Pork, the Military, and the Democrats

A constituent recently noted a letter to a local paper castigating your humble narrator for a vote cast against a resolution urging that no New Jersey military bases be closed. This, the letter writer observed, constituted a refusal to defend Picatinny Arsenal against the possibility of closure.

Let’s be clear: the military is NOT a jobs program, NOT an economic development program, and should NOT be treated as simply another opportunity for political pork. The economic impact of a base closing upon a particular state or locality should count for precisely nothing when the military assesses whether to retain same. The sole and exclusive determination in arriving at such decisions ought to be whether the base provides an essential component of military preparedness. And THAT decision ought to be left to the experts, not self serving politicians.

It simply will not do to have local politicians second guessing military decisions, PROVIDED that such decisions were not made on political grounds in the first place. Such constituted the rationale for creating the Base Closing Commission (BRAC) in the first instance: powerful legislators would ALWAYS look out for their local economic interest, with the result that duplicative, unnecessary, and expensive bases would never be closed. The Commission assesses only military necessity, which is as it should be.

The Pentagon estimates that this latest round of base closings will save some $50 billion over the next ten years. That money is much better spent on tanks, planes, bullets and soldiers’ pay – or, if militarily unnecessary, on tax cuts – than on unnecessary bases.

Alas, far too many politicians – and the Democrats here in New Jersey in particular – let petty local concerns and an appetite for pork, trump military necessity and security. For instance, more than 90% of all homeland security funds here in New Jersey got pumped into such high profile terrorist targets as Camden County. Clearly, as between bringing home the bacon, and protecting the public, Democrats opt for the former.

Harsh? Perhaps. But at what other conclusion can the public possibly arrive based upon the gross disparity of security spending?

And, apparently, local Democrats feel the same way about military spending. When compelled to chose between a strong military, employing facilities efficiently according to legitimate military necessity – and pork – the Dems come out strongly in favor of pork. If it costs $50 billion, who cares? As long as local pork isn’t curtailed.

As it happens, Picatinny survived – and prospered – on its own merits. Some 700 new jobs will move to the facility as a result of facilities closures elsewhere. Had the local Dems gotten their way, other jurisdictions would have fought to retain these positions, to the great detriment of the military, of Morris County, and of the taxpayers. My vote to permit the process to proceed (as if there were anything a Member of the General Assembly could do about a federal commission anyway) turned out to be precisely correct, both for the Country and for the County.

Pork before principle; pork before security; and, most definitely, pork before the taxpayer. These, apparently, are the mantras of New Jersey Democrats.

Military – and security – decisions ought to be made upon the merits alone, without respect to politics. I cast the correct vote, and would cast it again.