- ‘Welcome to the edge of freedom’: Biden’s boots touch down in DMZ
- Obama: Hole U.S. ‘digging out of’ requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- Obama’s regulatory agenda will cost U.S. economy $143B next year: report
- Patriot Act author on James Clapper: Fire, prosecute him
- Russia P.M. Medvedev: No amnesty for political prisoners
- Michigan GOP Senate hopeful reminds government is the ‘servant’
- Christmas, by Congress: Members mull a 15-cent tax on trees
- U.S. unemployment falls to five-year low of 7 percent; 203K jobs added
- World mourns Nelson Mandela and celebrates his life; burial set for Dec. 15
- Bill O’Reilly reminds: Nelson Mandela ‘was a communist’
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Upping TRICARE cost adds insult to injury
Combat operations in Iraq may have concluded and the effort in Afghanistan may be on a politically driven timeline to completion, but American service members now find themselves fighting off a new attack - one from their own government.
TRICARE, the military’s medical program, is in the cross hairs of the Department of Defense. Citing proposed cuts as “a tough and challenging responsibility,” Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta recommended to the House Budget Committee a TRICARE fee increase of upward of 345 percent. Let’s talk numbers.
In 2010 the Defense Health Program (DHP), of which TRICARE is a component, cost taxpayers a total of $48 billion. Out of a 2010 federal budget of $3.5 trillion, DHP therefore accounted for a mere 1.4 percent. And yet since 2009, the Obama administration’s funding for welfare has ballooned to more than $430 billion, a 49 percent increase. Perhaps Mr. Panetta should harken back to those heady days when he served as President Clinton’s chief of staff. Surely he remembers that Mr. Clinton, forced into pragmatism by a Republican Congress, instituted the most sweeping reforms to welfare in the nation’s history, resulting in an astonishing drop in those living off the largesse of others.
Armed with those data, Mr. Panetta could actually take a stand on behalf of those whom he was appointed to lead. To quote Thomas Jefferson, “I think … we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious.” When a nation looks back over the past decade, there has been no greater display of industriousness than the labors of our service members - many of whom sacrificed all on Lincoln’s “altar of freedom.”
So it comes down to this: Why not reduce funding to those who have contributed nothing in order to sustain those who have contributed much? Unfortunately, given this administration’s ideology, I think I know the answer.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
Get Breaking Alerts
- Bill OReilly reminds: Nelson Mandela was a communist
- Obama administration issues permits for wind farms to kill more eagles
- Kill team: Obama war chiefs widen drone death zones
- PRUDEN: British press horrified as London's new mayor dares to proclaim the truth
- Obama: Hole U.S. 'digging out of' requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement
- 'Hunger Games' delivers Obama's message on income inequality
- Rush Limbaugh: Obama trying to make Mandela death about himself
- Craigslist killers: Police say newlyweds stabbed man for thrills
- NYC alarms with notice: Immediately surrender your rifle