Wednesday, June 02, 2010

More Kline Double Speak

More Double Speak from Kline!

What Kline said:
"...more and more Minnesotans share with me their frustrations over the increased partisan rancor in Congress..."

The Truth: 
Four term Congressman Kline is as much to blame, maybe even more to blame, as his vote record shows...Kline has voted with a majority of his Republican colleagues 94.6% of the time during the current Congress.

What Kline said:
"I have been pleased to work closely with Democrats and Republicans on the House Armed Services Committee to pass the National Defense Authorization Act, the annual defense bill that serves as the budgetary blueprint for the Pentagon."

The Truth:

The budgetary blueprint that the House Armed Services Committee voted on shows close workings with military-industrial corporations and war pirateers. It included provisions and funding that the Bush, Obama, and Pentagon didn't want like $485 million  for GE/Rolls Royce's engine that Kline included.

What he said: "Congress decides how to spend many of your hard-earned tax dollars through an "earmark" system that is both broken and corrupt. Any member of Congress can request funding for a project -- no matter how outlandish it may be."

The Truth:
Outlandish or not, Kline votes for earmarks all the time...for example last week Kline voted for an earmark from Todd Akins (R-MO), that gives the Navy eight additional F/A Hornets (for a total of 17 in the last two years which the Pentagon does not want!). Naturally, Boeing is one of the top contributors to John Klines's Freedom and Security PAC.


Minnesota Central said...


FYI : Did you know that the United States spent $661 billion dollars for military spending in 2009 … that was an increase of $47 billion dollars more than a year earlier. With $65 billion dollars had been proposed for Afghanistan operations in the 2010 budget request and $61 billion had been set aside for Iraq, which leaves a lot for lot for Congress to play with.

It isn’t that we are spending so much, it’s that Mr. Kline is thinking about yesterday and not today’s war … read my recent commentary that the military is focusing on drones. A drone has a cost of $6 million … you could buy over 500 drones for the cost of one F-22 … the F-22 has never been flown in combat. Yet, John Kline (R-MN-02) supported an “earmark” offered by Rob Bishop (R-UT) for eight additional F-22. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates put a 187-plane cap on the program and does not think we need any more than that. Another example is Boeing’s C-17 … $2.7 billion.

Conversely, DFL-endorsed candidate Dan Powers offers a more reasoned approach, “we can’t afford to do that. If we can retool the way we use our military, we can put a lot of money towards infrastructure needs, towards becoming energy independent. There are so many other things we can do to invest in our own country".

With the national debt rising so much, why is that the Obama stimulus is getting blamed and no one is questioning Mr. Kline’s military spending to outfit a military for the last war ?

Minnesota Central said...

Why does Mr. Kline always frame it as a question of "Support the Troops", it's about how and what Congress are borrowing for military programs ... its about the future generations that will have to pay the bills that Mr. Kline has run up.

Consider these points :
The Pentagon’s base budget request for fiscal 2011 represents an increase of about 1.8 percent over fiscal 2010, when defense spending rose 2.1 percent. Those budgets follow eight years of 4 percent average annual growth.

Congress approved $104.8 billion for weapons buying this year and is considering proposed procurement spending of $111.2 billion for fiscal 2011, which begins Oct. 1. The Pentagon may request $120 billion in 2012, rising to $137 billion in 2015, according to Pentagon Comptroller Robert Hale. AND don't forget that Congress writes its own EARMARKS to pay for F-22, F-18, etc. that the Pentagon does not want.

According to the 2010 edition of the IISS Military Balance, in 2008 the US spent about 4.9 percent of GDP on national security, and the defense budget has grown in real terms by about 3 percent per year since 2001. By contrast, China spent about 1.4 percent of its GDP on defense, Russia 2.4% Great Britain only 2.3 percent , and German and Japan roughly 1.3 percent and 0.9 percent respectively. Lucky them.

If the U.S. cut defense by 20-30 percent (an enormous reduction), it would still be devoting roughly $400 billion per year to keeping Americans safe. Our national security spending would still be six times larger than China's, ten times larger than Russia's and a whopping forty times larger than Iran.

Minnesota Central said...

FYI : The Pentagon has finally issued a Stop Work order on the Kline-supported alternate engine … this was due to a coalition of Republicans, Democrats and Independents that rejected Boehner’s attempt to “earmark” funding for General Electric. Normally, when the taxpayer wins, Kline would issue a press release … but this time he was eerily silent … maybe he’s not ready to give up yet … they still have six months to find funding.