Misplaced priorities in proposed defense budget
Editor: Early in my elementary school years, I visited a Hazleton toy store with my grandmother,Margaret Bonin Kotch, to buy GI Joe equipment. The toy set was a big seller in the mid-1960s, during the post-World War II/Cold War era. Wanting to buy tens of dollars worth of toys, possibly well over $100 in today’s dollars — my frugal grandmother cut the cost dramatically.
If only she were serving on the House Appropriations Committee’s Defense Subcommittee today.
The Trump administration, under the Pentagon leadership of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, is advancing a FY 2027 budget request of $1.5 trillion.
Respected defense analysts like Max Boot question the wisdom of the Trump/Hegseth wish list. For instance, Boot faults the administration’s cutbacks on scientific research which is “integral to the nation’s economic and military competitiveness” while showering dollars on new, big-budget battleships that are considered outmoded for today’s conflicts. And there are other projects that have “lobbying muscle” behind big pricetag items like the B-21 bomber and the F-47 fighter, but the Ukraine war shows how important drones are to emerging warfare.
Trade, fiscal stability and public health are just as important to our national security too, all short-circuited by this administration’s appointments, policies and actions.
U.S. Senator Thom Tillis, R-NC, recently asserted via an“X” post: “Hegseth continues to surprise and disrespect our greatest allies and some of our best military professionals with impulsive decisions not grounded in reality or good judgment.”
If only there were more Republicans in Congress like Thom Tillis. At least, my grandmother, a mortuary school gradate, would see this budget request gets the burial in committee it deserves and demand a more realistic, cost-effective request.
Steve Lilienthal, Pottsville native, Washington, D.C.