How Would the Sequester Affect War Prevention Accounts?
The Budget Control Act of August 2011 requires an automatic across-the-board cut to all government programs on January 1st, 2013, followed by annual cuts through 2021.
FCNL supports cuts to the Pentagon budget, which would take place if this legislation as currently written went into effect. Unquestioned Pentagon spending perpetuates an over-reliance on military tools for foreign policy challenges and negatively impacts funding for tools to help prevent war. Further, cutting Pentagon spending at sequester levels would have virtually no impact on U.S. national security.
Unfortunately, budget cuts that would negatively affect U.S. and global security are on the table:
it is estimated that already underfunded programs that help prevent war would lose 8.2% of their budgets in the first year under sequester. These programs should be protected, rather than slashed, in budget discussions. After all, investing in the prevention of deadly conflict is 60 times cheaper for the U.S. than military intervention after war breaks out.
Here is what would happen to important deadly conflict prevention accounts in the first year of sequestration:
A Nine Year Plan
Sequestration doesn’t just involve one-year cuts: the Budget Control Act mandates decreased levels of funding for these programs for nine years--through fiscal year 2021. If implemented for all nine years, sequestration would have a devastating impact on funds that help prevent war.
So What’s The Bottom Line?
We do not support sequester cuts to the above deadly conflict prevention accounts (and many other international and domestic non-defense funds) that already suffer due to the bloated Pentagon budget. Funding prevention is the single-best way to avoid conflict—and it’s 60 times cheaper.