As Sequester Looms, Michigan Citizen Action Calls for an End to Military Contractor CEO Waste
MICHIGAN — As part of a National Day of Action across the U.S., Michigan Citizen Action hosted a tele-press conference to demand an end to wasteful Pentagon spending and thank Senator Carl Levin for his leadership on this issue.
“Pull the Pork from the Pentagon: Protect our Priorities. Protect Our Middle Class” events are taking place in Michigan and in more than two dozen states across the country today. In Lansing, Michigan Citizen Action delivered over 3800 petition signatures to Senator Carl Levin thanking him for his leadership on this issue. For more information about events nationally, please visit www.pullthepork.org. Nationally, more than 100,000 USAction members have signed petitions demanding that Congress take action.
“Pull the Pork from the Pentagon,” the National Day of Action, is taking place as Congress faces a series of deadlines on our country’s budget priorities, including possible automatic spending cuts scheduled to take place beginning Friday.
“Senator Car Levin has been a leader from day one of this fiscal debate, calling for a balanced and sensible approach to our nations fiscal crisis,” said Linda Teeter, Executive Director of Michigan Citizen Action. “At issue today is not the size of government but rather who government works for – military contractor CEOs or working families and the middle class. We must recognize that strength and respect abroad are built, and based, on economic strength at home. And we cannot thrive if obsolete and unnecessary weapons systems are consuming our precious resources. Senator Carl Levin recognizes this and that is why today we are here to thank him and to call on Congress to follow his lead.”
Michigan Citizen Action noted that the heads of three of America’s largest military contractors earn a combined $74.4 million a year – the head of Northrop Gunman makes $26 million; the head of Lockheed Martin, $25.4 million; and the head of Boeing, $23 million.
The Tele-press conference also featured Joyce Gerhinger of the Huntington Woods Peace Citizenship and Education group.
Col. Duke Lacrosse
4:08 pm on Friday, March 1, 2013
There are two sides to every story. The author of this piece is a good little Democrat footsoldier, let's make that clear up front.
According to this article, we need to pull even more money from the Defense Department, because heaven forbid any other aspect of federal government is forced to endure a tiny reduction in spending.
Look at this chart, notice the piece of the pie in blue:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Federal_Spending_-_FY_2011.png
That's right, a whopping 19%. Defense is supposed to sacrifice more, so that the other 81% has to sacrifice less.
This article is all about getting people frightened of having less government. It's about getting more fools more fired up for all the wrong reasons. Don't fall for it.
Less government is how Ronald Reagan got America working in the 80s. It's time for more of that.
Sincerely,
Conservative Footsoldier Col.
Sarah Franklin
10:34 pm on Friday, March 1, 2013
agree this objection to sequestration is smoke and mirrors to scare the American public but also think there is push back (fear) within government agencies to downsizing their fiefdoms.
dan rice
1:29 pm on Monday, March 4, 2013
The military isn't exempt from wasteful spending and s/b included in budget reductions. From salon.com:
"U.S. taxpayers still spend billions of dollars a year to pay for luxuries that are out of reach for the ordinary American.
The Pentagon, for example, runs a staggering 234 golf courses around the world, at a cost that is undisclosed.
According to one retired lieutenant colonel in the Air Force, who also just happens to be the senior writer at Travel Golf, the very best military golf course in the U.S. is the Air Force Academy’s Eisenhower Blue Course in Colorado Springs, Colo.
He writes, “This stunning 7,000-plus yard layout shares the same foothills terrain as does the legendary Broadmoor, just 20 minutes to the south in Colorado Springs." And the number of golf courses is often undercounted, with controversial courses in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and Mosul, Iraq, often left off the lists, which makes assessing the total costs difficult.
According to journalist Nick Turse, “The U.S. Army paid $71,614 [in 2004] to the Arizona Golf Resort — located in sunny Riyadh, Saudi Arabia,… The resort actually boasts an entire entertainment complex, complete with a water-slide-enhanced megapool, gym, bowling alley, horse stables, roller hockey rink, arcade, amphitheater, restaurant, and even a cappuccino bar — not to mention the golf course and a driving range.”
DoD’s Sungnam golf course in the Republic of Korea, meanwhile, is reportedly valued at $26 million."
Ronald Wolf
9:26 pm on Monday, March 4, 2013
If it was up to me all you conservative foot soldiers would be shipped to the front. This country is being eaten alive by money grubbing parasites infesting not only the military and their suppliers but professionals such as doctors, lawyers, and medical equipment suppliers all sucking the blood out the economy by even your tax dollars.
i believe it was Nixon who said: "its legal if the president does it". Where is the Supreme Cout on ethics? Busy talking to their investment counselors about their accounts in Switzerland, the Bahamas, and the Cayman Islands and no doubt invited to the same parties Romney attends. Yeah Obama is on the lobby take to. Its an American tradition it seems. Republicans are just the deans of this school.
Ronald Wolf
9:26 pm on Monday, March 4, 2013
Dan, as Lucky Luciano said just before his deportation "If you want a license to steal become a politician" or in this case a general.
Lianne Mathie
1:29 pm on Monday, March 4, 2013
http://pogoarchives.org/m/co/igf/bad-business-report-only-2011.pdf
I think there are some cost saving that could be realized. It just takes a little will power.
Lianne Mathie
1:29 pm on Monday, March 4, 2013
I also ran across this today too.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/03/dumb-sequester-cuts-are-only-7-months
gg10
4:55 pm on Sunday, March 3, 2013
Let's see how Reaganomics really worked. First Reagan lowered taxes, 70% to 28% on the top personal income brackets. Next he increased payroll taxes on the working. Our debt went from 700 billion to 3 trillion (in 1980's dollars). He increased military spending not covered by revenues. His 1985 Federal outlays were 22.9%, the highest since 1962 until George W. Bush. This myth, every conservative Republican believes, that Reagan is responsible for less government is just that, myth.
Ronald Wolf
9:26 pm on Monday, March 4, 2013
Good work gg10. Pork is not just a Republican phenomenon though. It started as an acceptable joke when it was called "earmarking" but its no longer funny. If you watched this weeks sixty minutes you will see Beijing (formely Peking, formely Peiping) is experiencing some of the same problems including a dangerous real estate bubble that may result in a Chinese Tea Party, or a bloody "Chinese Spring".
Col. Duke Lacrosse
11:39 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
The wikipedia entry on Reaganomics does the topic much better service than can be done here. It's pretty well balanced.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics
gg10 wants to go in the weeds rather than discuss the real issue. So typical...
dan rice
1:32 pm on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Pretty good summary of the legacy of Reaganomics.
"the devil is in the details..."
dan rice
1:32 pm on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
To gg10:
Pretty good summary of the true legacy of Reganomics. The devil is in the details...
todd b
11:39 am on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
government should operate as the auto companies operated for many recent years. my company has had several contracts with (the largest auto company based in Dearborn) which we had to win by competitive bid, only to have purchasing come back after the bid was basically accepted to say we now need to whittle another 10% from price over next year if we really want the business. Not exactly like that but essentially the bottomline. So as a vendor you become real creative to stay alive. If government did the same with McDonald Douglas, Northrop, Boeing and every other defense contractor they could make strides towards that 10% cutback. Coupled with closing all the perks (like military golf courses suggested above), military bases no longer needed and indefinite pay freezes for all military (except those directly in combat zones) they get even closer to cutback targets. or incentivize Generals by saying you have a 10% cutback target that you need to hit by (date) or an automatic (x%) salary reduction will be imposed on your entire command. Carrot and stick forces those in charge to make hard decisions and be accountable with a line in the sand to make it happen or (consequence happens). For those that say it can't be done, it can.
Retired Army Tanker
8:27 pm on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Now that the sequestration deadline has passed, if nothing else changes, I'll be hit with a mandatory one day off work with no pay per week for 22 weeks starting sometime in April. Meanwhile, federal legislators in both chambers of Congress continue to receive at least an annual salary of $174,000.00 with no interruption in their paychecks.
Article I, Section 9, of the U.S. Constitution requires that Congress pass a federal budget. Yet the U.S. Congress hasn't passed a federal budget since April 29, 2009; instead, they've opted for a Continuing Resolution year after year since then to avert a US Government shutdown.
Since April 29, 2009, which the was the last time the U.S. Congress passed a federal budget, the average U.S. Congressman, senators as well as representatives, has earned roughly $522,000.00 in annual minimum salaries. Yes, that's a half-million dollars. As a DoD Civilian, I haven't done one damned thing to earn a 20% furlough-induced pay cut. And I can assure you that I have not received a half-million dollars in pay since April 29, 2009. Yet the six-figure-a-year masterminds of the federal budget universe can go to bed each night safe in the knowledge that their pay will not be negatively impacted at all.
Can you sense my anger?
Bob of RO
8:27 pm on Tuesday, March 5, 2013
This sequester is just a tiny adjustment of spending growth. We will still spend more in 2013 than we did in 2012. Spending will still go up year after year. This is a real snoozer, much ado about nothing.