U.S. War costs: $1 trillion and counting
Facebook
Orlando Sentinel
Richard Burnett
06/08/2010
After nearly a decade of combat, U.S. spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan recently passed the $1 trillion mark, making them the biggest wartime expenditure since World War II, according to a new report.
From high-tech weapons to huge troop deployments, the two wars have sought to bolster national security following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The record expense has also fueled an expansion of the U.S. defense industry, including major contractors in Central Florida.
So what exactly would $1 trillion buy in the civilian world? According to the National Priorities Project, a Massachusetts-based budget-watchdog group that publishes a regular "Cost of War" report, it would provide a year of health care for nearly 295 million people, a year's salary for more than 21 million police officers, or full Pell Grant scholarships for all 19 million U.S. college students for the next nine years.Florida's share of the war effort, in terms of taxes, has surpassed $57 billion since 2001 — enough money for a year's worth of health care for 6.3 million low-income people, salaries for a million firefighters, or Pell Grants for more than 10 million students, according to the group's online database.
Criticized by political conservatives for its progressive bent, the National Priorities Project insists it just sticks to the facts as it often focuses on quantifying what the long-running wars may be diverting from domestic needs.
"I have never been one to say it's gotten to the point where these wars cost too much and we should close them down," said Christopher Hellman, a defense analyst for the group. "But our goal as a budget-analysis organization is to convey federal budget numbers in a way that has real meaning for people. Clearly, this tally does that."
Other analysts dispute the group's conclusions, though not the figures. "Yes, we have spent $1 trillion in overseas contingencies since 9-11," said Loren Thompson, a defense analyst for the Lexington Institute, a think-tank based in the Washington, D.C., area. "But that amount is eclipsed by the much larger deficits we are running daily here at home.
According to the National Priorities Project, the $1 trillion milestone was passed on May 30. Just last month, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates began pressuring the armed forces to find as much as $100 billion in savings over the next five years to help fund future operations and modernization programs.
Although some of the savings could come from organizational efficiencies in the military command, Pentagon officials acknowledged last week that an unspecified number of "lower-priority" acquisition programs may have to be cut — though no specifics projects were identified.
Central Florida military contractors have played key roles in the war efforts, receiving contracts worth billions of dollars since 2001. Lockheed Martin Corp.'s Orlando missiles and weapons-firing company has landed deals worth nearly $1 billion this year alone. Melbourne-based Harris Corp.'s contracts have totaled $870 million so far this year, including more than $600 million just for its combat-radio systems.
Defense spending, in general, has continued to increase during the Obama administration, even though some big military programs such as the F-22 Raptor fighter jet and the Future Combat System have been canceled or restructured. It is not clear whether Gates' austerity move will gain any traction in a military establishment that appears to be in no mood for budget cuts.
Last week, for example, the Department of Defense gave its approval to a half-dozen major defense programs — including the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — that had run afoul of a federal cost-overrun law and faced potential termination. The Pentagon fended off the congressional review by formally declaring the programs essential to national security.
Hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue and hundreds of jobs in Central Florida are tied to the F-35 program alone.
"The reality of where we stand is this: The U.S. has 5 percent of the world population and 25 percent of the world's economy," said Thompson, of the Lexington Institute, "but it is sustaining 50 percent of the global military force. That can't continue. It is unsustainable."
