The current legislative dispute in between Congress and
Head of state George W. Bush, usually called a contest
over war funding, arranged to resume in September 2007, is
not primarily about cash. By historical requirements, the
Iraq war– while soon to be the second most costly in
American history (2nd just to The second world war)– is
fairly inexpensive as a part of the U.S. gross
domestic item (GDP). At its height, the Second World War
expense nearly 40 % of annual gross domestic product, the
Oriental War nearly 15 %, and the Vietnam War 10 %. Iraq,
although costing a hefty $ 9 billion per month, amounts to
less than 1 % of this year’s GDP.
This clash included conflicting views about the knowledge of
continuing U.S. military engagement in a war that to a
growing number of Americans looks like a tragic oversight,
and exactly what take advantage of Congress had to require a modification. The
fight was the outcome of Congress’ limited powers to
change war policy. After the revolution, the founding
daddies offered Congress the power to tax and determine how
earnings are spent. So while they made the Head of state the
Commander-in-Chief of the military, he might not carry out a
war without the desire of lawmakers to appropriate
the funds. That, in theory, offered them enormous powers to
impact wartime policy. However, cutting off funds is a
blunt instrument, which Congress has been reluctant to
workout lest it be implicated of weakening troops in the
It was not constantly so. War funding was a deeply divisive
issue in the war of 1812– which was maybe even more
unpopular than the Iraq war. Officials in some states
advocated secession in demonstration. The Federalist Party, the
dominant political force in the late 18th century, sought
to reject President Madison, a Jeffersonian Republican, funds
for the war, hoping he would make an early peace. It
failed, but lots of Americans saw the tactic as unpatriotic
— and within a few years, the Federalists disappeared.
That method was never tried once again. At the height of
the Second World War, in 1943, a Democratic Congress voted
down President Roosevelt’s request for a large tax hike
because it believed taxes were already too high, but never ever
cut war appropriations.
Throughout the Vietnam War, Congress provided Head of state Lyndon
Johnson cash for the military, however demanded a tax
increase and cuts in his Great Society social programs. As
casualties mounted, the draft expanded, deficits rose and
inflation increased, support plunged. However Congress still
did not cut off money for the soldiers, each one of whom were
withdrawn in 1973. In 1974, lawmakers eventually used
their power over spending to impose ceilings on the number
of U.S. officials licensed to be in South Vietnam and
later on cut off military support for the Saigon
Despite a heated dispute, when funding the war came previously
Congress, they eventually supplied U.S. troops the funds
they required– as they have over the past 200 years. However
sustaining a war without the support of a large section of
the populace and Congress will certainly prove exceptionally and
progressively hard as when it come to Vietnam– and
pressures for withdrawal will heighten even without a cut
in war spending now.
As the U.S. military presence in Iraq decreases, a debate on
ways to meet longer-term security needs is vital. Iraq
has diverted cash from other requirements. Even if
stability in Iraq could in some way be attained, the higher
Middle East and other areas will certainly continue to be harmful
places and may require an extended military presence, e.g.,
an ongoing marine commitment in the Persian Gulf. Devices
ruined or broken in the Iraq War should be replaced;
outreach programs will certainly be had to improve relations with
countries pushed away throughout recent years; intelligence
abilities and homeland security will require comprehensive
shoring up; anti-terrorist forces and the weapons they require
must be augmented; and injured veterans will require assistance
for years. Therefore, Americans should not anticipate a big
The present disagreement will leave a legacy of bitterness on
both sides, as after Vietnam. That is understandable, but
allowing it to divert attention from other security requires
would be dangerous. The harmful heritage of Vietnam lasted for
nearly a years and caused big nationwide security cuts.
Facing an ongoing terrorist threat, the country can not
manage that now. Avoiding another attack – and if
essential responding to one – will require considerable
resources. And other new crises are likely to appear.
Both sides have to work towards a sound financial technique
to satisfy these needs and ensure that the U.S. monetary
system and economy continue to be resistant to handle future
emergency situations, consisting of war, a major hurricane, or a
pandemic. The earlier they get to it, the more safe and secure the
country will be.
Robert D. Hormats is Vice Chairman of Goldman Sachs (International) and handling director of Goldman, Sachs & & Co. Mr. Hormats served as Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Company Affairs from 1981 to 1982, Ambassador and Deputy U.S. Trade Rep from 1979 to 1981, and as Senior Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic and Business Affairs at the Department of State from 1977 to 1979. He served as a Senior Personnel Member for International Economic Affairs on the National Security Council from 1969 to 1977, throughout which time he was Senior Economic Consultant to Dr. Henry Kissinger, General Brent Scowcroft and Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski.Mr.
Hormats was a recipient of the French Legion of Honor in 1982 and Arthur S. Flemming Award in 1978. Mr. Hormats has been a checking out speaker at Princeton University and is a member of the Board of Visitors of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. He likewise is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.Mr.
Hormats’ publications consist of “Abraham Lincoln and the International Economy”; “American Albatross: The Foreign Debt Problem”; and “Reforming the International Monetary System.” Other publications consist of articles in Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, American Lender and The Financial Times.
ABOUT THE BOOK
THE PRICE OF LIBERTY: Spending for America’s Wars
by Robert D. Hormats
Released by Times Books
Copyright (c) 2007 by Robert D. Hormats. All rights reserved.
Please feel to replicate or disperse this file as long as the contents are not changed and this copyright notification is intact. Thank you.
Discover Even more College Financing Articles