Cuts In Military Spending

Leon E. Panetta, the Defense Secretary, is going to present his strategy to cut the Pentagon’s budget by hundreds of billions this week. He is expected to propose to shrink the size of the military to only be large enough to fight one ground war and conduct multiple other smaller operations. Pentagon officials are still debating on where the cuts will be made in almost every important area of spending. The idea is to eliminate $450 billion over the course of 10 years, which is about 8% of the current budget.

On top of the obvious concern of how the cuts will affect the future of the American military, the real issue being faced is not the cuts themselves, but where the cuts are coming from. A large chunk of the funding, about a third of the budget, is spent on military personnel costs. It goes to pay for salaries and allowances, health care, retirement, and additional costs. Mr. Panetta himself acknowledged that the personnel cost is unsustainable and the “generous retirement benefits may have to be scaled back to save crucial weapons programs.” On the one hand, spending a huge portion of our defense budget on “generous” benefits is irresponsible, but on the other is it fair to “break a promise to those who risked their lives for the country?” Despite the ethical debate, taking away from the Pentagon’s health care and retirement funds would potentially save billions in the coming years.

Although most of the Pentagon’s budget is put to good use, there is also a lot of government oversight as usual. Hopefully Congress will come up with or approve a way to decrease the spending over time. But, as the article said, “nowhere is balancing budget and strategy more challenging than in deciding how large a ground combat force the nation needs and can afford.”

California Revenue Shortfall to Force More Cuts

Governor Jerry Brown announced today that California's state income is $2.2 billion short of its projected income. As a result, $258 million will be cut from public school transportation, and there will be increased fees for college students. Governor Brown is planning on asking voters next year to temporarily raise taxes on the state's highest earners. A recent poll shows 60% of voters in favor of this measure.

This article goes back to the discussion over whether or not California is too democratic. While direct initiatives can get new laws passed more quickly and give the public more power, they also allow new laws, such as prop 13, to get passed which, as evidenced by this article, have substantial consequences. Governor Brown is calling for more democracy to fix the current budget crisis by asking the voters, and not the legislature, to fix the crisis. Do you believe that the public is willing/able to fix it? Or do you think the budget crisis should be dealt with primarily by the legislature?

32% Increase in UC Fees

(Link to the story embedded in title)
For those of you seniors who are planning on attending a U.C. next year, be prepared to pay more. Today, the UC Regents finance committee voted to recommend a 32 percent student fee increase, raising the annual price of a UC education to $10,302. This increase has been implemented to make up the $535 million dollar funding gap created by reduced state funding and inflation. As soon as next semester, students will see an incremental increase of 15% in their tuition. The decision by the regents was not welcomed warmly by students. Protests broke out in all the UC campuses, and at UCLA, where the meeting was held, UC riot police arrested 14 people. At UC Berkeley, 1,000 students and faculty members protested in Sproul Plaza. For students, many will struggle even more to pay for their tuition and some may have to drop out. While students with a family income less than $70,000 will have their tuition waived, the increase is still significant for everyone else. The regents acknowledged the effect on students from this fee increase and were reluctant to vote on it, but stated it was necessary to close the funding gap.

As a high school senior with one sibling in college and two siblings who are juniors in high school, I am seriously considering attending a U.C. as its tuition is low enough so that my parents can afford to pay for both my education and the education of my brothers. However, now even a U.C. might be out of reach financially. I feel like this increase could have been avoided if the government did a better job managing its education funds. California has one of the largest public university systems in the nation, and cutting funds from them impacts thousands of students. Instead of reducing the funds to the U.C., the state should have looked to other departments to save money as education is important for the future. California has one of the strongest public university systems, but with the budget cuts to the CSUs and now the U.C.s, things seem to be declining. Hopefully this increase isn't permanent and we will see tuition return to normal soon. What are your thoughts and opinions on this?