Congressman wants to curb military surplus program.

This is amazing. I can only hope this momentum continues.
I’m glad a D has come forward because it is important not to cede this issue to folks like Rand Paul.
The only thing in this article that doesn’t make me very, very happy is -of course- the Pentagon response.

Rear Adm. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, defended the program as useful because “it allows for the reuse of military equipment that otherwise would be disposed of.”

Asked whether events in Missouri had given the Pentagon reason to reconsider the program, Kirby said, “It is up to law enforcement agencies to speak to how and what they gain through this system.”

1.) The point is to protect people and treat them well,  with respect. The Rear Admiral is more concerned about his military equipment. This attitude is why we have lost more ground than we ever gained in our decade plus of war in the Middle East. Changes are needed in the Pentagon’s outlook if we ever hope to be successful in any our foreign military campaigns.

2.) No, it is not up to law enforcement agencies. They answer (or should) to the people they are charged with protecting and the people are say – loud and clear – that the police has gone way too far in the exact wrong direction. The police departments want toys they don’t need? Tough shit. I’m sure there are places in the world, with real military battles going on, that could this surplus to better use.

Everything else that was said by the officials that were referenced truly warms my with a faint spark of optimism.