President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney sparred briefly over foreign policy last night during their second-to-last debate before the Nov. 6 election.
Romney criticized Obama’s foreign policy and the president slammed his challenger’s plans for boosting defense spending. Yet the presidential hopefuls did not delve deeply into Pentagon-budgeting matters such as the so-called sequestration cuts to defense spending and Romney’s proposed military buildup during the 90-minute debate at Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y. The town-hall style event was intended to be devoted to both foreign and domestic policy, according to the Commission on Presidential Debates.
Aerospace Industries Association President Marion Blakey deemed it a “shame” the debate didn’t address the “800 (pound) gorilla in the room in today’s politics–the upcoming ‘fiscal cliff’ and sequestration cuts that will together plunge our economy into recession and threaten our national security.” That so-called fiscal cliff includes the scheduled expiration of Bush-era tax cuts at the end of this year.
On the campaign trail Romney and his vice presidential running mate Paul Ryan, a congressman who chairs the House Budget Committee, have sought to blame Obama for the across-the-board sequestration budget cuts, which originated with the Budget Control Act of 2011.
The Obama administration is opposed to sequestration, the $1.2 trillion decade-long reduction in planned defense and non-defense spending slated to start next January unless Congress and the White House can agree on an alternate plan. Obama wants congressional Democratic and Republican lawmakers to agree on a new wide-reaching plan that includes both spending cuts and new revenues.
Romney has pledged to fight the $500 billion in sequestration cuts to defense and along with the $487 billion in 10-year cuts that the Pentagon already has worked into its budget plans. Romney in recent weeks has been increasing calls for stopping “$1 trillion” in defense cuts.
Blakey said in a statement after the debate that the forum “was the perfect opportunity” for Obama and Romney to contrast their positions on sequestration and the fiscal cliff, and thus “offer the American people a choice.”
“We need quick action in the lame duck Congress to stop this looming threat” of sequestration, Blakely argued, referring to when Congress reconvenes in November and December. “These debates should be used to provide clarity on the most pressing issue of our day.”
The final presidential debate, scheduled for next Monday night, is slated to be devoted to foreign policy. The 90-minuted showdown will be moderated by journalist Bob Schieffer at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla.
The upcoming debate’s topics, which the Commission on Presidential Debates said could change, include: America’s role in the world; the Afghanistan war and Pakistan; Israel and Iran; the changing Middle East and “new face of terrorism;” and the rise of China. The debate format calls for six 15-minute time segments, each of which are intended to focus on one topic, according to the commission.
At last night’s debate, Obama repeated his criticism that Romney wants to spend $2 trillion on “military programs even though the military’s not asking for them.”
Some observers peg this $2 trillion figure on Romney’s proposal, in an October 2011 whitepaper, to set defense spending at 4 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in the coming years.
Travis Sharp, a fellow the Center for a New American Security, calculated Romney’s proposal to maintain that level of Pentagon spending would cost at least $2 trillion more over the next decade than would Obama’s defense-budget proposal.
Pentagon leaders, as part of Obama’s administration, publicly say they support his proposed defense budgets.
During last night’s debate Romney criticized Obama’s foreign policy in the Middle East and beyond, without delving into budgetary matters.
At a vice presidential debate last Thursday, Ryan criticized current plans for military-spending reductions–citing specifics such as cutting cargo planes, delaying development of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and not boosting Navy shipbuilding to the extent he and Romney want.
Vice President Joe Biden, a former senator who chaired the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, countered that military leaders support planned reductions.
“Look, the military says we need a smaller, leaner Army,” Biden said at the in Danville, Ky. debate. “We need more special forces…We don’t need more M1 tanks.”
Romney has proposed increasing weapons spending, including boosting Navy shipbuilding from nine to 15 ships per year.