GOP Rep. Admits Repubs cut security funding for Embassies
whygohome
Posts: 2,305
Whoops
Jason Chaffetz Admits House GOP Cut Funding For Embassy Security: 'You Have To Prioritize Things'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/1 ... 54912.html
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) acknowledged on Wednesday that House Republicans had consciously voted to reduce the funds allocated to the State Department for embassy security since winning the majority in 2010.
On Wednesday morning, CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien asked the Utah Republican if he had "voted to cut the funding for embassy security."
"Absolutely," Chaffetz said. "Look we have to make priorities and choices in this country. We have…15,0000 contractors in Iraq. We have more than 6,000 contractors, a private army there, for President Obama, in Baghdad. And we’re talking about can we get two dozen or so people into Libya to help protect our forces. When you’re in touch economic times, you have to make difficult choices. You have to prioritize things.”
For the past two years, House Republicans have continued to deprioritize the security forces protecting State Department personnel around the world. In fiscal year 2011, lawmakers shaved $128 million off of the administration's request for embassy security funding. House Republicans drained off even more funds in fiscal year 2012 -- cutting back on the department's request by $331 million.
Consulate personnel stationed in Benghazi had allegedly expressed concerns over their safety in the months leading up to the Sept. 11 attacks that killed four Americans, including Amb. Chris Stevens. Chaffetz and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, claim those concerns were ignored.
"It seems to be a coordinated effort between the White House and the State Department, from Secretary [Hillary] Clinton to President Obama's White House," Chaffetz told Fox and Friends on Tuesday.
Chaffetz and Issa co-signed a letter to the State Department, demanding answers on to the Benghazi security detail. State Department officials and other witnesses will testify before the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense, and Foreign Operations on Wednesday.
Ahead of the hearing, some Democrats claim that partisanship and campaigning are corrupting the Libyan investigation, The New York Times reports. The charges come as some GOP members attempt to frame the incident as a failure of the Obama's foreign policy and to call criticize the administration for engaging in a "cover-up" of what really occurred.
Jason Chaffetz Admits House GOP Cut Funding For Embassy Security: 'You Have To Prioritize Things'
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/1 ... 54912.html
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) acknowledged on Wednesday that House Republicans had consciously voted to reduce the funds allocated to the State Department for embassy security since winning the majority in 2010.
On Wednesday morning, CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien asked the Utah Republican if he had "voted to cut the funding for embassy security."
"Absolutely," Chaffetz said. "Look we have to make priorities and choices in this country. We have…15,0000 contractors in Iraq. We have more than 6,000 contractors, a private army there, for President Obama, in Baghdad. And we’re talking about can we get two dozen or so people into Libya to help protect our forces. When you’re in touch economic times, you have to make difficult choices. You have to prioritize things.”
For the past two years, House Republicans have continued to deprioritize the security forces protecting State Department personnel around the world. In fiscal year 2011, lawmakers shaved $128 million off of the administration's request for embassy security funding. House Republicans drained off even more funds in fiscal year 2012 -- cutting back on the department's request by $331 million.
Consulate personnel stationed in Benghazi had allegedly expressed concerns over their safety in the months leading up to the Sept. 11 attacks that killed four Americans, including Amb. Chris Stevens. Chaffetz and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who chairs the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, claim those concerns were ignored.
"It seems to be a coordinated effort between the White House and the State Department, from Secretary [Hillary] Clinton to President Obama's White House," Chaffetz told Fox and Friends on Tuesday.
Chaffetz and Issa co-signed a letter to the State Department, demanding answers on to the Benghazi security detail. State Department officials and other witnesses will testify before the House Oversight Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense, and Foreign Operations on Wednesday.
Ahead of the hearing, some Democrats claim that partisanship and campaigning are corrupting the Libyan investigation, The New York Times reports. The charges come as some GOP members attempt to frame the incident as a failure of the Obama's foreign policy and to call criticize the administration for engaging in a "cover-up" of what really occurred.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
:roll:
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Starve the Beast.............sign an oath of loyalty to a lobbyist group run by Grover Norquist, and abandon the American People.
Didn't Romney say he wasn't cutting the military budget
and he catches hell here because of that?
So now the blues here will blame the reds when they do cut a budget :?
I'm confused
Wrong all accounts.
And, we are talking about a specific case here. This GOP Rep essentially put his foot in his, and the Repubs', mouths
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
It will be interesting to see what happens when the US finally defaults on it's sovereign debt.
But by that time we will have raised the debt ceiling so many times to pay for things with imaginary money that the US dollar will be as worthless as the Iranian Rial.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
You're right.
Under Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, and Obama, there were no spending cuts, lots of tax decreases, lack of revenue.
Both sides may have an agenda.
The Republicans: birng the debt up to an unsustainable level and force the Starve the Beast approach into effect
Dems: ignore rising debts and deficits, use this to increase taxes on the rich.
And, Gimmie is right about the debt ceiling
One things though: there has only been 1 fiscally responsible, relatively speaking, President in my lifetime: Clinton
The fact is, you DO have to prioritize. Some things need to be cut, others trimmed, others not at all. I don't agree with prioritization in this particular situation, but, hell, hindsight sure is clear, ain't it? Reporters, epitomizing the Monday Morning Quarterback.
Pandora's comments were also part of my initial gut reaction, but I'm not sure this budget is really a part of the defense budget. Anyone know?
I believe the State Department Budget and the Military/Defense budget are separate.
Paying for possibilities is exactly what the defense department sells to gain more spending.
Jason is right, this is exactly why there won't be cuts. Everything is the fault of the person who cut the dollar, when we probably need to blame our poor foreign policy, not lack of security, for what happened in Libya and other parts of the world.
you are certainly right, but if they didn't have the possibility of raising it when they need to indefinitely, they would have to be MUCH more responsible in the short term with spending.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
How long has this been the problem? 4, 5, 6 decades?
I remember watching a documentary on the 1991 Gulf War (was that really a "war"). The end of the documentary discussed how the U.S. used the "war" as an excuse to set up operations (expand operations) in the region. They interviewed a Saudi about this development, and his response was quite clear. I paraphrase: "Please leave. We don't need you here. We don't want bases here as they are in Europe and Asia."
It's difficult for the average American to not only see another perspective, but to understand it. To break through this barrier would only be the first step.
probably since WWII. There have been successes, but we are way too involved around the world, whether we are asked or not, our answer should start being no more often.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
a tangled web we weave ?