May, 28 2021, 12:00am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Madison Tang, CODEPINK China campaign coordinator, madison@codepink.org
Carley Towne, CODEPINK Co-Director, carley@codepink.org
CODEPINK Statement on the Biden Administration's $753 billion Proposed Pentagon Budget
CODEPINK, a women-led peace organization, calls on Congress to reject President Biden's record-high FY 2022 military budget of $753 billion, a $ 13 billion increase over the Trump administration's previous spendthrift military budget. In supporting a minimum 10% reduction in Pentagon spending, CODEPINK noted the annual savings could eradicate hunger and homelessness each year in the United States.
WASHINGTON
CODEPINK, a women-led peace organization, calls on Congress to reject President Biden's record-high FY 2022 military budget of $753 billion, a $ 13 billion increase over the Trump administration's previous spendthrift military budget. In supporting a minimum 10% reduction in Pentagon spending, CODEPINK noted the annual savings could eradicate hunger and homelessness each year in the United States.
"To spend nearly a trillion dollars to prepare for war pulls back the curtain on the Biden administration's professed interest in lifting people out of poverty," says Carley Towne, CODEPINK co-director. "While millions of Americans are steeped in debt, living paycheck to paycheck, facing eviction and struggling to pay medical bills amidst an ongoing health pandemic and recession, the Administration hurls taxpayer dollars at an increasingly privatized for-profit war industry."
Biden's budget includes upwards of $30 billion for new nuclear weapons slated to cost $1.7 trillion over the next decades, billions for the F-35 fighter jet, a boondoggle with an eventual $1-2 trillion price tag, $17.4 billion for an unnecessary Space Force and at least $51.5 billion annually to maintain over 800 overseas bases and establish new ones in the Indo-Pacific, where the Biden administration's pivot to Asia sets us on a reckless and dangerous course toward war with China.
President Biden's final Pentagon budget request signals alarming continuity with the Trump Administration which, over the course of four years, increased the Pentagon budget by $133 billion with bipartisan Congressional approval.
In light of the Biden Administration's announcement that the United States will be withdrawing troops from Afghanistan by September 2021, the Pentagon budget should reflect a corresponding $50 billion reduction.
Instead, Biden's proposed Pentagon budget of $753 would provide the Department of Defense with more money than the Departments of State, Justice, Education, Transportation, Health and Human Services, and the Environmental Protection Agency combined.
At the same time that Biden is set to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan, Biden and Congress are using China as the justification for this massive increase in military spending by framing China as a danger to the U.S. and its allies. Biden's proposed Pentagon budget identifies China as a "top challenge," and Secretary of Defense Austin has stated, "China is our pacing threat." In reality, the inflated threat of China's military pales in comparison to the United States military: the U.S. has over 800 overseas military bases, hundreds of which surround the borders of China; China currently has only one official overseas military base, located in Djibouti.
"This same tactic of threat inflation led us to the U.S.'s catastrophic invasion of Iraq in 2003. The consequences of that intervention were not only horrific overseas but also proved deadly and harmful for Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and Muslim-perceived communities," said Madison Tang, coordinator of CODEPINK's China Is Not Our Enemy campaign. "Today, we are already seeing the consequences of this escalation of war with China in the form of Sinophobic violence that targets Asians and Asian Americans of various ethnicities across the U.S. Anti-Asian violence has increased 194% in the first quarter of 2021 compared to 2020, according to the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism. This pattern of heightened xenophobia and scapegoating of a minority group as a corollary to U.S. imperialist wars is not new, and must be challenged."
"This push for rearmament, including hundreds of new land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine mounted tactical nuclear weapons, comes amid concern the Biden administration's heated anti-China rhetoric and policies could plunge us into a nuclear war," said Marcy Winograd, coordinator of CODEPINK Congress, a campaign to mobilize co-sponsors for progressive foreign policy legislation. "There is no law of gravity, however, that compels President Biden or Congress to continue funding the drive for nuclear rearmament or global omnicide."
At the end of the day, the Federal budget is up to Congress to decide, not the President. We call on Congress to reduce the Pentagon budget by at least 10% and instead invest in what will truly make us safe: universal healthcare, good jobs, and addressing the climate crisis.
Act Now:
It's now more important than ever to contact your representatives and send them the CODEPINK guide to Pentagon budget cuts to demand that they show their support to reduce the Pentagon budget and invest in human needs!
Additional Quotes and Reactions on Biden's Proposed Pentagon Budget from the International Community:
"The way the US budget overemphasizes the military hurts the American people and the world. A tiny fraction of the money that President Biden is proposing for the military budget would save the lives of millions of children in Yemen. Wouldn't that be a better investment in the future than more bombs, warships and nuclear weapons?" - Aisha Jumaan, President, Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation
"This enormous Pentagon budget will only lead to more military conflicts, more bloodshed, more grief. We saw enough of that in Afghanistan for the last 20 years. It's time to invest in peace." - Basir Bita, local activist in Kabul Afghanistan
"There are many places where the U.S. could and should spend more money. At least it can start by paying for some of the huge damages it has caused to the people in this country and abroad in the last several centuries. Increasing the military budget, however, only makes everything worse." - Dr. Xu, Professor of Economics at John Jay College, CUNY, former Professor of Economics at Renmin University of China, and Chinese citizen
"An increase in the US defense budget will mean the deployment and/or testing of US weapons in South Korea, which endangers the lives of residents near US bases. US military buildup has led to a perpetual arms race including nuclear weapons and nuclear threats in Northeast Asia. The deployment of the US THAAD missile defense system in South Korea in 2017 has raised tension in the region and is opposed by many South Koreans. Villagers near the new THAAD base have been protesting everyday against the illegal deployment. I join in the call to the Biden administration to reduce the US defense budget and invest in human security: Withdraw tension-raising weapon systems from Korea and end the more than 70-year-old Korean War with a peace agreement." - YouKyoung Ko, a consultant for Women's International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF) and women-led Korea Peace Now! Campaign, and a standing committee member of the Korea Peace Appeal Campaign.
"The United States military continues to negatively impact the lives of people who have never consented to the U.S. military presence, particularly in island nations in the Asia Pacific region such as Hawaii, Okinawa, and the Marianas. The military presence places the people of these nations in mortal danger of annihilation, as was demonstrated in 2018 via the false ballistic missile alert in Hawaii, proving that the U.S. military is incapable of protecting us. Furthermore, the military creates a burden in numerous other ways, such as through crime, pollution, and economic deprivation." - Robert Kajiwara, founder of the Peace for Okinawa Coalition
"We, members of the International Women's Network against Militarism, unequivocally oppose the proposed Biden Pentagon budget. Spending nearly 50% of the US discretionary budget (more than the next 10 countries combined) demonstrates the destructive priorities of a society committed more to world military domination than care of its people and the natural environment. Increased militarization in the US and abroad will only create more insecurities, fear, and destruction--both at home and abroad especially in places of massive US military presence such as Okinawa and Guam. We urge the Biden-Harris administration to withdraw the current proposal and formulate one that will ensure full healthcare, quality education, and environmental protection," -International Women's Network Against Militarism
CODEPINK is a women-led grassroots organization working to end U.S. wars and militarism, support peace and human rights initiatives, and redirect our tax dollars into healthcare, education, green jobs and other life-affirming programs.
(818) 275-7232LATEST NEWS
In Trump Economy, Holiday Spending Plans Plummet and Layoffs Hit Highest Level Since Covid Pandemic
The grim data arrive as President Donald Trump is reportedly planning to "aggressively push back" on negative perceptions about his economy.
Dec 04, 2025
A new batch of data is offering more evidence that the US economy is in rough shape heading into the holidays.
The latest Economic Confidence Index released by Gallup on Thursday has found that Americans' confidence in the economy has fallen by seven points over the last month, and now stands at its lowest level in more than a year.
Overall, Gallup found that just 21% of Americans currently describe the economy as excellent or good, while 40% describe it as poor. The outlook for the near future also looks grim, as more than two-thirds of Americans surveyed said the economy is currently getting worse.
This deteriorating economic confidence is weighing on Americans' holiday shopping plans, as Gallup found that planned holiday spending expenditures have "plummeted" from just over $1,000 in October to $778 in November. The decline in spending expectations also occurred across all income groups, although it was particularly steep among low-income households, which slashed their estimated holiday spending by an average of $267.
Gallup noted that while it's common for shoppers to trim their spending plans the closer it gets to the holidays, the drop between October and November this year was the biggest it has ever recorded, even "surpassing the $185 drop seen during the 2008 global financial crisis."
The Gallup survey was not the only troubling economic data to drop on Thursday, as outplacement firm Challenger, Gray, and Christmas released its latest report showing that hiring in the US has slowed to its lowest level in the last 15 years, while layoffs now total their highest level since 2020, when the country was at the peak of the Covid-19 global pandemic.
The data on layoffs came just one day after global payroll processing firm ADP estimated that the US economy lost 32,000 jobs in November, with small businesses shouldering by far the most job losses.
President Donald Trump, who earlier this week dismissed concerns Americans might have about affordability as a "Democrat scam," has reportedly decided to hit the road in an effort to convince voters that they've never had it so good.
According to Axios, Trump next week will start touring the country to tout his administration's economic policies, and he is expected to "aggressively push back against criticism over the cost of everyday essentials—an issue that helped propel him to victory over Kamala Harris last year."
However, a new poll published by Politico on Thursday shows that Trump may have an uphill climb selling his economy even to his own voters.
Overall, the poll found that 37% of voters who backed Trump last year now say that the cost of living crisis is the worst they have experienced in their lifetimes, while only 24% of 2024 Trump voters say that the cost of living crisis at the moment is "not bad."
The poll also found that Trump's efforts to blame former President Joe Biden for the current state of the economy aren't flying, as 46% of voters say that Trump is most to blame for the current state of the economy, compared to 29% of voters who put the primary blame on Biden.
Keep ReadingShow Less
After NYT Sues Over Pentagon Policy, Press Advocates 'Urge Other News Outlets to Follow'
"The only way to put an end to the Trump administration's multipronged assault on press freedom is for every news outlet to fight back at every opportunity," said the head of the Freedom of the Press Foundation.
Dec 04, 2025
Press freedom advocates on Thursday welcomed the New York Times' lawsuit over the US Department of Defense's "flatly unconstitutional" press policy, filed on the heels of the first briefing for what critics call the "Pentagon Propaganda Corps."
The newspaper and Times reporter Julian E. Barnes, one of several journalists who refused to sign the policy earlier this year, are suing the DOD—which President Donald Trump has dubbed the Department of War—as well as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Pentagon's chief spokesperson, Sean Parnell, in the US District Court in Washington, D.C.
The plaintiffs are asking Judge Paul L. Friedman, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, to strike down provisions of the Pentagon policy that violate their First and Fifth Amendment rights, and warn that "if allowed to stand, that policy will upend the longstanding and 'healthy adversarial tension between the government, which may seek to keep its secrets' and 'the press, which may endeavor to' report them... and will deprive the public of vital information about the United States military and its leadership."
The filing notably comes not only as the DOD celebrates that dozens of "independent journalists, bloggers, and social media influencers" who "are not associated with legacy media outlets, including print media such as newspapers and magazines, and broadcast media, such as cable television news," have joined the new Pentagon Press Corps in exchange for signing the controversial agreement, but also as Trump and Hegseth face mounting outrage over boat bombings that experts argue are "war crimes, murder, or both."
Charlie Stadtlander, a spokesperson for the newspaper, said in a statement that "the Times stands with fellow news organizations across digital, print, and broadcast media, including many conservative outlets, in strongly opposing this unprecedented policy."
The paper has hired a prominent First Amendment lawyer, Theodore J. Boutrous Jr. of Gibson Dunn. The Washington Post reported that "lawyers representing the Times said they discussed litigation with other news organizations but ultimately decided to proceed on their own. They said they would welcome other outlets filing their own lawsuits or amicus briefs in the Times' case."
While Parnell said in a statement that "we are aware of the New York Times lawsuit and look forward to addressing these arguments in court," journalists and media advocacy groups are already signaling support for the newspaper—which is also battling a $15 billion defamation suit refiled by the president in October.
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press vice president of policy Gabe Rottman said Thursday that "the Pentagon's press access policy is unlawful because it gives government officials unchecked power over who gets a credential and who doesn't, something the First Amendment prohibits."
"The public needs independent journalism and the reporters who deliver it back in the Pentagon at a time of heightened scrutiny of the department's actions," he asserted. "We look forward to lending our voice in support of this suit."
The Pentagon Press Association said it was "encouraged by the New York Times' effort to step up and defend press freedom," while White House Correspondents' Association president Weijia Jiang declared that the WHCA "stands firmly" with the newspaper and described the suit as "a necessary and vital step to ensure journalists can do their jobs."
Clayton Weimers, executive director for Reporters Without Borders USA, said that "it's great to see the New York Times continue to proactively defend press freedom in the courts as well as on their pages. We all know by now that capitulation to Donald Trump's authoritarian impulses never works out, but fighting back will."
"This is the logical next step after the mass refusal of journalists to sign Secretary of Defense Hegseth's loyalty pledge," Weimers added. "Journalists must be able to cover the government critically and freely."
Pointing to television companies' recent settlements with the president, Freedom of the Press Foundation executive director Trevor Timm said that "in an era where news networks seem to be caving to Trump's censorious tactics left and right, it's refreshing to see the New York Times leading by example and sticking up for the First Amendment in court."
"An attack on any journalist’s rights is an attack on all. And the only way to put an end to the Trump administration's multipronged assault on press freedom is for every news outlet to fight back at every opportunity," Timm continued. "We urge other news outlets to follow the Times' lead."
"These days, the government has countless platforms of its own to tell the public what it wants it to know. A free and independent press isn't needed for that," he noted. "The Constitution guarantees one anyway precisely because the public needs the information the government does not want it to know. The Pentagon's absurd access pledge has been an affront to the First Amendment since the first day they proposed it. And we look forward to a federal judge throwing it out with the trash, where it belongs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Experts Say Those Ordering and Carrying Out US Boat Strikes Should Be 'Prosecuted for Homicide'
“US military attacks on alleged drug traffickers at sea," said two human rights experts, "are grave violations of the right to life and the international law of the sea."
Dec 04, 2025
Two United Nations rights experts warned that in numerous ways in recent weeks, the Trump administration's escalation toward Venezuela has violated international law—most recently when President Donald Trump said he had ordered the South American country's airspace closed following a military buildup in the Caribbean Sea.
But the two officials, independent expert on democratic and international order George Katrougalos and Ben Saul, the UN special rapporteur on protecting human rights while countering terrorism, reserved their strongest condemnation and warning to the US for the administration's repeated bombings of boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific, which have targeted at least 22 boats and killed 83 people since September as the White House has claimed without evidence it is combating drug traffickers.
The strikes, said Katrougalos and Saul, "are grave violations of the right to life and the international law of the sea. Those involved in ordering and carrying out these extrajudicial killings must be investigated and prosecuted for homicide.”
Human rights advocates have warned for months that the strikes are extrajudicial killings. Trump has claimed the US is in an "armed conflict" with drug cartels in Venezuela—even though the country is not significantly involved in drug trafficking—but Congress has not authorized any military action in the Caribbean.
Typically, the US has approached drug trafficking in the region as a criminal issue, with the Coast Guard and other agencies intercepting boats suspected of carrying illegal substances, arresting those on board, and ensuring they receive due process in accordance with the Constitution.
The Trump administration instead has bombed the boats, with the first operation on September 2 recently the subject of particular concern due to reports that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued an order for military officers to "kill everybody" on board a vessel, leading a commander to direct a second "double-tap" strike to kill two survivors of the initial blast.
Hegseth and Trump have sought to shift responsibility for the second strike onto Adm. Frank "Mitch" Bradley, the commander who oversaw the attack under Hegseth's orders. Bradley was scheduled to brief lawmakers Thursday on the incident.
The White House has maintained Bradley had the authority to kill the survivors of the strike and to carry out all the other bombings of boats, even as reporting on the identities of the victims has shown the US has killed civilians including an out-of-work bus driver and a fisherman, and the family of one Colombian man killed in a strike filed a formal complaint accusing Hegseth himself of murder.
The UN experts suggested that everyone involved in ordering the nearly two dozen boat strikes, from Trump and Hegseth to any of the service members who have helped carry out the operations, should be investigated for alleged murder.
After Hegseth defended the September 2 strike earlier this week, Saul emphasized in a social media post that contrary to the defense secretary's rhetoric about how the boat attacks are "protecting" Americans, he is carrying out "state murder of civilians in peacetime, like executing alleged drug traffickers on the streets of New York or DC."
As Common Dreams reported last month, a top military lawyer advised the White House against beginning the boat bombings weeks before the September 2 attack, saying they could expose service members involved in the strikes to legal challenges.
Katrougalos and Saul urged the administration to "refrain from actions that could further aggravate the situation and ensure that any measures taken fully comply with the UN Charter, the Chicago Convention, and relevant rules of customary international law."
They also emphasized that Trump had no authority to declare that Venezuela's airspace was closed last week—an action that many experts feared could portend imminent US strikes in the South American country.
“International law is clear: States have complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above their territory. Any measures that seek to regulate, restrict, or ‘close’ another state’s airspace are in blatant violation of the Chicago Convention,” said the experts. “Unilateral measures that interfere with a state’s territorial domain, including its airspace, risk fully undermining the stability of the region and are seriously undermining Venezuela’s economy."
Saul and Katrougalos further called on the White House not to repeat "the long history of external interventions in Latin America."
“Respect for sovereignty, nonintervention, and the peaceful settlement of disputes," they said, "are essential to preserving international stability and preventing further deterioration of the situation.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


