No Price Too High

The myopic “America-Firsters” are once again falling into the “useful idiot” role, this time by embracing the ideology of the anti-free-trade unions.

The latest assault on the proven triumph of free-market economics comes to you courtesy of Congress. But to the consternation of Defense Department leaders and the White House, this blow to rebuilding our military at bargain prices comes from a friend. According to an article in today’s New York Times the hand holding the dagger belongs to a close friend, Congressman Duncan Hunter, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

Famously hot-tempered Donald Rumsfeld is all or nothing on Hunter’s “buy American or don’t use it” provision. According to the Times, “…Rumsfeld, has said he will recommend that President Bush veto the entire $400 billion 2004 Pentagon budget if Mr. Hunter does not back down. According to a White House statement, Mr. Hunter's proposals are ‘burdensome, counterproductive and have the potential to degrade U.S. military capabilities.’ ”

Talk about misguided. The California Republican and former Ranger has told the Times, “If the American worker is going to pay for the defense of the free world…he should participate fully in the manufacture of military goods. This is a warning shot, a red flag. We need to have domestic sources for critical military components. No one argues with that. We just differ in the details.”

Maybe he thinks it’s just a detail. But crushing the DOD budget in the midst of our massive Federal deficit makes no sense at a time when we should all be pulling together to defeat terrorism abroad. There’s no need for DOD to buy from high-priced, unionized U.S. workers when they can get a better deal abroad. Let those who work for almost nothing without health and safety protection contribute to our efforts, too. We should welcome their sacrifice to ensure that our military gets the lowest price.

Some liberals argue, absurdly, that the low pay in foreign markets creates a hotbed for revolutionaries and anarchists. But that’s economic idiocy, really. Would these workers be more Anti-American if we did no business with cheap-labor countries? Then they would have no jobs. Would that make these people think more kindly towards us?

Arguably the best way to measure the merits of this “Buy American” approach to spending our precious tax dollars on the Defense budget is to look at who sides with Hunter and his anti-free-trade agenda. According to the Times, “In a letter being circulated in Congress, Leo W. Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers of America, says, ‘American steelworkers are also American taxpayers and they do not want their tax dollars going to subsidize the export of their jobs!’ ”

And in case you wondered about the thinking of the “world community,” so happy to profit from our foreign military excursions, but so short on supporting them, the NATO secretary general, Lord Robertson, reports the Times, thinks buying American, “would threaten ‘political unity.’ ”

Despite support for buying American from some self-serving U.S. industries, like clothing and shoemaking, machine tool, ship building and steel companies, the biggest defense contractors, like Boeing, Lockheed and Raytheon, managed to find a sympathetic Congressional ear. It belongs to their trusted friend in the senate, John Warner. A group of 25 military-industry leaders met with him to impress on him how much more they would have to charge the DOD to wage our war on terrorism, should they be forced to employ more Americans. Theirs is a clear and patriotic case, that at a time when all of us should be focusing on protecting our homeland, the last thing on our minds should be a protectionist ploy to keep jobs in the U.S.
¶ 1:30 PM