U.S. Services Wrestle with $7B Budget Gap from 2007 to 2011
If the U.S. military services try to balance their budget shortfall by cutting personnel, operations and maintenance accounts, it could create sharp differences between Pentagon officials and combatant commanders responsible for carrying out military operations throughout the world, sources familiar with the budget process say.
At a Dec. 13 meeting of senior Pentagon officials, the military service secretaries and civilian defense officials are said to have identified a $7 billion shortfall in the budget for 2007-11. The shortfall is expected to be paid largely out of personnel, operations and maintenance accounts to preserve planned spending on new weapons.
Such a course of action could pose “real problems” and lead to “ramifications not thought through,” said one former Pentagon official familiar with the budget discussion. The cuts could come predominantly in the expenditures of U.S. combatant commanders and might be seen as “cutting them off at their knees,” the former official said.
There are five geographic area commanders — for the European, Pacific, Southern, Central and Joint Forces commands — and four functional commanders for Transportation, Special Operations, Space and Strategic commands.
As the Pentagon is considering giving the combatant commanders more authority over the weapon development process — one of the suggestions by a special panel formed by Deputy U.S. Secretary of Defense Gordon England — the idea of slashing operations and maintenance accounts to balance the budget could create problems, the former official said.
The former official and an industry source familiar with the services’ thinking said the military could try to get back these proposed budgets cuts from operations accounts through wartime supplemental bills. This could set up a conflict with Congress, however, which has been trying to reduce the Pentagon’s dependence on supplements to pay for routine expenditures.
Once the 2006 defense budget — which is nearing completion in Congress — is passed, the Pentagon is likely to get a $50 billion “bridge supplement” to pay war-time bills until May 2006, when another $100 billion is likely to be requested for the remainder of the fiscal year.
The military services are still preparing their priority lists for next year’s supplements and would attempt to make up the shortfalls in the main budget through such additional spending measures, the industry source said.
At a Dec. 13 meeting of senior Pentagon officials, the military service secretaries and civilian defense officials are said to have identified a $7 billion shortfall in the budget for 2007-11. The shortfall is expected to be paid largely out of personnel, operations and maintenance accounts to preserve planned spending on new weapons.
Such a course of action could pose “real problems” and lead to “ramifications not thought through,” said one former Pentagon official familiar with the budget discussion. The cuts could come predominantly in the expenditures of U.S. combatant commanders and might be seen as “cutting them off at their knees,” the former official said.
There are five geographic area commanders — for the European, Pacific, Southern, Central and Joint Forces commands — and four functional commanders for Transportation, Special Operations, Space and Strategic commands.
As the Pentagon is considering giving the combatant commanders more authority over the weapon development process — one of the suggestions by a special panel formed by Deputy U.S. Secretary of Defense Gordon England — the idea of slashing operations and maintenance accounts to balance the budget could create problems, the former official said.
The former official and an industry source familiar with the services’ thinking said the military could try to get back these proposed budgets cuts from operations accounts through wartime supplemental bills. This could set up a conflict with Congress, however, which has been trying to reduce the Pentagon’s dependence on supplements to pay for routine expenditures.
Once the 2006 defense budget — which is nearing completion in Congress — is passed, the Pentagon is likely to get a $50 billion “bridge supplement” to pay war-time bills until May 2006, when another $100 billion is likely to be requested for the remainder of the fiscal year.
The military services are still preparing their priority lists for next year’s supplements and would attempt to make up the shortfalls in the main budget through such additional spending measures, the industry source said.
posted by Marko at 12/18/2005 01:25:00 PM
<< Home