OCR Text |
Show defense costs must rise. If conditions con-ditions are as serious as we have been told, we had better get down to cases and quit wasting our time and money on trivia and non-esseneials. Improve fiscal practices and modernize budget procedures. Pass Hoover Committee Recommendations, Re-commendations, H. R. 8002. Place budget on annual ac-cruel ac-cruel basis with annual Congressional Con-gressional review and control. There can be no adequate defense de-fense unless our economic strength is preserved and maintained unless the taxpayer taxpay-er remains solvene. The $73.9 billion budget threatens our security se-curity and well being. Utah's share of this breathtaking breath-taking budget based on a formula for-mula developed by the Tax Foundation, Inc. of New York is $243,982,000. This is the equivalent of $300 for every man, woman and child in the state or $1,50 for a family of five. It is nearly four times as much as all property taxes paid in Utah ($67,521,000) and is five and one-half times as much as the operating cost of our schools. We are vitally interested in-terested in what is done. Funds to Defend But Not to Waste We are willing to sacrifice for Defense but not for Waste, says a report from the Utah Taxpayers Association, which also makes other observations as follows: There is wide agreement that our national defense must be adequate and strong. It has been and will continue to be costly and in many instances wasteful and extravagant. As Senator Douglas has said, "The military do have great virtues but thrift is not one. The military mili-tary have a built-in bias against economy." Defense, we must have but defense well planned and efficiently executed. execu-ted. According to U. S. News, a total of $17,364 million have been spent since 1946 and we are just getting a good start. In 1953, missils took 1.7' of the defense dollar it now takes 24. Many other changes chang-es are taking place in this missile mis-sile age. An ever present danger dan-ger is that a horde of items and projects will be advocated and undertaken that do not have even a casual relationship to defense. This is what is happening. In 1954, a sort of in-between period, per-iod, ordinary federal budget expenditures ex-penditures which includes everything but defense, "international "inter-national affairs" and debt service ser-vice totalled $12.7 billions. The 1959 budget for such purposes pur-poses adds up to $18.4 billions or an increase of $45.4 above the 1954 figure. By way of comparison, we note defense costs have actually actual-ly decreased from $48.6 billions bil-lions since that time. Even since the low of 1956, when the total was $42.5 billions, the proposed budget of $47.6 billions is only 12 higher. One might well conclude that the "all-out-defense" effort is directed di-rected toward perpetuating- and increasing the monstrosity of hodge-podge grants-in-aid programs: pro-grams: It is high time we stopped this double talk about the seriousness ser-iousness of world affairs, the cross-roads, the all-out need of defense and the like unless we do something about it. Most everyone agrees that we must have adequate defense and that I |