President Clinton's 1995 defense budget, which allocates $1.29 trillion for defense from 1995 through 1999, continues his Administration ,s systematic dismantling of the nation's defenses so painstakingly rebuilt by Ronald Reagan in the 1980s., In the Clinton plan, the Department of Defense will fall short of its funding re- quirements-as outlined in the Administration's own "Bottom-Up Review"-by nearly $ 100 billion. The Ad- ministration and Congress must stop looking for "savings" in the defense budget, which has paid more than its share in cost-cutting efforts by three Administrations since the Reagan build-up peaked in 1985. To be sure, Clinton slightly raised this year's defense budget by $1.8 billion.2 However, when adjusted for in- flation, the 1995 defense budget still shows a decline of 0.9 percent. This is the tenth straight year of declining defense budgets. Furthermore, the budget will decline in inflation-adjusted terms in each of th
provision of the patriot act, which allows the government to go to a third party to get our communication. and that s the issue. tony, turning to a slightly different topic, i want to talk about money. secretary of defense hagel was out today talking about the pentagon budget cuts. let s take a listen. if sequester-level cuts persist, dod would experience nearly $1 trillion in defense spending reductions over the next ten years. to help dod balance strategic ends, ways, and means under these budget scenarios, the strategic choice of the management review scrutinized every aspect of dod s budget. everything was on the table. so, what does this all this mean for what we re doing in afghanistan going forward and our presence there? within the past week, there s been a bipartisan, much like the amash vote on nsa. there s been a real moving back towards reducing the funding for afghanistan. now, general dunford is doing his best with the commander of forces there. he s now debating