Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) called for cutting defense spending by 25 percent, or roughly $150 billion, with cuts centered mainly on weapons procurement programs and personnel end-strength reductions.

In an interview with the South Coast Standard-Times, Frank was quoted as saying the Department of Defense must be forced to choose which weapons programs it will cut.

However, Frank is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee that oversees Federal Reserve monetary policy and banking and securities regulation, not the House Appropriations Committee and its defense subcommittee (HAC-D) that provide actual dollars that the Pentagon can spend, or the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) that authorizes defense programs.

However, the HASC has attempted at times to make deep cuts in some in-development missile defense programs, such as the Airborne Laser and Kinetic Energy Interceptor that would kill enemy missiles in their most vulnerable and easily defeated phase of flight, just after launch.

Separately, Rep. Jack Murtha (D-Penn.), chairman of HAC-D, has said in Congressional Quarterly that the military must decide to cut personnel end strength in order to free enough funds to finance weapons procurement.

Rep. John McHugh (R-N.Y.), a member of the HASC, condemned Frank’s statements, saying it would be "unconscionable" to make deep defense spending cuts, as has occurred at previous times.

That was an apparent reference to the peace dividend, a defense spending reduction that began with the fall of the Iron Curtain and the Soviet Union in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

Rather, McHugh said it is vital to ensure sufficient equipment and force strength, to support men and women in uniform.