WASHINGTON — From "Hail to the Chief" to Taps, military musicians and military bands serve a high-profile role for the armed forces. But it's a role that critics say has gotten too big and too expensive.
The House of Representatives recently passed an amendment to limit the tax dollars going to musical units in the military.
Right now, nearly half a billion dollars each year is budgeted for military bands. The amendment by Rep. Martha McSally, R-Arizona, a retired Air Force colonel, said that no tax dollars can go for music units to play dinners, dances or other social events.
"We should be recruiting warriors," McSally said. "But the Army website is targeting people to play music for a living."
McSally said she does not want to eliminate military bands, but does want to cut back on spending. "While our communities certainly do enjoy being entertained by our military bands, they would prefer, I think, to be protected by the military," McSally said.
Critics of the amendment said it does not take into account the important role they say military musicians play. Col. Thomas Palmatier, who retired last year as the Armed Forces' senior musician, said more than 2,000 musicians have served in Iraq and Afghanistan since the conflicts began there. "This isn't a bunch of elitist fat cat musicians sitting around enjoying the high life," Palmatier said. "These are extraordinarily dedicated soldiers."
Palmatier also questioned whether restricting the kinds of events musicians can appear at will save money. He says unless troop numbers are cut, budgets will not shrink. "If we're going to have these assets, let's use them to their very fullest," Palmatier said.
McSally's amendment still needs the approval of the Senate and the president before it would become law.