The failed Obama policies of the Great Recession might protect us from the man-made disaster that a second Obama term would undoubtedly prove to be. But the economy is not the only reason a vote against Obama is critical for the future safety and security of all Americans. President Obama’s resistance to promoting US interests internationally and his demotion of our national defenses are enough to compel every conscientious voter to elect his opponent this November.
The primary job of the federal government of the United States, as dictated by the Constitution, is to provide for national defense. The President, under his constitutional role of Commander-in-Chief, is entrusted with setting the defense agenda for the country. This President, however, has chosen to focus on social justice and equality of outcome as the primary concerns of his administration. He has, therefore, allowed the United States to slip in its role as a world power, and he has encouraged negligent cuts to the Department of Defense and the US military.
In effect, under the Obama Administration the strength of American influence worldwide has been downgraded.
In a conference call to Heritage Foundation members, former US Senator Jim Talent explained that changes made to US security under the Bush administration are still effective today. Changes effected in the Defense Department, intelligence agencies, and even the Department of Treasury have allowed the US to remain free of terror attacks since 9-11. The types of policies instituted by George W. Bush take years to reach their optimum effect, and President Obama has benefitted from simply continuing many of President Bush’s innovations. In fact, the successful capture of Osama bin Laden last May can be traced to policy changes and War-on-Terror techniques that were developed and employed during the Bush Administration.
The delayed effects of modifications run both ways in that the negative effects of cuts to our military will also take years to materialize, but will be recognized for many years into the future. Therefore, the United States will likely still be suffering from the damage of Obama’s failed foreign policies for years after he is defeated (hopefully) in re-election. James Carafano of the Heritage Foundation calls Obama’s policies “Bush-lite,” and he maintains that such policies are not enough to provide for the common defense and secure the future safety of America on the international front.
The inevitable “sequestration” that is required to occur as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011, should Congress fail to approve a deficit reduction bill with at least $1.2 trillion in cuts, puts the issue of national security to the forefront. Automatic cuts to the Department of Defense, along with equal cuts to non-security programs, will occur if a budget deal is not reached.
There is much concern among experts that Obama will use the threat of “sequestration” and its automatic military cuts, the results of which elected officials from both parties acknowledge will be devastating to American security, to force the hands of Republicans in Congress to agree to tax increases.
It will be an inevitable Catch-22 for members of the GOP, who recognize that the current state of our military is not something we can ignore much longer.
Dr. Carafano explains that the United States is still living off of the capital military inventory from the build-up of the Reagan years. During the Clinton administration the military was cut by 40% and has been reduced even more since the 1990s. Yet during the same time period, deployments increased substantially, even before the War on Terror commenced. Therefore, the United States is depleting its Reagan military capital, negatively impacting the day-to-day readiness of the US military. The hull cracks of US Navy cruisers provide physical evidence of this devastation.
The job of the military is to preserve peace at the lowest opportunity cost in terms of funds and human capital. But the United States needs a strong military presence around the world to serve not only as an active force, but, just as critically, as a deterrent. We need other countries to be intimidated by our strength and to know that in a moment’s notice, American forces can surface at any location worldwide to defend her interests and the interests of her allies.
It is imperative that America project a sense of military superiority in order to maintain world peace and to demonstrate a strong commitment to protecting its interests. And Republicans in the House understand the critical threat to our security that is the Obama Administration.
Obama has clarified, time and again, his preference for increasing social welfare programs over national defense. Social welfare, at the very least, is a debatable function of the federal government under the Constitution. Yet the current administration has chosen to prioritize such programs over maintaining a responsible military and defense. Such blatant disregard of his constitutional duties to protect America from harm should easily earn him a defeat come November.
Yet, as Mike Needham of HeritageAction.com explains, there is a disconnect between the necessity to maintain a strong defense and what Americans view as the major issues of the day. The disconnect arises primarily from security and defense being viewed as a fiscal or budgetary issue. Rather than considering military spending as just another category in the federal budget, elected officials need to ask themselves if the US can meet the security threats of today and fund the antidotes to the likely threats of tomorrow.
Senator Jim Talent summarizes the role of the federal government as a protector of national security: We need presidential leadership to encourage proper and efficient use of military funds. We need to defend the homeland in an age of asymmetric weapons, while ensuring freedom of access to international seas and airspace for travel and trade. We need to anticipate future threats and dangers and do our best to prevent or thwart them.
It is imperative that America project a sense of military superiority to demonstrate a strong commitment to protecting American interests, and to guarantee the maintenance of world peace. America needs a broad-spectrum military to defend our homeland and deter potential threats to international security. And we need a president who understands and respects his constitutional duty to provide for the common defense of his nation and her allies.