Continued from page 1

Together, GBIs and SM-3s are what stand between your house and a conventional exploding or nuclear warhead landing on it now and in the future. 
Yet since assuming office, Mr. Obama has effectively cut missile defense programs, including GBIs and SM-3s, by nearly $5 billion. Automatic cuts triggered by sequestration would cripple investment in these systems, potentially by billions more. That leaves a really big hole in the sky through which hell could fall. 
Politically, sequestration is a creative way to draw money from the defense budget for later use in European socialism-styled big government initiatives, while pitting the GOP (who refuse to pass any budget that contains tax increases with no real spending cuts) against its traditional allies in the military and defense contracting. Sequestration cuts to missile defense kill emerging protection technologies, but would also decrease existing homeland defenses as maintenance of current land and sea-based protections are seriously underfunded. 
Key to homeland and deployed forces protection is expanding “battle space” and defensive capacity within it. That is what investment in GBI and SM-3 technology will do – improve the quality of existing capabilities while expanding our safety zone. 
The last federal budget was passed four years ago, and Senate Democrats have refused debate on a White House budget since, which is how we arrived at sequestration in the first place. It is hard to stick to a budget when you don’t have one, which may actually be the plan. The president has also ignored sequestration alternatives initiated by House Republicans. 
When the Pentagon recently announced 800,000 Defense Department employees across the country may suffer sequestration furloughs, Americans previously disinterested in this weird Roman-sounding word took note.  Non-directed, un-prioritized cuts mean real damage to real families and our national defense. 
Ballistic missile attack may be the war of the future on American soil. The growing delta between the capacity of foreign hostiles and America’s ability to protect itself means a potential missile attack on the U.S. homeland is not a vague external threat that applies only to Washington insiders. As the administration spends less on homeland defense in inverse proportion to the threat, we are all at risk. 
Our SM-3 missile variants IA and IB have proven brilliantly effective in test after test, the most recent a smashing success this month near Hawaii when a medium range missile was successfully destroyed. Investment that improves these current systems is not just a wise defensive action; it’s a moral imperative. The purchase of additional existing IAs and upgraded IBs – set to roll off the production line as soon as next year – is also critical, as military commanders repeatedly express concern that our defensive arsenal is already below capacity. 

Story Continues →