Curt Nickisch-WBUR
I appreciate your calm and measured discussion of defense cuts in Mass., but I was expecting you to mention the silver lining behind these cuts.
The US is trying to cut the deficit and the less we spend to subsidize defense spending the better chance of reducing the deficit. This always sounds like a good idea unless it comes to our back yard. As Congressman Barney Frank has so courageously stated, our military mission and our budget is much much larger than it has to be for our safety. And many Americans agree that a 25% reduction in unnecessary military programs would still keep us safe and free up money for deficit reduction and/or investments in our domestic infrastructure. I expect you are familiar with the PERI report out of UMASS Amherst that discusses the greater number of jobs that could be created by similar investments in health, green energy, education, and infrastructure as compared to military spending. And in this report they acknowledge that there would be a broader ranger of jobs and less high tech. Hospitals would employ surgeons and janitors. The obstruction to moving the money from the military to non-defense industries is the tradition of the military -industrial- congressional-complex revolving door. If we could just get our politicians to follow the will of the American people and start investing in programs that help people and improve the quality of life, rather than figuring out how to oppress or kill our supposed enemies. And though one could not deny disruption caused by the job losses, I imagine many defense industry workers would be happy to work on high tech solutions that would actually improve quality of life. We need a change of priorities and you are in an excellent position to mention the possible benefits of defense industry cuts, especially if we move the money to domestic needs.
Carol Coakley
RSS Feed
