For Immediate Release

228 Republicans and 41 Democrats in the U.S. House voted for a $612 billion defense authorization bill on May 15 . They maneuvered the increase in military spending, which should have been prohibited by ‘sequester’ spending caps established by the Budget Control Act of 2011, by putting some of the spending ina slush fund.

The Senate Armed Services Committee also approved a $612 billion defense authorization bill that circumvents the sequester.

President Obama is in favor of the military spending hike, although he may quibble over use of the slush fund (for “Overseas Contingency Operations”).

‘Both Democratic and Republican politicians are throwing more taxpayer money at the military-industrial complex in Washington D.C.,’ said Nicholas J. Sarwark, chair of the Libertarian Party. ‘We need to starve the beast, not feed it more.’

‘More military spending virtually guarantees more war, more U.S. troop casualties, and a higher risk of a terrorist attack in the United States,’ he continued. ‘This country needs people in office who are committed to a foreign policy of peace – and who don’t need a sequester to keep spending down and act in the best interest of the American people.’

In 2014, thirty-eight Libertarian candidates for federal office pledged that, if elected, they would co-sponsor legislation to cut military spending by 60% or more and cut total federal spending accordingly; close all foreign U.S. military bases; withdraw completely from the Middle East; and bring our troops home.

“As someone with active duty family members, I believe politicians should show real respect to our men and women in uniform,’ said Sarwark.’Wasting billions of dollars on pork-barrel weapons systems and sending our troops overseas to provide for the defense of other countries is not real respect for the troops. Real respect is properly caring for the wounded veterans from past foreign adventures and not sending more men and women to die in future ones.”