QUANTICO, VIRGINIA – SEPTEMBER 30: U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (L) greets U.S. President Donald Trump as he arrives to speak to senior military leaders at Marine Corps Base Quantico on September 30, 2025 in Quantico, Virginia. In an unprecedented gathering, almost 800 generals, admirals and their senior enlisted leaders have been ordered into one location from around the world on short notice. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Getty Images
Up to three quarters of a million federal workers could be furloughed if the current impasse over funding the federal government continues. And unlike the last two government shutdowns, in 2018/2019 and 2013, active duty military personnel will also miss paychecks starting October 15th if Congress doesn’t act, but they will be required to serve nonetheless. In addition, many military families depend on other government services to make ends meet, like federal nutrition assistance. There is a bill being considered that would guarantee military pay even during the shutdown, but as of this writing its fate was uncertain.
The government shutdown means short-term hardships for military families and a wide swath of other federal employees, but active duty military personnel and veterans of recent wars will be hit even harder, and for a longer time period, under the provisions of the so-called “big beautiful bill” that passed earlier this year. Only a tiny share of the increased Pentagon spending contained in the bill – about 5% – will go to help military families. And cuts elsewhere in the budget will mean a net loss for many of these families, as pillars of the social safety net like nutrition aid are slashed.
The situation for veterans is even worse. Cuts in food assistance and health care will hit them harder, because they are more dependent on these programs. As the non-partisan Center for Budget and Policy Priorities has pointed out, in 2023, the last year for which full statistics are available, ‘one out of every four veterans lived in a household receiving food assistance from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or health care from Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP).” And even before the big bill, VA Secretary Doug Collins announced a plan to eliminate 83,000 jobs in the Veterans Administration, a move that would slow processing of benefits, and force closure of veterans health clinics. Cuts across the government will also take a toll, because veterans constitute roughly 30% of federal employees.
At a time when the Pentagon budget has reached $1 trillion for the first time in the post-World War II period, and members of Congress tout these expenditures as promoting “peace through strength,” military families and veterans are being left behind while more than half of the department’s budget goes to contractors like Lockheed Martin, RTX (formerly Raytheon), and General Dynamics. While these firms supply the systems active duty troops need should they go into combat, technology does not win wars. It takes well-trained, well-motivated troops acting on behalf of a realistic strategy to prevail. Giving short shrift to current and past military personnel weakens America’s defenses.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s rhetoric about prioritizing “the warrior” will not make up for the neglect of the troops and veterans when it comes to how the Pentagon spends our tax dollars. Arguing about beards and haircuts, and loosening disciplinary rules to allow actions that in the past could have been considered violations of the laws of war distracts from what should be the primary mission of the armed forces – to be prepared to defend the nation in the event of a serious threat to our security. But as more and more funding goes to dubious projects like the Golden Dome missile defense system, which many scientists assert will never perform as advertised, basic supports, from combat training to supporting the families of active duty troops, lack sufficient funding.
The best way to support our troops is to stop asking them to fight wars in conditions that make it almost impossible for them to succeed, as happened in America’s 20-year intervention in Afghanistan. Our troops need more than martial rhetoric. They need financial support, adequate training, and a civilian leadership that sends them to war only when all other means of fending off a threat to the nation have been tried and exhausted.
Instead of talking about haircuts, beards, and “male standards,” Secretary Hegseth should be pressing for greater support for active duty troops and their families, as well as veterans who have served in recent conflicts. And we should have a serious national debate about which military commitments truly provide for our defense, and which ones are relics of strategies that were conceived decades ago, when the world was a very different place.
Disclaimer: This news has been automatically collected from the source link above. Our website does not create, edit, or publish the content. All information, statements, and opinions expressed belong solely to the original publisher. We are not responsible or liable for the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of any news, nor for any statements, views, or claims made in the content. All rights remain with the respective source.