McCain for Withdrawal

Here's a tidbit from John McCain's balanced budget "plan":

Balance the budget requires slowing outlay growth to 2.4 percent. The roughly $470 billion dollars (by 2013) in slower spending growth come from reduced deployments abroad ($150 billion; consistent with success in Iraq/Afghanistan that permits deployments to be cut by half — hopefully more)

James Kvaal and Robert Gordon note that this only adds up if you assume a total withdrawal. For one thing, "U.S. spending in Iraq and Afghanistan totaled $171 billion in 2007, according to the Congressional Budget Office – and that includes money for Iraqi security forces, foreign aid, and veterans benefits." Similarly, "According to CBO, rapidly reducing the number of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan to 30,000 would save only $55 billion in 2013" and "Obama’s own, more aggressive plan to withdraw forces from Iraq will save only $90 billion a year, according to his campaign."

To obtain the sort of savings McCain is counting on, in other words, would require a much more aggressive withdrawal plan than the one he opposes as too aggressive.

U.S. Army photo by Spc. Alan Moos

Comments

C'mon, Matt...

You expect us to believe that a picture of a soldier watching a cow under a tree was snapped by a guy named "Alan MOOS"?

That's just crazy.

Posted by lampwick | July 16, 2008 11:48 AM

To obtain the sort of savings McCain is counting on, in other words, would require a much more aggressive withdrawal plan than the one he opposes as too aggressive.

"Math is HARD!"

-- Gohn McBush

Posted by LFC | July 16, 2008 11:51 AM

At least the career I've made mocking Republican elected officials for their ignorance of "facts" in lieu of their gut-felt "truths" will live strong should we have a President McCain...

Posted by Stephen Colbert | July 16, 2008 11:58 AM

No, no, don't you see? By 2013 our successes in Iraq and Afghanistan will be so compelling that THEY will be paying US just to stay longer!

Posted by DTM | July 16, 2008 11:59 AM

Well, there's another way to "obtain the sort of savings McCain is counting on", and that's by making shit up.

Posted by Snoopy | July 16, 2008 12:03 PM

Matt, you missed the biggest part of all:

Iraq war funding ISN'T in the budget at all!

They're paying for it entirely through supplementals that bypass paygo and just go straight to the national debt. Even eliminating all war spending doesn't affect the current deficit at all.

It's getting to the point where the lies are just morally reprehensible.

Posted by Adam | July 16, 2008 12:12 PM

To obtain the sort of savings McCain is counting on, in other words, would require a much more aggressive withdrawal plan than the one he opposes as too aggressive.

John McCain has a secret plan to end the war. It's so secret, in fact, that even John McCain doesn't know of its existance.

Posted by DAS | July 16, 2008 12:22 PM

So wait... If McCain plans to end the war by 2013, doesn't that mean he has a timetable to end the war? I thought timetables were bad things only announced by week-kneed, appeasing Democrats.

Maybe some hard-hitting reporter will ask him about this discrepancy.

Posted by Boots Day | July 16, 2008 12:41 PM

Note also that McCain isn't budgeting for veterans benefits from Iraq, or for replacing equipment worn out in the sands of Iraq.

There's a reason that the book a couple of years ago was titled "The Three Trillion Dollar War" even though direct outlays at that point were about half a trillion ...

Posted by Warren Terra | July 16, 2008 1:00 PM

You overlooked one major part of McCain's plan to cut the budget though:

Phase 1 Steal Underpants
Phase 2 ?????
Phase 3 Reduce Deficit!

Posted by Jayhawk Max | July 16, 2008 1:59 PM

Lampwick --

I had to click on the comments just to see if anyone else caught what I did.

It's just GOTTA be a joke, right?

Posted by swellsman | July 16, 2008 3:06 PM

Where's the picture of the soldier shooting the cow?

As for three trillion dollars, the economists who figured that out actually say that's a conservative estimate and they actually figure four or five trillion dollars.

And we haven't even started the war in Iran yet which will triple or quadruple those estimates.

Add in starting a war with Pakistan and I'd say the US will be a broke Third World country within ten or fifteen years, if not sooner.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | July 16, 2008 5:31 PM

"As for three trillion dollars, the economists who figured that out actually say that's a CONSERVATIVE estimate and they actually figure four or five trillion dollars."

That's what McCain said! Oh, I kill me.

Too bad the 1st post beat me to the cow, I had a great one lined up for that.

Posted by Jeremy | July 17, 2008 1:47 AM