You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Africa North
Democrat says Libya costs run much higher
2011-04-08
A Democratic lawmaker says the White House is “dramatically underestimating” the true cost of the military’s involvement in Libya by relying on accounting that obscures the total financial burden being saddled on taxpayers.
Don't count on the White House making clear what the Libyan War is costing us.
Rep. Brad Sherman, a lawyer and accountant, told The Washington Times on Thursday that more accurate accounting of the mission would provide a clearer picture of just how much money the U.S. pours into this and other U.N.-backed missions while putting Congress in a better position to silence critics who say the nation is shortchanging the global body. The Californian also said the cost of the U.S. involvement in Libya should be covered with the estimated $33 billion in Libyan assets that have been frozen by the Treasury Department.
Apply the remaining funds to deficit reduction and we'd have an incentive to get rid of Gaddafi quickly.
“As much fun as I find cost accounting, the reason I raise these issues is because I think those Libya assets ought to be available to pay for what goes on over and in Libya, and because I think in negotiating with other countries over whether we are doing enough for the U.N. we should not hesitate to point out the high cost of what we are doing [with U.N. support],” he told The Times.

Last week, Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates testified that the nation’s initial involvement in establishing a no-fly zone over the skies of Libya — Operation Odyssey Dawn — carried a $550 million price tag and that the cost of the support role to NATO going forward would be about $40 million a month. Mr. Gates also assured lawmakers that he had enough money in his budget to absorb the costs, though he wasn’t ready to reveal the source of the money.

But in a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing on U.N. funding Thursday with Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Mr. Sherman said the Pentagon’s estimates of the mission in Libya are based on what’s known as “marginal-cost” accounting, which doesn’t consider such things as overhead costs from the development of the weapons systems and equipment being used, or the salaries of the military men and women flying airplanes in the skies and floating on ships in the seas around Libya.

“That effort is costing us billions a week,” Mr. Sherman told his colleagues, while arguing that “full-cost” accounting is a more “legitimate system of accounting” that would generate a more accurate snapshot of the financial burden shouldered by the United States. By doing so, he said, the country would gain the “diplomatic advantage of telling the world the enormous burden the taxpayer absorbs in order to make available to such actions as Libya our unique military capacity.”
Instead of the world thinking that we're cheap...
In a testy exchange, Mrs. Rice said that the “Libya mission is not one that falls under U.N. accounting or U.S. budgeting. It is something we are undertaking in a national capacity.”
Posted by:Steve White

#4  No democrat is counting money. As the rep today stated, "It is like we are arguing about who will pay for drinks on the Titanic" - No democrat cares how they spend your money so they are never serious about money. They are but tapeworms that will never really care.
Posted by: newc   2011-04-08 22:53  

#3  "As much fun as I find cost accounting"

The mind boggles.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2011-04-08 13:17  

#2  It's costing money that has to come from somewhere. Whether you've done a budget in the last five years or not.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2011-04-08 11:54  

#1  In a testy exchange, Mrs. Rice said that the “Libya mission is not one that falls under U.N. accounting or U.S. budgeting. It is something we are undertaking in a national capacity.”

"It's for The Children"?
Posted by: Pappy   2011-04-08 00:12  

00:00