Friday, September 16, 2005

Where We Stand

I'm told that President Bush gave a good speech, that some Democrats in Congress were grousing about the specifics, or lack thereof, of President Bush's plan to assist the Gulf Coast and deal with the extreme poverty in places like New Orleans.

I'm also told that members of the GOP are concerned about the return to big government programs that worked so well in the past (that's sarcasm folks). The President is proposing major new programs that are going to cost a lot of money.

Where is all that money going to come from. I can already hear Democrats saying that we need to get out of Iraq in order to pay for the rebuilding of the Gulf Coast, but I don't buy that argument for a moment. The fact that the US military was able to respond as quickly as it did is a testament to the increased spending on the military, having a military that is well versed in reconstruction efforts and the logisitics of moving personnel and equipment into severe conditions. If anything, this should suggest the need for greater military expenditures on airlift and sealift so that our forces can get to where they need to go faster and safer.

Consider the following - the USNS Comfort, a hospital ship, is a converted tanker that is very slow compared to most other naval vessels. The Comfort and her sister ship, the USNS Mercy, are the only two hospital ships in the US Navy. The potential for natural disasters is a constant threat in the US and around the world, let alone military conflicts that the US may find itself in. The US ought to look into procuring at least one or two new hospital ships that can arrive on scene much faster. This would enhance US federal capabilities to respond to disasters, especially where hospitals on land have been damaged or destroyed.

Spending money isn't necessarily the problem so much as where and how that money is spent. Throwing good money after bad is not the way to do it. Throwing money at poverty isn't going to solve it. That's been the US policy since the Great Society was first proposed 40 years ago and that hasn't worked out too well.

No comments: