Military Spending: A Poor Job Creator

By William D. Hartung
Center for International Policy
September 2011

Plans for cutting the federal deficit have raised an important question: what impact would military spending reductions have on jobs?

Contrary to the assertions of the arms industry, maintaining military spending at the expense of other forms of federal expenditures would actually result in a net loss of jobs. This is because military spending is less effective at creating jobs than virtually any other form of government activity.

The question is not whether military spending creates jobs – it is whether more jobs could be created by the same amount of money invested in other ways. The evidence on this point is clear.

• A billion dollars spent for military purposes creates 25% fewer jobs than a tax cut;
• One and one-half times fewer jobs than spending on clean energy production;
• And two and one-half times fewer jobs than spending on education.

And though average overall compensation is higher for military jobs than the others, these other forms of expenditure create more decent-paying jobs (those paying $64,000 per year or more) than military spending does.(1)

Part of the reason that military spending creates fewer jobs than other forms of expenditure is that a large share of that money is either spent overseas or spent on imported goods. By contrast, most of the money generated by spending in areas like education is spent in the United States.

In addition, more of the military dollar goes to capital, as opposed to labor, than do the expenditures in the other job categories. For example, only 1.5% of the price of each F-35 Joint Strike Fighter pays
for the labor costs involved in “manufacturing, fabrication, and assembly” work at the plane’s main production facility in Fort Worth, Texas.(2) A full 85% of the F-35s costs go for overhead, not for
jobs actually fabricating and assembling the aircraft.(3)

In a climate in which deficit reduction is the central focus of budget policy in Washington, a dollar spent in one area is likely to come from cuts in other areas. The more money we spend on unneeded weapons programs, the more layoffs there will be of police officers, firefighters, teachers and other workers whose jobs are funded directly or indirectly by federal spending.

Footnotes:
1) Jobs figures come from Robert Pollin and Heidi Garrett-Peltier, “The U.S. Employment Effects of Military and Domestic Spending Priorities,” Department of Economics and Political Economy Research Institute (PERI), October 2009. The study was commissioned by the Institute for Policy Studies and WAND, Women’s Action for New Directions. For a summary of these points, see “What Kinds of Federal Spending Create the Most Good Jobs?” available at http://www.ips-dc.org/articles/what_kinds_of_federal_spending_create_the_most_good_jobs and “Finding New Ways to Create Jobs” available at: http://www.wand.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/fact-jobs-08.pdf

2) U.S. Committee on Armed Services, “Hearing to Receive Testimony on the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter Program in Review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2012 and Future Years Defense
Program,” May 19, 2011, p. 14.

3) Andrea Shalal-Esa, “Lockheed, Pentagon Vow to Attack F-35 Costs,” Reuters.com, May 12, 2011.

Action Alert: Don't greenwash Woodstock's toxic weapons waste site

The toxic byproducts of weapons components production at Woodstock’s Rotron factory came to the public’s attention in the early 1990s. For years, without our knowledge, our air, water, and soil had been heavily contaminated with trichloroethylene (TCE) and other extremely poisonous chemicals from the plant. After an outcry, Woodstock’s military contractor was declared an official Superfund site, and for 16 years the New York Department of Environmental Conservation has managed a remediation program.

Now the DEC has determined (in a Public Notice dated May 24) that the site “no longer presents a threat to public health and the environment” and proposes to reclassify the site from a Class 2 site (“Significant threat to the public health or environment - action required”) to a Class 4 site (“Site properly closed - requires continued management”) on the Registry of Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Sites. Public comments on this reclassification are being accepted until July 1, and we urge you to submit a comment.

Overview of the remedial program

Besides TCE, a powerful carcinogen, other “compounds of concern” at the site are 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA), Freon 113, 1,2-Dichlorethene (1,2-DCE) and 1,1-Dichloroethane (1,1-DCA).

•    Woodstock’s public water supply was extended to neighboring homes so that they wouldn’t have to use the TCE-contaminated water in their wells.

•    Some contaminated soil was removed.

•    Deed restrictions were put in place to restrict future use of groundwater at the site.

•    Engineering controls were put in place to limit the spread of the contamination into groundwater and bedrock aquifers:

A system of 4 recovery wells continuously pumps contaminated water which would otherwise reach aquifers. An additional pair of pumps in wells on a neighboring property (across Route 375 at Fernwood Apartments) is designed to control another contaminant plume.

A separate system of 4 trenches collects contaminated groundwater. The water from the recovery wells and trenches – about 22,000 gallons per day of it – is pumped through a filter that removes the toxic compounds. In 2010, 22.82 pounds of TCE were removed in this way, representing an average TCE concentration of around 350 parts per billion. (The EPA’s recommended maximum level for TCE is 5 parts per billion.)

In addition, some two dozen monitoring wells are checked monthly, quarterly, or semi-annually for leakage of contaminants into the earth’s water system.

Our comments       

In our opinion, the site still represents a significant threat to public health and the environment for the following reasons:       

•    The recovery wells and groundwater trenches rely on an active system of pumps – the pumps are on continuously. If and when they stop working the poisons will make their own way into the environment. The catastrophe at Fukushima reminds us that active safety systems are inherently unreliable. Disruption of electricity supply, and failure of electrical or mechanical components, can and does happen in unpredictable ways. Just in 2010, according to the engineer’s report, the pump in recovery well 6(4) failed, a meter in recovery well 9 jammed, and an unnamed “mechanical issue” affected the sumps in Trenches 1A, 1B and 3.

•    Large quantities of contaminated soil remain on the site. The cost of removing all of it would have been prohibitive. The Final Engineer’s Report states that “A total of up to 150,000 cubic yards of soil appeared likely to exceed soil cleanup objectives for the site.”

•    The geology of the site and the flow of water – to 2 separate streams east and west of the site, and underground – are complex and unpredictable. Monitoring well 12B continues to show high contaminant levels. Unexplained spikes in contaminant levels have been occurring in recovery well 10. While the regular monitoring schedule will hopefully identify new problems as they develop, it cannot eliminate the threat of an unexpected incident spreading contamination to bedrock aquifers.       

In sum, while the engineering systems are doing the job they were designed to do, we cannot say that there is no threat to health or the environment. The threat remains. We can manage it, but the danger of significant health and environmental impacts is only mitigated, not removed. While the contamination remains, it would be false – and could lead to unwarranted complacency – to state, by reclassifying the site, that there is no longer a threat.

Address Public Comments about the Rotron-Woodstock site to:               
Mr. William Bennett
NYSDEC
625 Broadway
Albany, NY 12233-7014
Phone: 1-866-520-2334
wbbennet@gw.dec.state.ny.us

Raytheon, Missile Offense & Endless War

INT’L SPACE ORGANIZING CONFERENCE TO TAKE CRITICAL LOOK AT RAYTHEON

The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space will hold its 19th annual space organizing conference in Andover, Massachusetts on June 17-19, 2011. The group is made up of 150 peace groups around the world who are working to oppose the introduction of weapons and nuclear power into space. The theme for the conference will be Raytheon, Missile Offense and Endless War.

The weekend event will begin on Friday, June 17 with a protest at Raytheon in Andover from 3:00 – 5:00 pm to be followed by an evening supper at a local church. A daylong conference will be held at Merrimack College on June 18 that will feature leading activists from around the world. In the evening of June 18 a concert will be held at the Old Center Hall in North Andover at 8:15 pm and will feature Tetsu Kitagawa, one of Japan’s top folk singers. In addition local Andover resident, and Veterans for Peace leader, Pat Scanlon and friends will perform at the concert.

Activists will come to Massachusetts from as far away as India, England, Canada, Germany, South Korea, Sweden, and Japan and from throughout the U.S. Of particular interest this year will be discussions about U.S. global military expansion including its controversial “missile defense” deployments that are now being used to surround Russia and China. Raytheon plays a key role in creating many of these missile offense technologies. At their Andover facility, Raytheon builds the Patriot (PAC-3) system that is now being used by the Pentagon to help encircle Russia and China.

Global Network Coordinator Bruce Gagnon stated, “U.S. deployments of ‘missile defense’ systems throughout Europe and the Asian-Pacific are not only costing the American taxpayer an arm and a leg but are also destabilizing and will help create a dangerous new arms race. The Raytheon Co, which had 2009 sales of $25 billion, is a leading builder and promoter of the missile offense program. Our members are working hard in their communities to stop this massive expansion of U.S. militarism that Raytheon is pushing.”

The Global Network contends that the Obama administration must accelerate the pace of dismantling U.S. nuclear weapon stockpiles and close down the more than 800 military bases in the growing American military empire. In addition the U.S. must join Russia and China’s invitation to negotiate a global ban on weapons in space before a full-blown arms race in the heavens begins. Today the U.S. spends more on its military than all other countries in the world combined.

Each year the Global Network holds their space organizing conference in a different part of the world. Full conference details are available at the Global Network’s website www.space4peace.org

Militarist Madness

The Global Arms Bazaar

By LAWRENCE S. WITTNER

Despite the vast rivers of blood and treasure poured into wars over the centuries, the nations of the world continue to enhance their military might.

According to a recent report from the prestigious Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), world military expenditures grew to a record $1.63 trillion in 2010. Middle East nations alone spent $111 billion on the military, with Saudi Arabia leading the way.

Arms sales have also reached record heights. SIPRI's Top 100 of the world's arms-producing companies sold $401 billion in weaponry during 2009 (the latest year for which figures are available), a real dollar increase of eight percent over the preceding year and 59 percent since 2002. These military companies do a particularly brisk business overseas, where they engage in fierce battles for weapons contracts. "There is intense competition between suppliers for big-ticket deals in Asia, the Middle East, North Africa and Latin America," reports Dr. Paul Holtom, Director of the SIPRI Arms Transfers Program. Until recently, in fact, defense contractors scrambled vigorously to sell arms to Libya.

In numerous ways, the United States is at the head of the pack. Of the $20.6 billion increase in world military expenditures during 2010, the U.S. government accounted for $19.6 billion. Indeed, between 2001 and 2010, the U.S. government increased its military spending by 81 percent. As a result, it now accounts for about 43 percent of global military spending, some six times that of its nearest military rival, China.

U.S. weapons producers are also world leaders. According to SIPRI, 45 of its Top 100 weapons-manufacturers are based in the United States. In 2009, they generated nearly $247 billion in weapons sales—nearly 62 percent of income produced by the Top 100. Not surprisingly, the United States is also the world's leading exporter of military equipment, accounting for 30 percent of global arms exports in the 2006-2010 period.

Being Number 1 might be exciting, even thrilling, among children. But adults might well ask if the benefits are worth the cost. Are they?

Let's take a look at the issue of terrorism. Much of the last decade's huge military buildup by the United States was called for in the context of what President George W. Bush called the "War on Terror." And the costs, thus far, have been high, including an estimated $1.19 trillion that Americans have paid for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, plus thousands of Americans and vast numbers of Afghans and Iraqis who have been slaughtered. By contrast, the benefits are certainly dubious. Neither war resulted in the capture or killing of the terrorist mastermind, Osama bin Laden, who was tracked down in another country thanks to years of painstaking intelligence work and dispatched by a quick commando raid. Wouldn't Americans (and people in other lands) be a lot safer from terrorism with fewer wars and better intelligence?

Of course, there is also the broader national security picture. Even without terrorism, the world is a dangerous place. War is certainly a hardy perennial. Nevertheless, simply increasing national military spending does not make nations safer. After all, when one country engages in a military buildup, others—frightened by this buildup—often do so as well. The result of this arms race is all too often international conflict and war. Wouldn't nations be more secure if they worked harder at cooperating with one another rather than at threatening one another with military might? Even if they were not the best of friends, they might find it to their mutual advantage to agree to decrease their military spending by an equal percentage, thus retaining the current military balance among them. Also, they could begin turning over a broader range of international security issues to the United Nations.

Maintaining a vast military apparatus also starves other areas of a society. Currently, in the United States, most federal discretionary spending goes for war and preparations for war—and this despite an ongoing crisis over unemployment and a stagnating economy. Continuing this pattern, the Obama administration's proposed federal budget for fiscal 2012, while increasing military spending, calls for sharp cuts in funding for education, income security, food safety, and environmental protection. Even as congress wrestles with the thorny issue of priorities, huge numbers of teachers, firemen, health care workers, social workers, policemen, and others—told that government revenues are no longer sufficient to fund their services—are being dismissed from their jobs. Other public servants are having their salaries and benefits slashed. Social welfare institutions are being closed. Thus, instead of defending the home front in the United States, the immensely costly U.S. military apparatus is helping to gut it.

Ultimately, as many people have learned through bitter experience, militarism undermines both peace and prosperity. Perhaps it's time for government officials to learn this fact.

Dr. Lawrence S. Wittner is Professor of History at the State University of New York/Albany. His latest book is Confronting the Bomb: A Short History of the World Nuclear Disarmament Movement (Stanford University Press).

From CounterPunch

WAR PROFITEER MARCH in GREENWICH CT

A War Profiteer March will be held in Greenwich CT on Saturday Oct. 23, starting at 12:30 pm at the US Post Office at Greenwich Avenue and Arch Streets, passing through the downtown and then to the home of Steven R. Loranger, Chairman, President and CEO of ITT Corp. ITT is one of the top ten US military contractors and maker of bomb and missile release systems for drones of the type being used in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The 11 New York and Connecticut peace groups organizing the march will point out that Mr. Loranger, who was paid $14 million in 2009, has lobbied, through the Aerospace Industries Association, for continued funding for the wars in Afghanistan/Pakistan and Iraq. They will call on him to begin lobbying to halt these wars and a halt to all war funding except what is needed to immediately return all US military and private armed forces to the United States.

The marchers will also point out that since 2001, federal tax payers in New York and Connecticut have provided a total of $126 billion for the Afghanistan and Iraq Wars with $880 million of that coming from Greenwich, $1 billion from Stamford and $7 billion from Westchester County NY.

"We will be taking our message to the home of Mr. Loranger," said Nick Mottern, an organizer of the march, "to emphasize that war is coming daily to the homes of Afghanis, Pakistanis and Iraqis, that Mr. Loranger's style of living is related to profiting from these wars and that he and his military contractor colleagues have powerful voices in war decisions, perhaps equal to those of members of Congress, if not greater."

The marchers will note that ITT spent $2.5 million lobbying Congress in 2009 and 2010, to date, and it has distributed $223,000 to House and Senate candidates in the 2010 elections.

The march is endorsed by: WESPAC Foundation, NoWarWeschester, Code Pink Westchester, Peace Action New York, World Can’t Wait, Peace Action Greenwich/Stamford, Middle East Crisis Committee (CT), Concerned Families of Westchester, Rockland Coalition for Peace and Justice, Orange County (NY) Democratic Alliance and Women in Black Westchester.

How Much Is Enough?

America's Runaway Military Spending
Excerpt from an article on ZNet by Lawrence S. Wittner:

... A recent Pentagon report estimated that the Defense Department relies on 766,000 contractors at an annual cost of about $155 billion, and this figure does not include private intelligence organizations. A Washington Post study, which included all categories, estimated that the Defense Department employs 1.2 million private contractors.

Of course, enormously expensive air and naval weapons systems—often accompanied by huge cost over-runs—account for a substantial portion of the Pentagon's budget. But exactly who are these high tech, Cold War weapons to be used against? Certainly they have little value in a world threatened by terrorism. As Congressman Frank has remarked: "I don't think any terrorist has ever been shot by a nuclear submarine."

Furthermore, when bemoaning budget deficits, Americans should not forget the enormous price the United States has paid for its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. According to the highly-respected National Priorities Project, their cost, so far, amounts to $1.06 trillion. (For those readers who are unaccustomed to dealing with a trillion dollar budget, that's $1,060,000,000,000.)

When calculating the benefits and losses of these kinds of expenditures, we should also include the opportunities forgone through military spending. How many times have government officials told us that there is not enough money available for health care, for schools, for parks, for the arts, for public broadcasting, for unemployment insurance, for law enforcement, and for maintenance of America's highway, bridge, and rail infrastructure? ...

Obama Seeks to Expand US Arms Exports

Published on Thursday, July 29, 2010 by the McClatchy Newspapers

by Maggie Bridgeman

WASHINGTON - The United States is currently the world biggest weapons supplier - holding 30 per cent of the market - but the Obama administration has begun modifying export control regulations in hopes of enlarging the U.S. market share, according to U.S. officials. ...

Read the full article