There were three primary drivers of the Ghost Budget: unusual economic conditions, congressional budget dysfunction, and military assertiveness.
By Linda Bilmes, Just Security
Editor’s Note: This article is part of our Ending Perpetual War Symposium. The article derives from a chapter in Brianna Rosen, ed., Perpetual War and International Law: Legacies of the War on Terror (Oxford University Press, forthcoming 2024).
The post-9/11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were enabled by a historically unprecedented combination of budgetary procedures and financing methods. Unlike all previous U.S. wars, the post-9/11 wars were funded without higher taxes or non-war budget cuts, and through a separate budget. This set of circumstances – one that I have termed the “Ghost Budget” – enabled successive administrations to prosecute the wars with limited congressional oversight and minimal transparency and public debate. I adopted the name “Ghost Budget” because the term “ghost” appeared frequently in post-9/11 government reports in reference to funds allocated to people, places, or projects that turned out to be phantoms.

The Ghost Budget was the result of an interplay between changes in the U.S. budgetary process, a more assertive military establishment, and the conditions in global capital markets. It has had far-reaching implications for the conduct and course of the post-9/11 wars and for defense policy today.
Funding the Post-9/11 Wars
The “Ghost Budget” was the biggest budgetary anomaly in U.S. history. Prior to 9/11, U.S. wars were financed through a mixture of higher taxes and budget cuts, and funded mostly through the regular defense budget. One third of the costs of World War I and half the costs of World War II were met through higher taxes. During World War II, President Franklin D. Roosevelt described paying taxes as a “patriotic duty” as he raised taxes on business, imposed a “wealth tax,” raised inheritance taxes, and expanded the number of income taxpayers to roughly 80 percent of the workforce by 1945. Wars in Korea and Vietnam largely followed a similar pattern, with President Harry Truman pledging to make the country “pay as you go” for the Korean War. War funding was also a central issue in the Vietnam War, which ended when Congress refused to appropriate money for the South Vietnamese military.
Recent Posts
They’re Making Record Profits, But Oil Companies Still Won’t ‘Drill, Baby, Drill’
August 12, 2026
Take Action Now The war in the Middle East has sent Big Oil’s profits soaring. Companies are pocketing the money rather than expanding drilling.By…
Study: Medicare for All Would Save 114k Lives Yearly — and Save $1T in Costs
August 12, 2026
Take Action Now “This study confirms what we have known for years: Medicare for All saves lives and saves money,” said Bernie Sanders.By Sharon…
Sanders Demands Democrats Ban Super PAC Spending in Primaries After AIPAC Blitz
August 11, 2026
Take Action Now AIPAC is reportedly slated to spend tens of millions opposing Abdul El-Sayed and backing his Republican opponent.By Sharon Zhang ,…
Willie Nelson Gets It—This Time About Data Centers
August 11, 2026
Take Action Now “The last thing we need is a loud, water thieving, light polluting, data center anywhere near our town (or any others for that…




