The Sequester and the Military Budget

Project on Defense Alternatives
April 18, 2013

More than a month after the onset of sequestration, neither the White House nor Congress are any closer to enacting a ?grand bargain? that could replace the nine-year sequester in its entirety or a one-year ?patch? that could be used to offset the FY13 or FY14 sequesters.? In fact, the recently unveiled budget request for Fiscal Year 2014 all but ignored the automatic spending reductions that impact almost every sector of the federal government.? Veteran defense reporter John Bennettbelieves?that the recent budget request has but one purpose for the White House, and that is ?constructing the foundation for a ?grand bargain? fiscal deal with Senate Republicans.?? As a result, sequestration still seems here to stay for the immediate future.

This seeming lack of progress has prompted the chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Carl Levin (D-MI), to?advocate for a one-year patch to avoid sequestration in Fiscal Year 2014.? Because both the White House and Congress are budgeting to pre-sequester levels, the military budget faces a more-than $50 billion cut in Fiscal Year 2014.? The FY13 sequester cuts are currently being implemented by the Office of Management and Budget.? If Congress decided to appropriate at the post-sequester spending levels in Fiscal Year 2014, it could avoid another sequester altogether.? Still, it appears as if Congress will continue to ignore sequestration as it drafts its FY14 spending bills.? While Levin remains hopeful that a ?grand bargain? will eventually be enacted, he believes that a one-year patch to avoid the automatic cuts in FY14 is essential.? Last year, Levin rejected similar temporary proposals from Republicans and instead advocated an annual military spending reduction of $10 billion per year for the next decade.

Appearing before the?House Appropriations subcommittee on defense?this week, Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel announced that the Pentagon is preparing a largereprogramming request?to offset some of the budgetary disruption resulting from the onset of sequestration.? For example, the department is currently facing a $22 billion shortfall in operations and maintenance funding in Fiscal Year 2013.? During the hearing, Pentagon Comptroller Robert Hale noted that the department is planning on reducing its civilian workforce by five to six percent between now and Fiscal Year 2018 in order to keep pace with active duty reductions.? Furthermore, Hale asserted that civilian workforce reductions will need to be coupled with infrastructure downsizing through the Base Realignment and Consolidation (BRAC) process.? The Pentagon?says?that their latest BRAC proposal stems from a 2004 study in which the department found it had 24 percent excess domestic infrastructure. ?Still, Chairman Levin?threw cold water on the proposal, saying he doesn?t think the Senate will be any more receptive to domestic base closures this year than it was last year.

In its recent budget submission, the Army confirmed that the development phase of the new Ground Combat Vehicle program will be delayed by one year.? This delay follows a scathing Congressional Budget Office report that found alternative options to the GCV would be both more capable and less costly than current plans.? The new chair of the House Armed Services subcommittee on tactical air and land forces, Representative Michael Turner (R-OH),?recently told reportersthat he?s keeping a close watch on the Army?s acquisition budget, and especially the Ground Combat Vehicle, to make sure that another F-35-like boondoggle doesn?t emerge.

Last month, Representative Ron Kind (D-WI) introduced?H.R. 1361, the Inefficient Defense Elimination Act of 2013, which would require the Pentagon to follow through on program terminations and the retirement of certain military assets that were included in last year?s budget.? This includes cancellation of the Global Hawk Block 30 drone program, the mothballing of the C-27J Spartan transport aircraft, and the early retirement of seven aging cruisers and two amphibious landing ships.? The Pentagon has included many of the aforementioned recommendations in this year?s budget.? Meanwhile, Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) has introduced?S. 664, the Government Contractor Accountability Act of 2013, which would require federal agencies to enact the recommendations of Inspectors General with respect to contractor savings and reforms.? ?My bill would ensure [Inspector General] recommendations for cutting costs and rooting out fraud and abuse are given sufficient consideration by the federal agencies,? Shaheen said in a?statement.

Yesterday, Representative Mike Coffman (R-CO) sent a letter to House Appropriations Committee leaders requesting decreased funding for ten military programs as appropriators begin drafting FY14 spending bills.? Among the items recommended for decreased funding, many of which are included in Coffman?s?Smarter Than Sequester Defense Spending Reduction Act, are the Army?s Ground Combat Vehicle, refurbishments for M1 Abrams tanks, military bands, and active duty Marine Corps and Army personnel.? Coffman wrote, ?Our current fiscal situation requires us to identify spending reductions throughout the budget, including the defense budget.? However, we should do so in a responsible manner, with targeted reductions in less critically important areas.?

As early as?this summer, F/A-18 manufacturer?Boeing will introduce an upgraded version of the Super Hornet, which the contractor hopes will be considered as a cheaper alternative to Lockheed Martin?s F-35 Lightning II. The Navy currently plans to buy 260 units of the F-35C variant, a number at risk of being supplanted by the less expensive Super Hornets. Meanwhile, both USMC Commandant Gen. James Amos and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert have reaffirmed their support for the F-35, though both parties acknowledge procurement is moving slowly: Gen. Amos?referred?to the procurement process as ?constipated.? Gen. Amos and Adm. Greenert criticized the increased role of Pentagon program managers and blamed them for clogging procurement reform.? Meanwhile, the Marine Corps recently?announced?that its variant of the F-35 should be ready for initial operations as soon as July 2015.

A yearlong Senate Armed Services Committee?review?has found that the United States spends more than $10 billion annually to maintain overseas bases in allied countries. Of this total, over seventy percent is distributed to Germany, Japan, and South Korea; where spending is $4 billion, $2 billion and $1.1 billion respectively. Compounding expenses, co-payments by the host countries are often accepted as ?in-kind? payments of services or facilities instead of cash.? Not only have allied payments failed to ?keep up with rapidly rising U.S. costs,? the report notes, but there is scant congressional or Pentagon oversight of the construction projects.

Global military spending dropped in 2012 for the first time since 1998. ?According to a?report?prepared by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the international community spent $1.75 trillion on its military, down 0.5 percent from the year before.? Defense outlays shrank in the West, but rose in?Russia, China, and the Middle East.? The United States retained the highest percentage at 39 percent of all military spending.? SIPRI experts noted that while Chinese military spending has increased over the past year, it has not seen a commensurate improvement in military capability.

Source: http://itsoureconomy.us/2013/04/the-sequester-and-the-military-budget/

Incumbent politico Tammy Baldwin house of representatives paul ryan michele bachmann donald trump