DOGE Reports $80 Million in Unnecessary DoD Spending on DEI Initiatives
DOGE revealed over $80 million in spending by DoD on DEI initiatives, with additional findings of $5 million related to similar projects. Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell criticized this spending as a distraction from military priorities and indicated that more such revelations are forthcoming.
The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has disclosed that the Department of Defense (DoD) allocated over $80 million towards diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) projects. Chief Pentagon Spokesman, Sean Parnell, cited various instances of what he has termed wasteful spending, which included funding for climate change studies and DEI training across military branches.
Alongside the $80 million discovery, Campus Reform further analyzed the data and identified an additional $5 million in expenditures related to DEI initiatives and climate studies by the DoD. These findings included significant grants to various universities for research on climate impacts.
Among the additional expenditures, notable allocations were made such as $1.6 million to Boise State University to research climate change’s effects on birds, and $967,357 to Columbia University for studies on climate-driven migration. The findings also revealed $1.6 million to the University of Maryland regarding climate impacts on national security.
Parnell emphasized that such expenditures divert attention from the military’s core functions, stating that these initiatives are not essential to the mission of the military. He pledged that more disclosures regarding excessive spending would emerge, aiming to enhance the operational efficacy of the DOD moving forward.
The recent disclosures by DOGE indicate a significant amount of taxpayer money has been directed towards DEI and climate-related research initiatives by the Department of Defense. The overwhelming sentiment from DoD officials highlights a commitment to refocusing spending on core military objectives and eliminating non-essential financial burdens. As these revelations unfold, they signify a critical examination of governmental financial priorities.
Original Source: www.campusreform.org
