costs have increased from $69 billion to $131 billion a year over the past decade.
“But these necessary expenses will soon be crowded out by the growing cost of long-term entitlements and the growing principal and higher and higher interest payments on our debt. And spending increases we now regard as necessary may no longer be possible. The choice is clear: in order to provide for the common defense, we must reform entitlement programs that are consuming a larger and larger share of our budget and reduce the national debt.
“Cutting $100 million dollars here or there in discretionary costs won’t do the trick. In 1965, discretionary spending accounted for 62% of the budget. Today, it accounts for just 38%. As discretionary spending has become a smaller and smaller part of the pie, mandatory spending on entitlements and debt has become a bigger and bigger part of the pie. In 1965, mandatory spending and interest accounted for 38% of the budget. Today, they account for 62% -- or nearly two-thirds of the entire budget.
“This means that in order to face our problem head on, we’ll have to address the problem of entitlement spending. And the only serious option on the table is the Conrad-Gregg proposal, which would provide a clear pathway for fixing these long-term challenges by forcing us to get debt and spending under control. I’ve had a number of good conversations about this proposal with the President. Based on those conversations, I’m hopeful it will be given serious attention. For the safety and security of our nation the Conrad-Gregg proposal deserves broad bipartisan support.
“Every Secretary of Defense must confront the tension between America’s near-term readiness and future investment. But some future Defense Secretary will no longer be able to make either choice if we do nothing to address the problem of long-term debt. Regardless of the global threats we face, we will be forced to field a smaller and less capable force. The money just won’t be there. When most Americans think about threats to our security, they come up with a standard list. But few people include our growing national debt. They should — because it's real, and it's serious.
“Based on current trends, it’s quite possible to imagine some future Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff walking into the Oval Office one day and informing the Commander in Chief that he has a choice: he can either protect the sea lanes in the Persian Gulf or he can protect the sea lanes in the Sea of Japan. But he can’t do both. And on that day the United States of America will no longer be the guarantor of the international trading system, sea lines of communication, the security of our allies, or even our own independence.
“All of this should matter to members of the Senate. Americans trust our nation’s intelligence and uniformed personnel to protect them from distant threats. But it’s incumbent upon the men and women of this body, those of us who control the purse strings, to make sure the nation’s resources are managed in a way that enables these forces to do their work. The men and women of the Senate must look beyond the narrow demands of a single political term in office or the next election to the long-term security of our nation and indeed the world. No one else can protect the American people from the diminishment of power and capability that come with our dangerous and ever-increasing national debt.”
###
‘The national debt threatens our way of life; it threatens the value of our national currency; and it threatens our ability to pay for entitlements that millions of Americans depend on. Yet, just as importantly, the national debt also endangers our position in the world, the long term capabilities of our military, and the long-term viability of the all-volunteer force that is currently serving us so ably and courageously in two very challenging wars’
WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made the following remarks on the Senate floor Thursday regarding the debate on the Defense Authorization bill and our national debt:
“Earlier this year I came to the Senate floor and outlined a number of foreign policy principles that have served our nation well in the past and which I believe would serve us well in the future. In doing so, it was my hope that these principles would serve as the basis of steady bipartisan cooperation between the Senate and the new administration. These principles transcend party; they’re time-tested; and they can be summed up in a single sentence: the cornerstone of U.S. national security policy lies in maintaining a strong and ready defense and in keeping our alliances strong.
“As the Senate continues to debate the Defense Authorization bill, I’d like to take the opportunity to reiterate the importance of this fundamental principle of action and to highlight something that seriously endangers our ability to uphold it. I’m referring to our nation’s staggering national debt.
“The national debt threatens our way of life; it threatens the value of our national currency; and it threatens our ability to pay for entitlements that millions of Americans depend on. Yet, just as importantly, the national debt also endangers our position in the world, the long term capabilities of our military, and the long-term viability of the all-volunteer force that is currently serving us so ably and courageously in two very challenging wars. And that’s why it’s increasingly urgent that we focus on this growing threat — and do something about it.
“Let’s put the current situation in context. The story of the American military over the past century reflects what historians have described as a feast or famine approach to defense. The pattern goes back at least as far as our entry into World War I, and extends through our involvement in World War II, the Korean War, and Vietnam. In every case, the U.S. military underwent an abrupt expansion of manpower and armaments only to be followed by calls for a drawdown in the size of our force and a reduction in defense spending. This pattern, though not always well-advised, may have been understandable in some cases in the past. But the nature of our current threats and position in the world makes it indefensible today.
“With developments in weapons technology, America no longer has the luxury of isolation. And September 11th showed us that we can no longer leave ungoverned territories unwatched. The demands on today’s military are constant. We’re either on offense, or we’re at risk. Feast or famine and isolationism no longer work.
“And this is why our ever-growing national debt is so perilous — because even those who believe as I do that a strong and ready defense is the cornerstone of our security won’t be able to guarantee it if current fiscal trends persist. Put simply: if we do nothing to pay down this debt and address the needs of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, then America risks finding itself so weakened financially that some day in the not-too-distant future we just won’t have the resources we need to equip and maintain our forces in the places they’re needed most.
“Consider the fact that the federal government is now spending an average of $100 million dollars a day just to pay the interest on a single piece of legislation, the Trillion Dollar Stimulus Bill that Congress passed earlier this year. Or that it’s estimated we’ll pay $347 billion in interest on just this one bill over the next ten years. At current rates of spending, that’s enough to provide health care for our nation’s veterans for more than five years. It’s enough to cover the salaries and benefits of all our active duty and reserve forces for two and a half years. Or it’s nearly $350 billion we could put back into the pockets of the American people at a time when they could really use it.
“And that’s just one piece of legislation. Now imagine what it costs to finance our entire national debt. By the end of the decade, it’s estimated that under the President’s budget we’ll spend nearly $800 billion dollars a year just to cover the interest on the national credit card—not reducing what we owe, but just keeping the creditors from knocking on the door. Here’s the frightening part of where we are: by 2017, the amount of money we’re expected to spend on interest alone will exceed the amount of money we’re expected to spend that year on all of Defense.
“The implications of this for our national security are clear. More and more, our ability to deploy forces with state-of-the-art weaponry is in competition with our financial obligation to the countries that hold our debt, and we get closer to the day when countries that hold large amounts of U.S. debt, such as China and Saudi Arabia, could directly influence the foreign policy decisions of a future president.
“We also get closer to the day when our allies and partners will rethink the value of a relationship with the United States.
“Sooner or later, we’ll have to face the fact that we’re on a path that leads to some very unpleasant choices. Either we default on our debts, which we will not do, print more money to cover those debts and tempt a massive inflationary spiral, or be forced to withdraw from our security commitments, just as Great Britain did at the end of the Second World War. America’s all-volunteer force costs a lot of money to maintain. Indeed, one of the major reasons we’ve been able to avoid conscription in this country since the Vietnam War has been our ability to maintain recruiting and retention policies through an attractive retirement system, recruiting bonuses, incentive pay and sensible housing allowances. In current dollars, military personnel costs have increased from $69 billion to $131 billion a year over the past decade.
“But these necessary expenses will soon be crowded out by the growing cost of long-term entitlements and the growing principal and higher and higher interest payments on our debt. And spending increases we now regard as necessary may no longer be possible. The choice is clear: in order to provide for the common defense, we must reform entitlement programs that are consuming a larger and larger share of our budget and reduce the national debt.
“Cutting $100 million dollars here or there in discretionary costs won’t do the trick. In 1965, discretionary spending accounted for 62% of the budget. Today, it accounts for just 38%. As discretionary spending has become a smaller and smaller part of the pie, mandatory spending on entitlements and debt has become a bigger and bigger part of the pie. In 1965, mandatory spending and interest accounted for 38% of the budget. Today, they account for 62% -- or nearly two-thirds of the entire budget.
“This means that in order to face our problem head on, we’ll have to address the problem of entitlement spending. And the only serious option on the table is the Conrad-Gregg proposal, which would provide a clear pathway for fixing these long-term challenges by forcing us to get debt and spending under control. I’ve had a number of good conversations about this proposal with the President. Based on those conversations, I’m hopeful it will be given serious attention. For the safety and security of our nation the Conrad-Gregg proposal deserves broad bipartisan support.
“Every Secretary of Defense must confront the tension between America’s near-term readiness and future investment. But some future Defense Secretary will no longer be able to make either choice if we do nothing to address the problem of long-term debt. Regardless of the global threats we face, we will be forced to field a smaller and less capable force. The money just won’t be there. When most Americans think about threats to our security, they come up with a standard list. But few people include our growing national debt. They should — because it's real, and it's serious.
“Based on current trends, it’s quite possible to imagine some future Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff walking into the Oval Office one day and informing the Commander in Chief that he has a choice: he can either protect the sea lanes in the Persian Gulf or he can protect the sea lanes in the Sea of Japan. But he can’t do both. And on that day the United States of America will no longer be the guarantor of the international trading system, sea lines of communication, the security of our allies, or even our own independence.
“All of this should matter to members of the Senate. Americans trust our nation’s intelligence and uniformed personnel to protect them from distant threats. But it’s incumbent upon the men and women of this body, those of us who control the purse strings, to make sure the nation’s resources are managed in a way that enables these forces to do their work. The men and women of the Senate must look beyond the narrow demands of a single political term in office or the next election to the long-term security of our nation and indeed the world. No one else can protect the American people from the diminishment of power and capability that come with our dangerous and ever-increasing national debt.”
###