-Caveat Lector-

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: The Insanity Defense
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 13:45:32 -0500
From: Robert Weissman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Multiple recipients of list CORP-FOCUS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Need a definition for Washington?

Try institutional insanity.

Consider this: The United States, the world's only remaining military
superpower, is about to embark on a military buildup unmatched since
the
peak of the Reagan-era Cold War.

President Clinton is preparing to propose a boost in the defense
budget of
$112 billion over six years --  on top of the already monstrous $265
billion of federal money spent annually on the military. The weapons
procurement budget alone is scheduled to grow 50 percent in the next
half
decade. And the Congressional Republicans are set to demand an even
greater jump in military spending.

What's happened, you might ask: Was there a coup in Russia? Has the
Cold
War resumed?

Uh, no. It is not the Empire that's struck again, itUs the
military-industrial complex.

During the Clinton presidency, the U.S. defense industry -- with
encouragement and subsidies from the Pentagon --  has undergone an
ear-splitting consolidation that has left but three major contractors:
Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Raytheon. Today's Lockheed Martin is the
product of the merger of Lockheed, Martin Marietta, Loral and parts of
General Dynamics. Boeing leaped to the top tier of the contractor pack
with its acquisition of McDonnell Douglas. Raytheon gobbled up Hughes.

With manufacturing facilities spread across the United States, these
three
companies now have enormous political influence -- they can promise
that
new military contracts will mean jobs in the districts of hundreds of
members of Congress, and in nearly every state. They supplement this
structural power with huge campaign contributions -- more than $8.5
million  in the 1997-1998 electoral cycle, according to the Center for
Responsive politics -- and even bigger lobbying investments -- nearly
$50
million in 1997 alone, according to the Center. To complete the
package,
the industry invests in a variety of hawkish policy institutes and
front
groups, all of which churn reports, issue alerts, factsheets,
congressional testimony and op-eds on the critical need for more, and
more, and more defense spending.

Combined with the powerful lobby from the Pentagon and its
chicken-little
worries about shortcomings in U.S. military "readiness" and the
ability of
the United States to fight two major wars simultaneously, the defense
contractors have successfully positioned themselves to reap the
benefits
of a new explosion in military spending.

As William Hartung of the World Policy Institute notes in a new
report,
"Military Industrial Complex Revisited," nothing indicates the power
of
the contractor lobby more than its ability to extract more money from
Congress for weapons purchases than the Pentagon itself has requested.

Hartung highlights the example of the C-130 transport plane, which is
made
by Lockheed Martin just outside of the congressional district of
former
Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. In the last 20 years, the U.S. Air
Force has asked for five C-130s, but Congress has funded 256. "This
ratio
of 50 planes purchased for every one requested by the Pentagon may
well be
a record in the annals of pork barrel politics," Hartung writes. The
C-130s go for about $75 million a piece.

Even more remarkable, perhaps, is the "Star Wars" program. With the
collapse of the Soviet Union, the program's original mission no longer
exists. Although the Pentagon has poured $55 billion  into the program
in
a decade and a half, as Hartung notes, it has been a miserable failure
in
technical terms. Undeterred, the Congressional leadership added an
extra
$1 billion in Star Wars funding in the 1999 federal budget. Chalk up
another victory for Lockheed and Boeing.

But nothing compares to bonanza that the defense sector is about to
reap.
Without even the bogeyman of a perceived Soviet threat and in a time
of
rigid adherence to budget austerity, the weapons makers and their
allies
are about to usher in a new era of military profligacy and industrial
waste.

With the U.S. infrastructure crumbling, its Medicare system imperiled,
child poverty at unconscionable levels in a time of unparalleled
economic
expansion and global warming threatening the well-being of the entire
planet, a remotely sensible version of "national security"  would
prioritize these concerns over maintaining the military budget at
current
levels, let alone increasing it.

Unfortunately, the lobbies for public works, the sick and aged, the
poor
and the environment cannot match the influence of the weapons makers.
Their urgings that the federal government invest to address real
problems
that trouble the entire society, or at least large segments of it, are
dismissed as "unreasonable."

In Washington, where things are upside down, it is the madmen in the
Pentagon and at Lockheed Martin who are considered reasonable.

Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate
Crime
Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based
Multinational Monitor.

(c) Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman

Focus on the Corporation is a weekly column written by Russell
Mokhiber
and Robert Weissman. Please feel free to forward the column to friends
or
repost the column on other lists. If you would like to post the column
on
a web site or publish it in print format, we ask that you first
contact us
([EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]).

Focus on the Corporation is distributed to individuals on the
listserve
[EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe to corp-focus, send an e-mail
message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following all in one line:

subscribe corp-focus <your name> (no period).
Focus on the Corporation columns are posted on the Multinational
Monitor
web site <www.essential.org/monitor>.

Postings on corp-focus are limited to the columns. If you would like
to
comment on the columns, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to