Your voice matters. Check your Vermont Voter Registration Today.

Matt Hill for US Congress for Vermont

MILITARY

Matt Hill's position on the US military is that all aid must stop for those countries who oppose our freedoms and ideals, those wrought with corruption, and those who seek our harm.

The United States is the leader of the Free World.  Since its inception almost 250 years ago, many have died for this great country in order for its citizens to live in freedom. I believe the primary function of our Federal Government is to protect national security and defend our liberty. Sustaining a strong military is our country’s best defense against opposing geopolitical threats. As a Senator, one of the most important votes I will cast will be for the defense budget. According to the 2023 Congressional Budget Office report, the US spent roughly $800 Billion (13.3% of the federal budget) on Military expenditures. I will support sustained investments to ensure military readiness in the increasingly uncertain geopolitical landscape. Our military must be prepared at all times to thwart any threat.

When the Houthis (Iran’s proxy army in Yemen), began firing missiles at ships in the Red Sea region, the US Navy was able to intercept most of them. While US missiles cost millions each, Yemen drones supplied by Iran are estimated to each cost only a few thousand dollars. But the US Navy’s bold and decisive actions protected global trade while saving millions in transit costs, weeks in transit time, and billions for every ship that would have been sunk. 


If the US didn’t have that kind of spending power, countries such as Taiwan, Ukraine and the Philippines would not exist as they currently do. US aid to these countries helps to safeguard democracy, deter authoritarianism, promote economic growth, and provide peace, stability, and security. Most likely, Russia wouldn’t have attempted a Ukraine takeover, it would have been Alaska. In recent years, African, Middle Eastern, Haitian, and Asian countries have pleaded with us for assistance either militarily, economically or technologically.  We’ve helped scores of countries for decades only to be demanded that we leave once things got better for them, allowing the potential for terrorism and instability to return.  We are in these countries to maintain stability, but they want us out after we have supplied aid?  Something has to change, that dynamic doesn’t work-the US is not the world’s police department. My position is that all aid must stop for those countries who oppose our freedoms and ideals, those wrought with corruption, and those who seek our harm.


It is not up for debate that as a result of American intervention in both World War I and World War II western democracy has been able to flourish. In particular, the United States, who fought a two-front/two-ocean war, saved and cemented the rules-based international order that all democratic and free enterprise countries enjoy today. If not for American economic might, decimated Europe would not have been rebuilt through the Marshall plan. But for American military might, Europe would have been overrun by the Soviets and dictatorial tyranny would be the norm in capitals from Paris to Berlin to Rome. In the Pacific, a militarily fanatical Japanese empire would have continued to oppress Korea and the Philippines (not to mention China) with eventually Australia and New Zealand being conquered. The United States is the reason, and continues to be the reason, for democracy and capitalism flourishing around the world. It is not only our responsibility to be democracy’s guardian, but it is our right based on the blood spilled by US servicemen and women cementing our position as the “shining city on the hill”. 


That being said, all the countries under our protective umbrella need to step up to the plate and start contributing significantly more for their own protection. It is in our interest but most importantly in their interest to take measures, under our leadership, to pay their fair share for collective protection. 


The only thing that dictators understand is force or the threat of it. That is why Russia has not invaded a NATO country. That is why China has not invaded Taiwan. That is why North Korea has not invaded South Korea. Those bad actors realize that the force the United States can levy along with its allies is so overwhelming that it would be foolhardy to attempt such an unattainable goal. Our position of strength is necessary not only to protect our friends and allies, but to bolster the global economy, preserve democracy, and serve as a beacon for human rights around the world. 

What is your stance on the current level of military spending?

Probably not enough. At a minimum, the US needs to be on the cutting edge for everything-tech, weapons and people. We need to treat our soldiers better.

What is your position on the use of military force in international conflicts?

I am against funding other country's wars.

What policies do you support to improve the quality of life for military personnel and their families?

I am in favor of most policies to help our vets and their families.

How do you propose to strengthen partnerships with allies to enhance global security?

Require that our partner's increase their defense spending if they are under the 2% that they agreed to.

Share by: