In defense

It's been 35 years since President Jimmy Carter -- a Democrat -- announced the zero-based budgeting" approach that had served him well as governor of Georgia would also be adopted by the federal government.

As with many things, Mr. Carter meant well, but his impact in shifting the hidebound federal bureaucracy was minimal.

Too bad. We could use it now.

No one wants to cripple the ability of our armed forces to defend America. But standard budgeting -- taking last year's spending as a given, arguing only about how much new lard to spread on top -- is no longer acceptable as the debt-laden federal government teeters on the edge of insolvency.

Any combat operations in Iraq have been winding down for years. Osama bin Laden is dead. President Obama has set a timetable to reduce our involvement in Afghanistan. It's high time to ask just what we legitimately need our military to do, and how much it should cost.

Instead, Congress can't even slice $100 million from the annual expenditure for military bands.

Really.

It doesn't end there. The $649 billion defense spending bill passed by a whopping 336-87 House vote on Friday actually boosts spending by $17 billion, providing a 1.6 percent increase in pay and funding various new warships, weapons and aircraft, including a C-17 cargo plane the Pentagon didn't even want.

Only 12 Republicans and 75 Democrats opposed the bill. And this as congressional negotiators face an Aug. 2 deadline to come up with a deal to authorize more federal borrowing.

Indeed, trimming back the Pentagon budget should form a natural basis of partnership between limited-government tea partiers and left-wing Democrats.

"Many of us have gone around back home and told people how serious we are," says tea party-backed freshman Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C. "But how can we look them in the eye and tell them that we are serious about cutting spending and then come in and 'plus up' the base defense budget?"

Rep. Mulvaney is correct. If any member of Congress wants to be taken seriously, this blind race to fiscal oblivion is no longer acceptable. Republicans, especially, should take the lead in figuring out what's really needed for defense -- $320 million for military bands? -- and slashing the rest.