CSBA in the News

The deal to avert a US debt default should have little effect on the Pentagon’s huge budget in the short term, but leaves the door open to sharp cuts that could force a strategy overhaul, experts say/…/ But experts say fresh deficit reduction efforts carried out under the new legislation could impose even more drastic cuts on the Pentagon, forcing the Defense Department to make some tough choices.

Todd Harrison, a budget expert at the nonpartisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, delved into the details Aug. 1 as the two chambers began considering the late-weekend deal. If the cap on security spending in fiscal 2012 proposed by the bill before Congress were applied proportionately, the Pentagon could face a $37 billion cut relative to the president’s $553 billion baseline request, Harrison says. That would bring the new allocation to $516 billion — or $14 billion less than the level provided by the House in its defense spending bill for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1.

As the Pentagon plans for U.S. forces to exit Iraq and Afghanistan, it is keeping one eye trained on the rising threat in the East. For two decades China has been adding large numbers of warships, submarines, fighter jets and — more significantly — developing offensive missiles capable of knocking out U.S. stealth aircraft and the biggest U.S. naval ships including aircraft carriers/…/China says it is simply developing defensive weapons and protecting its interests. But military analysts say the United States appears to be taking a different view, citing the Pentagon’s development of a new class of bombers that can fly for long periods outside of the reach of radar.

The U.S. Army since 1995 has spent at least $32 billion on development, testing and evaluation of 22 weapons programs that were later canceled — almost a third of its budget for creating new weapons, according to an internal evaluation released today.Todd Harrison, defense budget analyst for the Center for Strategic and Budget Assessments, a private Washington study group, this week likened the situation to “Hollow Growth” where “acquisition costs increased while the inventory of equipment grew smaller and older.”Harrison calculated that since 2001 the Pentagon and military services canceled 12 programs on which $46 billion was spent. His list included seven of the biggest Army terminations.

One of the big-ticket items in any budget deal will have to be the defense budget/…/ Having less money means deciding what is and isn’t going to be done, determining the real dangers that the country is going to face in the next decade and the likelihood of those dangers occurring.

If you’ve been paying attention, you may have heard that President Obama has pledged to cut $400 billion out of security spending between now and 2023. But what you may not know is that the $400 billion won’t be a cut as far as Joe and Jane Taxpayer are concerned.Todd Harrison, Washington’s defense-budget wizard, says letting Pentagon spending grow along with inflation, between now and 2023, actually will yield more than the $400 billion in savings Obama is seeking. Keep your eye on the ball here: the $400 billion in cuts aren’t cuts as you and I understand them — they are reductions in the projected future rate of growth. And because defense spending has close to doubled over the past decade — with future spending increases folded into future budget plans as naturally as dew forms on the morning grass — the U.S. military finds trimming its future spending to the rate of inflation a near-death experience.