About Me

Name: Bull 67
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

CBO Forecasts Deep Military Spending Cuts

 More stories keep emerging from inside the Beltway concerning the impeding implosion of the US military. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) says defense spending will drop 13%, from 4% of GDP to 3.5% of GDP in only five years. It will drop by another 12% through the following decade.

The Hill reported on 19 November:

Ranking member Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) raised alarm over a “dramatic decline” in funding for weapons systems — from 35 percent of the overall defense budget in fiscal 2010 to 24 percent in 2020...

“The picture is not a pretty one,” Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said in his opening statement Wednesday at a hearing on future defense budgets.

The CBO also states the Obama Administration is low-balling its requested Pentagon budget by 6% versus what is required for the Department of Defense's current missions.

A 13% cut vs. GDP over 5 years...while fighting two wars.  Keep in mind, the GDP is stagnant due to the deep recession and this figure also doesn’t factor in potential inflation.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Impeding Death of the American Military



In my last blog entry
I highlighted the imminent demise of the Royal Air Force. Over the next 5 years the RAF will slash its force by 25%, essential ending it as a global power projection force.

This morning’s Washington Times heralds the same forces are now at work eroding America’s military might:

...The era of American military dominance, or "Pax Americana," is dwindling as the nation loses its position far atop the global marketplace, a congressional military analyst said Wednesday...

...The new dynamic - in which the U.S. remains a world force, but does not hold the pre-eminent position it attained after World War II - is the result of global financial centers shifting to Asia, said Stephen Daggett, a defense policy and budget specialist for the Congressional Research Service...

..."It seems this administration finds massive amounts of money for bailout and [stimulus spending] but not enough to fund the basic money needed for defensive hardware and personnel," said Rep. Trent Franks, Arizona Republican.

Victor Davis Hansen had a good quote this morning, “...political influence and military power are ultimately predicated on economic strength.

Our economic strength, like that of Great Britain, is dying as we quickly drowned in a sea of self-induced socialist debt. Only two pillars are keeping us afloat: the fact oil is traded in dollars and the might of the US military protecting the global trade system.

The dollar hangs upon a precipice; it dies overnight if the world turns to another medium for oil trading. Now, our military is about to be cannibalized to feed the socialist beast eating us all alive.

When the US military is gone, depleted in endless wars abroad and cashiered for progressive votes, it will not rise again. We will be naked before our enemies and creditors...one in the same.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Where are the Priorities?

 
I can't think of a better example of what’s so dreadfully wrong with our government than the case of the Air Force luxury jets the Air Force didn’t want. 

Last year the United States Air Force’s top three acquisition priorities were the F-22, new aerial refueling plane, and a new rescue helicopter. Say what you want about any of these programs, but one thing is clear – the military service thought they were important and necessary.

The F-22 was fully supported by the previous Air Force secretary and chief of staff. Then Secretary of Defense Gates fired both of them and terminated the program at ½ of the services requested numbers

The rescue helicopter languished for over three years, a victim of the service’s own acquisition follies, a tinkering congress and their powerfully defense contractor allies, and eventually succumbed to Secretary of Defense Gate’s unilateral termination. Strike two.

Now, only the aerial tanker program remains.  It’s been struggling since 2001, though two iterations and vicious congressional interference, and still no tanker has been selected.

The service has so far unsuccessfully tried to acquire three replacement weapons systems – three new aircraft it states (or at least stated under the previous administration) it desperately needs.

Now, out of the blue (literally) Congress, in its wisdom, directed the Air Force to buy 8 corporate jets worth $550 million, including high end Gulfstreams and a 737, it doesn’t want. That would buy about 10 new combat rescue helicopters or about three F-22s, which the service said it did want. No debate, no grueling acquisitions process, no oversight, no serious justification...just "here, buy this."

Who’s asking for these aircraft? Not the Air Force, but none other than Rep. Sanford D. Bishop of Georgia. This “Blue Dog” Democrat has asked for a whopping 23 funding requests (i.e. pork requests) in the House dense appropriations bill (I’m not done counting them all up, but so far he’s the pork request leader among the Blue Dawgs (you know, the Dems so staunchly against excessive gov't spending).

I’m glad the men and women of the U.S. military could provide the honorable men and women of our legislative branch a source of funding to support their lifestyles and re-election chances.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Defense Budget Pork Exchanged for Domestic Programs?

 

The Pentagon is being limited to zero growth as well as having $60 billion redirected from current budget to initiatives not necessarily in line with the Pentagon’s requirements priorities.

As Defense News reports Some of these initiatives are legitimate:

…the big winners appear to be light intratheater cargo planes, unmanned aerial vehicles, countermine warfare systems.

However, according to Newsweek, about 5% of that $60 billion, or $2.7 billion, is being doled out to key congressional vote-getters like Rep John Murtha, head of the House the Defense Appropriations Committee, and Rep Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a member of the House Appropriations Committee.

I believe if these, and other congressmen, play ball with the White House this fall on critical votes healthcare and cap & trade (regardless of how vocal their constituents tell them to oppose these programs) they may see their precious pork emerge unscathed in the final defense budget.  In my opinion, the defense department will be used as a slush fund to bring congressional votes into line. If you want to know of healthcare reform will pass, then maybe you need to look at the congressional and senate line-item appropriations in the defense budget. The future of the President’s domestic initiative may very well be forged when for defense budget is built. Next step: follow the pork when the Senate gets its hands on the defense budget.

DefenseNews goes on to say:

…Losers may include amphibious craft, heavy armored vehicle and air defense systems, according to defense officials and experts… Asked how program cuts to free up dollars to fill the $60 billion shortfall might be split among the services, Ochmanek said: “Higher-end stuff is typically more expensive.”Defense analysts said that suggests the Navy and Air Force will receive the bulk of the $60 billion (budget cuts).

Aviation Week & Space Technology states:

An early look at the U.S. Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) reveals major force and capability alterations that are being described as “high-g changes in direction, and high-g causes pain,” says a senior U.S. Air Force official.

Moreover, the pared-down, reshaped, multifunctional forces under consideration are expected to cost $50-60 billion over five years above the planning target of no real growth in defense spending through Fiscal 2015…

This is the where the defense budget is heading: no additional spending though 2015, continuing combat operations, billions of extra funds needed to withdrawal forces from Iraq in the next few years (if everything goes as planned), huge modernization bills overdue for the Air Force and Navy, and the whole budget being used as a political sweetener to advance the president’s domestic agenda.

The sad side effect of this pork-barrel politics is transformation of our military from a strategic global power projection force to an expeditionary ground support only good for peacekeeping and counter-insurgency. More specifically, we’re gutting the U.S Air Force into nothing more than a glorified army air corps. 

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Change" and the Defense Budget

 

This article was on page 14 of the New York Times this morning. It focused on two Republican congressmen trying to "embarrass" democrats and, specifically Mr. Murtha, over pork in the defense appropriations bill. Here are some key excerpts:

While the House voted 269 to 165 to approve an amendment that stripped out money for building more F-22s, it overwhelmingly rejected efforts by Mr. Flake and Mr. Campbell to cut up to $2.7 billion in earmarks, including money that lawmakers had inserted on behalf of specific companies on 553 smaller projects...The bill also included more than $1 billion to continue work on larger projects the administration wants to kill, like a new presidential helicopter, and nearly $1.2 billion for combat planes that the Pentagon did not request...The overall bill, which would set military appropriations for 2010, passed by 400 to 30. The Senate will take up its version later this year, and the two bills will need to be reconciled in conference...Mr. Obama had repeatedly threatened to veto any bill that included more money for the F-22, the world’s most advanced fighter, as the Pentagon seeks to shift more from high-tech weaponry to simpler systems the troops can use now.

The real question is why it passed 400 to 30 if the White House was so adamant Obama "would consider recommending a veto if the House went ahead with plans...to try to save the troubled effort to create a new presidential helicopter and to finance development of an alternative engine for another new fighter plane, the F-35." Why would the vast overwhelming majority of democratic congressmen vote to buck the White House to vote for this barrel of pork when those votes may come back to haunt them in the next election?

Obama is planting seeds for the fall, when big votes come up on healthcare and 'cap and trade'. He won't veto the defense bill, pork and all, when it comes across this desk. And key votes will magically appear to carry his healthcare.

The more things change...

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Keep an Eye on the Defense Budget

 

Yesterday I discussed White House plans to cap defense spending to 0% growth and its dictate for the Pentagon to reshuffle 11% of its budget to make way for "new initiatives." What are those "initiatives"?

According to today's Washington Post: 

The Democratic-controlled House is poised to give the Pentagon dozens of new ships, planes, helicopters and armored vehicles that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates says the military does not need to fund next year, acting in many cases in response to defense industry pressures and campaign contributions under an approach he has decried as "business as usual" and vowed to help end.

The White House has said that some but not all of the extra expenditures could draw a presidential veto of the Defense Department's entire $636 billion budget for 2010,... 

Gates vowed in April to fundamentally overhaul the military's "approach to procurement, acquisition and contracting" and urged Congress to support the termination of many traditional weapons programs in favor of more spending on counterinsurgency efforts and operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. In this round, those Democratic and Republican lawmakers who support maintaining or expanding programs that Gates proposed to eliminate or trim appear likely to prevail, because an unusually restrictive rule for floor debate agreed upon Wednesday will allow only amendments that could strip less than half of the spending the administration did not request.

I think this is a smokescreen. I believe a significant portion of this “initiatives” will be pork payoffs to lure key senators and congressmen to support Obama's domestic programs, like healthcare and energy. President Obama is hurting in the polls, and these are Chicago-style payoffs to help his legislation get back on track.

Obama is sending Gates out as a sacrificial lamb to show how publicly how committed he is cutting wasteful Pentagon spending. Nevertheless, he’ll sign the defense bill when shows up on his desk, loaded with defense pork for the likes of Murtha and, not surprisingly, numerous Blue Dog Dems and RHINO Republicans. These will be the legislators who will suddenly support his gov't healthcare bill. He'll say he did his best to control pork and, most importantly, the overall defense budget will be about the same as the previous year. All the pork will come out of other stressed Pentagon accounts, like manpower, research and development, training, and acquisitions.

Winners: Obama will get his key votes for his real agenda and legislators will get goodies for their states.

Losers: Gates will be handed a defeat at the hands of his new boss (who will keep him on as SecDef "with full confidence and support"). The media will decry Gates as a failed reformer who couldn't fight the Pentagon's established bureaucracy. The Pentagon will get programs it doesn't want and blame it doesn't deserve.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »