New Congress Says It Will Cut “Woke” Policies in the U.S. Military to Save Money
Cutting “woke” may make for good politics in Republican right, but it is going to little to save money in the Defense budget:
A variety of social issues can fall under the “woke” umbrella, including diversity, equity and inclusion training, funding for women’s reproductive health and support for gender identity initiatives. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., Jordan and other Republicans have argued the military’s attention to “the left’s social agenda” has hurt readiness.
“If we’d focus on getting rid of all the ‘woke’ in our military, we’d have the money we need to make sure our troops get the pay raise they deserve, we’d have the weapons systems and training that needs to be done so that we’re ready to deal with our adversaries around the planet,” Jordan said Sunday on Fox News.
Rep. Stephanie Bice, R-Okla., insinuated last month that transgender service members were taking financial advantage of the Pentagon’s policy to provide hormone therapy, mental health care and surgeries for troops diagnosed with gender dysphoria. She said a cadet at Fort Sill, Okla., had told her that he enlisted in the military because he wanted the government to pay for gender reassignment surgery.
“It was shocking that he would actually verbalize that in front of all those officers and other cadets standing there,” Bice said in December during a House Armed Services committee hearing. “This is an issue, and I do think we should be looking at it.”
The cost of transgender care is minuscule when compared to the overall size of the defense budget. The Pentagon spent $15 million treating transgender troops from 2016 to 2021, including about $3 million for surgery, according to the Defense Health Agency. The parts of the spending plan dealing with personnel are so vast and expensive that carving out items targeting “woke” culture will have a negligible impact, said Michael Herson, president of the lobbying firm American Defense International and a former Defense Department official.
Stars & Stripes
You can read more at the link, but if Congress wants to save money than look at wasteful military acquisitions programs which they probably won’t because they produce jobs in influential voting districts.
Do any of the chinabots know why it’s called “recoilless”?
Waiting …
Do any of the chinabots know why it’s called “recoilless”?
Self-lubricating?
Reclassified as oil-less?
Special treatment for transsexuals, lesbians, gays, genderqueers, pup handlers, minority-supremists, the mentally ill, hood rats, communists, fembois, skanks, etc., seems like a lot of money if you count up every special treatment, every special program, the lost man-hours that could be devoted to warfighting, etc.
But when you consider what they all bring to the table in unit cohesion and force multiplication, its too bad there are not more special interests fighting for attention and resources.
Too many people say “readiness” but they really mean “bigotry”.
For the purpose of advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA), the OPM appointed a Chief Diversity Officer. This CDO commissioned the Chief Diversity Officers’ Executive Council (CDOEC). The CDOEC designated four new working groups centered on advancing DEIA initiatives.
Just as a WAG, I’d say were looking at a minimum of 50 employees.
Granted, I’m referring to OPM vs DoD, but OPM is the first governmentwide. Meaning OPM will likely be the gov’t model for other departments and agencies. And what are all these employees going to do?
For one, they will create more CBTs that will be compulsory for all employees — right up there with annual Privacy Act Trng, SAPR/SAR, Equal Opportunity … the list goes on to no less than 20.
It’s all a time-suck for the operational employees who are already over-tasked, overwhelmed, and undermanned. God knows, we need more annual compulsory CBTs.
While on active duty (some 30 years ago at Ft Dix), I remember training/practicing how to pick up a dead or incapacitated soldier and put them in a fireman’s carry to extract them from a firefight.
Point is: THAT was useful, and in my opinion, an essential task for all military. But how many in the military today can actually pick up a 170 lbs slab of meat laid out prone on the ground?
That kind of training actually advances military effectiveness and lethality of our force. Something DEIA trng does nothing to advance; in fact, it takes away from it.
Went to one of those weeklong “leadership” sessions right when trans folks were first forced on the military (for those who have forgotten, that was right before Obama left office, he threw that shyte pie into the pile). Anyway, a good 1/3 to 1/2 of the time investment was stories about how “well” (very very badly) integration was going. Often the trannies were super-political to the point anyone working with them was subject to an abusive polemic so no one wanted to. They essentially took so much from the mission they had to work by themselves. Trump makes a tweet and overnight they don’t have to worry about it (accommodation for this one group took an enormous amount of wasted hours and energy) anymore.
It saved a lot of time and money, for a couple of years until Biden was in, at any rate. Also, at our installation once the secretary of the AF decided they could ignore unproductive and/or counterproductive regulations, the number of CBT hours went from 82 annually to about 4. It was glorious. A lot can happen quickly under good leadership…just like a lot can happen that is destructive under bad leadership. At the moment it’s a stygian mess I’m sure.
“CBT hours went from 82 annually”
Fifty-two workweeks, minus 4 for leave, gives us 48 workweeks.
2 CBT workweek equvilants divided by 48 gives us… uh… 4% of productive time dedicated to learning how glorious it is to work with men with breasts.
Out of curiosity, was this a symptom or a cause of America slinking out of Afghanistan so fast pallets of cash and 80 billion in hardware was forgotten?