For a group of people who intuitively know their polling data the way Olympic marathoners are attuned to their heart rate, Congress is curiously out of step with the country on one of the most underappreciated issues of the 2016 election: defense spending.

Though typically overlooked, US public opinion has been one of the best leading indicators of future defense spending, both in terms of the direction of change and the magnitude of those changes. And, as recent Gallup polling suggests, the American people are more inclined to support increased defense spending than at any time since Sept. 11, 2001.

That is lost in the resurgence of a take-no-prisoners approach to slashing federal spending, employed by lawmakers succumbing to a fiscal fever that shortchanges America's future.

Thankfully, this is an area where politics and national security align. The Budget Control Act (BCA) and sequestration represent a threat to US military capabilities and the public has picked up on this. This creates a political liability, particularly for Republican lawmakers. When a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee bluntly chides military leaders that they will reduce the president's budget "with you or we will cut it without you," it betrays a misplaced confidence in the ability to "govern by BCA" — something the legislation was never intended to be used for.

Polls conducted by the Gallup organization irregularly beginning in 1969 and more consistently each February since 2001 ask respondents, "Do you think we are spending too little, about the right amount, or too much [on defense]?"

Over the past four-and-a-half decades, the difference between Americans answering "too much" and "too little" has swung widely. These shifts have foreshadowed changes in real defense spending by roughly two years, as the political system eventually catches up with public sentiment.

In the late 1960s, for example, as Americans turned sharply against the war in Vietnam, those answering that the US was spending "too much" outnumbered those responding "too little" by 44 points. By the time President Ronald Reagan came to office in 1981, the difference was 36 points in the opposite direction, signaling widespread support to boost military spending. Corresponding changes in defense budgets followed.

Starting in the late 1990s and accelerating with 9/11, public attitudes shifted strongly in support of increased defense spending, heralding the longest run-up since World War II. Subsequently, as the situation in Iraq deteriorated and Americans grew weary of the Afghan conflict, public support slackened.

However, public attitudes favoring cutbacks in defense spending never reached the levels seen during previous "postwar" downturns, with polling figures remaining within a relatively tight band between 2006 and 2014. Americans may have tired of war, but have not yet succumbed to the view that military spending is out of control.

Gallup's latest polling shows that those responding the US spends "too much" falling by five points and those arguing the US spends "too little" growing by six points since last year. This 11-point swing reflects genuine public concern about the global security situation and a willingness to tolerate increasing defense spending regardless of BCA constraints.

However, since the BCA was passed in 2011, defense budgets and American preferences have moved in opposite directions. Since 2010, spending has fallen by over 25 percent even as Americans have called for, at worst, maintaining the status quo. And while the president's budget sets a modest increase in 2016, the budget will follow a negative path in real terms through 2020 if sequestration limits remain.

These reductions fly in the face of a reasonable public response to the security environment. Driven no doubt by the conflict with ISIS, Russian aggression, the threat of international terrorism, a rising China and unease about global security, Americans are seeking to strengthen defense. Indeed, the same poll showed 44 percent of Americans believe the US military is "not strong enough," up sharply from 2012 when 32 percent held that opinion.

For those on Capitol Hill who do not see sequestration as a threat to US military capabilities, Gallup's polling should warn that their perspectives are misaligned with those of their constituents. Americans are increasingly supportive of funding levels that will allow the military to fulfill its missions. Those missions are imperiled because the US has spent the past decade fighting wars rather than modernizing its force or adding personnel. There is little sense within policy circles or among the public that there are extraneous military capabilities that could easily be cut.

Public support for boosting defense spending is likely to continue for several years and will be reflected in the voting booth. Holding defense outlays hostage to the BCA-imposed caps will likely result in real political costs in 2016 for the party seen as most responsible for undercutting the armed forces. It is past time lawmakers and the White House figured this out for their own sakes, and that of the country.

Steve Irwin is president of Avascent, a strategy and management consulting firm serving clients in government-driven markets.

Share:
More In Commentary