State or human security? A response to the 2007 budget proposal

In session
February 2006

Bishops urges House to reject budget agreement
CRS calls for support for food aid funding
State or human security?

State or human security?
The Friends Committee on National Legislation responds to proposed 2007 budget
We call it a “shoot and spend” budget. President Bush this week proposed a $2.7 trillion budget for fiscal year 2007. He has chosen to increase spending on new weapons systems, the special forces (unconventional fighters), and other military programs. To pay for this war fighting, he has proposed draconian reductions in the civilian programs of the federal government. As reported, the $439.3 billion allocated to the Pentagon in this budget is a 6.9 percent increase over fiscal year 2006. According to an estimate by the Washington Post, President Bush has increased military spending about 45 percent over the level when he took office five years ago. The budget analysis FCNL will release later this month will examine military spending in several government agencies and, as a result, may show a different and higher number. (Col. Dan Smith has prepared an analysis of the military strategy behind the Bush budget.)

The president has proposed a budget driven by fear of “terrorists” and by the assumption that military muscle is the primary tool for creating global stability, world peace, international security, and safety for the people who live in this country. The president’s budget trades off human needs here and abroad for aggressive U.S. military strategies and war. As a practical matter, these strategies have been tried and arguably have made matters worse – witness Iraq, the post-Katrina Gulf Coast, and the ascendency of al Qaeda franchises worldwide – while making profits for war and “reconstruction” industries. Congress should not accept the president’s budget choices, both for these practical reasons and for moral reasons.

Budgets reflect the moral choices of the nation. The Constitution provides Congress with the responsibility to make the final decisions on government spending. Grounded in a recognition of the failures of military strategies over the last three years, Congress should craft a budget that reflects the moral values of our people. War spending drives up the mounting federal debt and diverts resources from human needs programs both here and abroad. Our observation is not—as the president charges—“isolationist.” On the contrary, we urge federal spending for engagement with the world through peaceful civilian programs. Domestic programs, especially those with a proven track record of success, should not be cut back to provide yet more money for war. That’s a bad deal for everyone, except the military industry. Congress should construct a federal government spending plan that reduces funding for the military and increases money for international diplomacy and efforts to build human security at home. Urge your members of Congress to craft a moral budget.

No More “Enron bookkeeping.” As he has in previous years, the president refused to include in his budget estimates the real costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, preferring to fund these military operations largely through “emergency supplemental” spending requests. That is, he does not want that spending shown in his budget. Congress has already approved $320 billion for these two wars, and the Pentagon announced this week it will seek an additional $70 billion in funding for this year. The 2007 budget also includes $50 billion in “bridge” financing to cover ongoing costs in Iraq. Congress should condition any further funding for these wars on the U.S. taking clear steps toward the withdrawal of all U.S. military troops and bases from Iraq. Urge your members of Congress to reject any further funding for war not tied to a strategy for withdrawal from Iraq.

Money for prevention, not for war. The president’s budget includes $439 billion for the Pentagon, but only $35 billion in funding for the State Department and foreign assistance programs. The president has again proposed spending $3 billion on foreign aid channeled through the Millennium Challenge Corporation, but he cut funding for traditional development assistance programs. Overall, spending on diplomacy and foreign aid is at about the same level as two years ago. Urge Congress to pull the purse strings on the administration’s accelerating militarism and shift funds toward SMART Security approaches that focus on sensible, multilateral, U.S. responses to the escalating violence in the world.

Take Action Now
Urge your representative and senators to reject the president’s budget and craft a federal government spending plan that recognizes that more military spending will not bring the U.S. more security at home or abroad.

Contact your members of Congress directly from FCNL's web site. We've provided a sample letter that you can edit and send to your representatives..

More Resources
FCNL will be posting additional analysis of the federal government budget on our web site in the coming days. Go to our web site and select the “Budget” link on the left hand side of the page.

Contacting Legislators

Contact your members of Congress through FCNL's web site.

Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

Sen. ________
U.S. Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Rep. ________
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

FCNL's Congressional Directory

Contacting the Administration
Contact the President through FCNL's web site.

White House Comment Desk:
202 456-1111
Fax: 202-456-2461
White House web site

President George W. Bush
The White House
Washington, DC 20500

Back to page top