A $90 billion dollar Pentagon slush fund and tax breaks for billionaires & corporations OR

[think]

jobs, trains, bridges, & college educations.

You decide

Pentagon’s $90 Billion ‘Slush Fund’ Comes Under Attack

By Eric Pianin - May 8, 2015 3:15 PM


An obscure Pentagon account that has powered the U.S. war effort in the Middle East since shortly after the 9-11 attacks is at the center of a growing political controversy over the use of budgetary gimmicks and the future direction of government spending.

For a decade and a half, the White House, Congress and the Department of Defense have played a deceitful game in funding the $1.7 trillion cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, keeping much of that spending “off budget” even as it still added to the national debt.

The Overseas Contingency Operations fund, as it came to be known shortly after President Obama came to power, was meant to exclusively cover the cost of personnel, weaponry, supplies and logistical support to the roughly 2.5 million troops sent to war. But gradually, OCO evolved into an all-purpose slush fund for the military, members of Congress and the Bush and Obama administrations. Policy makers found it convenient to use the account not only for fighting overseas but to fund routine costs of Department of Defense personnel and benefits or to purchase weapons system still in the production stage.

Last September, for example, the Defense Department tried to use $2 billion of OCO funds to pay for weaponry including eight F-35 stealth fighters that are still in development and may not be available for deployment for years. Congress blew the whistle on that, but has allowed other abuses of the OCO fund over the years.

Read more:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/pentagon-90-billion-slush-fund-191500847.html

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/05/08/Pentagon-s-90-Billion-Slush-Fund-Comes-Under-Attack

[jwirr]

1. THIS is what I have been suggesting that Obama us his power to get the MIC to use this kind of money

to hire US citizens to rebuild our roads and bridges. It can be a military project while hiring citizens to do the construction. If Ike could build them in the first place we can repair them the same way. Same with the energy grid etc.

If you cannot lick them then join them.

[Egnever]

3. Interesting approach

gonna chew on that for a bit.

[Sherman A1]

4. Precisely

The Interstate Highways are indeed military projects in any event. There is no reason that it should not be maintained and rebuilt as needed for national defense.

The National Defense Highway System

The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways (commonly known as the Interstate Highway System, Interstate Freeway System, Interstate System, or simply the Interstate) is a network of controlled-access highways that forms a part of the National Highway System of the United States. The system is named for President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who championed its formation. Construction was authorized by the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956, and the original portion was completed 35 years later, although some urban routes were cancelled and never built. The network has since been extended, and as of 2013, it had a total length of 47,856 miles (77,017 km),[2] making it the world's second longest after China's. As of 2013, about one-quarter of all vehicle miles driven in the country use the Interstate system.[3] The cost of construction has been estimated at $425 billion (in 2006 dollars).[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System

[jwirr]

6. And hopefully the definition could be extended to cover many of the bridges, etc. I know this just

plays into the MIC for profit idea but someone is going to get rich off of it anyhow. Get as much of it fixed and give people good paying jobs is the goal. They did it once why not again.

The energy grid can also be justified that way. Global warming is a national security problem. Building a sustainable grid is vital. The Labor Department and the Engineers could work together for the good of our country. And we could actually get something out of the military budget other than another war.

[GoneFishin]

5. That would be great for the country and the economy. But probably too lefty a move for

someone who has never shown much spirit when it comes to irritating the right wing of the party.

[Sherman A1]

7. I believe it depends

on how one sells the idea.

[daleanime]

2. K&R.....