Starting this month, the Department of Defense could spend almost over $8 million per year on providing gender reassignment treatments and surgical procedures for soldiers deemed eligible.
Ever since the Secretary of Defense Ash Carter authorized the military departments, the DOD, and the Coast Guard to “implement a construct by which transgender Service members may transition gender” while in active or reserve duty. Regardless of any other push for policy change, which includes Tricare’s acceptance of transgender beneficiaries, will have short term and, quite possibly, long term budgetary implications that can result in cuts elsewhere in the batholith DOD.
Firstly, transgender individuals reserve all rights to join the military and also reserve the right to change gender and mutilate parts of their. However, Secretary Carter’s moves to authorize in service transition procedures with a commanding officer’s approval crosses the line.
If we truly seek to find ways to shrink spending, as well as government, and make it efficient, we cannot continue peculiar spending trends that engulf the military’s budgetary black hole. Considering the specificity of the spending, the cost of getting soldier’s reassignment treatment, though dismal now, can expand and exacerbate to levels not intended. Thus, a major cost can occur in the future.
Another component to the argument is to consider the natural growth of spending in the DOD. I think we can all attest to the observation that nothing is cheap in the military, and if it is “cheap,” it won’t be for long.
Just for the past year, the military’s budget is over $600 billion with, what it seems, a blank check from the Republican-held Congress to continue for it to grow. Nevertheless, I digress in this respect.
Other policies like the Air Force’s push for gender quotas by the implementation of several new initiatives to promote a less straight white male service branch. Similarly, the Navy had an all hands training seminar on the DOD’s transgender policy changes, made enlisted ranks more gender friendly and caused sailors to be disgruntled with such changes.
More and more, instances like these are propping up everywhere in government. Such mandates, like mentioned earlier in this editorial, will directly affect government spending and then indirectly the taxpayers who fund the government.
If it is outside the DOD, or in the very ranks, no one should be compelled to pay for someone else’s gender transition. This is especially the case if a respectable segment of the population disagrees with such practices. How does this protect us? It show favoritism to a small segment of the population which can end in the ultimate removal of traditional gender identity in our nation’s military, and government.
