Newsflash:
Issues Healthcare Human Rights Medicaid Expansion in the States End Wars and Occupations $1.5 Trillion and Counting: What New Involvement in Iraq Means for Federal Spending
Thursday, 21 August 2014 00:22

$1.5 Trillion and Counting: What New Involvement in Iraq Means for Federal Spending

Written by  Lindsay Koshgarian, Jasmine Tucker | National Priorities
President Obama gets briefed by national security adviser Susan Rice President Obama gets briefed by national security adviser Susan Rice (White House Flickr)
As President Obama allows a trickle of troops back into Iraq and continues to ramp up air strikes against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), Americans are wary about our role in a conflict most think we never should have started in the first place. Polls show that while Americans are divided on new airstrikes in Iraq, most people are against sending troops back. And while these strikes might seem targeted, mission creep is a very real threat in Iraq.

Aside from the obvious concern about dangers to our troops, U.S. involvement in Iraq also comes at another cost: money spent on war is money that’s not available to address our other priorities. We have a border crisis, high unemployment, a growing student loan debt problem, to name a few. While the Pentagon has not specified how much the renewed conflict has cost so far, signs point to higher war bills yet to come as President Obama calls the strikes "open-ended," despite the fact that we simply cannot afford it.

Since invading Afghanistan in 2001, we are on track to spend a total of more than $1.5 trillion on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars before the end of fiscal year 2014 in September, including $817 billion for Iraq. Even before the current crisis, war spending was expected to keep going strong for the foreseeable future.

Never mind that troops left Iraq in 2011. Never mind plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan over the coming year. President Obama’s requested war funds for fiscal year 2015 will not "decline precipitously” compared to previous years. Instead, the president is requesting $60 billion in war costs for fiscal year 2015. If that was the plan when we expected our involvement to be winding down, what will our costs be now that operations seem to be ramping back up? With every new step the U.S. takes into the Iraq conflict, war spending numbers will only rise.

Some lawmakers are calling on Congress to vote on U.S. involvement in Iraq citing worries that we will become involved in another long and expensive ground war. But, with election season upon us, a vote is politically risky and therefore unlikely, even though the American people have the right to weigh in on how we spend federal dollars.

Link to the original article from National Priorities. 

Read 1504 times

Medicaid Expansion Articles

Healthcare for All Activity

Deep Blue -- Legislation introduced and/or passed. Active single-payer movement.**
Moderate Blue
- No legislation. Highly active s-p movement.
Light Blue -- No legislation. Growing s-p movement.
Pale Blue -- No legislation. Opportunity to grow movement.
**CA most active state movement. Legislation pending strategic decision.
Red Refused Medicaid Expansion
Green Expanding Medicaid - opportunity for S-P movement growth

Sign the TPP Fast Track Petitions

MoveOn.org Petition - Congress Don't Renew Fast Track

Public Citizen Petition - Congress Must Reject Fast Track Authority

MoveOn.org Petition - Stop the Trans Pacific Partnership

CREDO Petition - Stop the Massive Corporate Power Grab

 

Find Your Elected Officials for Issues

Enter your zip+4 and find your elected officials. This link provides name, address and phone number

ButtonFindElectedOfficials

 

Legislative Session - All States