MILITARY & WAR SPENDING
The following documents are all in PDF format. You can download or view each file by clicking on its title.
Security Spending Primer: Getting Smart About The Pentagon Budget
Produced by the National Priorities Project, this Primer consists of 6 two-page fact sheets on topics ranging from nuclear weapons to the employment impact of U.S. military and domestic spending choices to the military cost of securing energy. We designed these fact sheets to be read separately or as a group. We have also included a host of resources: organizational contact lists, sample NPP tools, resources lists, a glossary and more. (Size = 1.1 mb)
The Cost of War in Afghanistan
Produced by the National Priorities Project, this 4 page background paper provides information on Afghan public opinion, cluster bombs, the human cost of the war, and information on what each state might have gained had money be spent on human needs rather than on making war. (Size = 500 kb)
Unified Security Budget for the United States for Fiscal Year 2010
Produced by Foreign Policy in Focus of the Institute for Policy Studies, the new “Report of the Task Force on a Unified Security Budget for the United States for Fiscal Year 2010” is now available. The report finds that while the Obama administration promised “a sweeping shift of priorities and resources in the national security arena,” this promise has not yet been kept. The Unified Security Budget has been produced annually since 2004 and draws on a task force whose members are experts in U.S. security spending and military and foreign policy. (611 kb)
The Military Cost of Securing Energy
Produced by the National Priorities Project, this report discusses the military costs of securing energy resources for use by the United States. It concludes that, excluding military costs for the Iraq war, the U.S. military spent between $97 billion and $103.5 billion in Fiscal Year 2009 to secure energy resources. (Size - 1 mb)
The report notes that:
“Knowing the military costs of securing energy is important for a few reasons. For one, U.S. soldiers’ well-being is put at risk in the pursuit of securing energy. Secondly, the tax dollars spent on enhanced military activities have opportunity costs; in other words, the same tax dollars could be spent on improving education, repairing bridges, or addressing other needs, even other national security needs. Third, since the market price does not indicate the true cost of production and consumption, it results in market failure and overconsumption of energy. If the market price reflected the true cost, the quantity demanded by consumers would decrease, leading to more conservation, and making renewable, non-polluting energy alternatives more viable. In short, the true price of energy supplies would facilitate a transition away from fossil fuels, lead to greater energy independence and lessen the impact on the environment.”





