What We're Reading Now
Jun 17, 2011
IRAN
Medvedev calld for Iranian cooperation in nuclear dispute
Global Security Newswire- June 16, 2011
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Wednesday called on his Iranian opposite to offer better cooperation in the years-old dispute over the Middle Eastern state's contested nuclear program.
Iran launches second satellite into orbit, claims state TV
Julian Borger, Guardian- June 16, 2011
Western officials say Rasad-1 could be used to high-resolution maps, but the move prompts concern over Iranian nuclear ambitions.
NORTH KOREA
Is it time to give up on the Six-Party Talks?
Evan Ramstad, Wall Street Journal- June 14, 2011
There’s been a fascinating discussion happening in Seoul this week over the future of nuclear energy, weapons and technology on the Korean Peninsula. The three-day Asan Plenum on the nuclear future turned especially provocative Tuesday morning when some prominent American participants said it’s time to give up on the diplomatic process called the six-party talks.
PAKISTAN
Pentagon says US must salvage relations with Pakistan to protect nukes, regional security
Associated Press- June 16, 2011
The U.S. must keep working to salvage its relationship with Pakistan in order to preserve security in the region and protect against potential proliferation of that country’s nuclear weapons, top Pentagon leaders said Thursday.
Defense Appropriations Bill approved by House Appropriations Committee
Jun 15, 2011
Yesterday, the House Appropriations Committee approved its version of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2012 Defense Appropriations Bill. The bill contains $530 billion in funding for non-war programs and accounts, an increase of $17 billion over FY 2011 and a decrease of approximately $9 billion from the President’s request.
In addition to $530 billion in base spending, the bill contains $118.7 billion in spending for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, $842 million above the President’s request and $39 billion less than FY 2011, a decrease due to the drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq. This total includes $12.8 billion for the training and equipping of Afghan Security forces, and $1.1 billion for the Pakistan Counterinsurgency Capability Fund (PCCF), which has moved from the subcommittee on State/Foreign Operations to the subcommittee on defense.
The total in the bill is $648.7 billion. Other portions of defense spending are contained in the Military Construction and Energy and Water Appropriations Bills.
The bill is expected to be considered by the full House of Representatives the week of June 20. It is expected that germane amendments will be permitted.
House Armed Services Mark of the Defense Authorization
May 20, 2011
In case you're not keeping up with every little step in the budget process, we've got you covered. New up on our sister site today is a summary of the most important and/or controversial provisions and amendments contained within the House Armed Services Committee's mark of the Defense Authorization bill last week. If you'd also like to read the full text of the bill and report you can do so here.
By a vote of 60 to 1, the House Armed Services Committee approved $553 billion for the Pentagon’s base budget, a 4.1% increase over appropriations for FY 2011, along with an additional $118 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, matching the administration’s request on both counts.
The full House is expected to consider the bill the week of May 23. Many of the provisions listed below may be challenged on the House floor.
(More below the jump)
House Moves On War Supplemental
Jul 02, 2010
After weeks of intense debate, the House passed an approximately $80 billion emergency supplemental appropriations bill last night that will lend an additional $33 billion to the wars in Afghanistan in Iraq.
In the end, the vote to advance the nearly $60 billion Senate-passed measure came under a vote on the rule, an obscure process used to allow the House to vote to set the terms for debate on the bill, but not on the underlying bill. Inside the rule, the bill was deemed passed after the rule passed. The vote was close, but eeked by at 215-210. The budget resolution (that isn't really a budget resolution) was included within the self-executing rule.
The House then took up five separate amendments that include a $1 billion youth summer jobs program, $10 billion for an Education Jobs Fund and $180 million in loan guarantees split evenly between nuclear and renewable energy programs.
For further analysis, see our sister site Nukes of Hazard.
House Dems Propose $7 Billion Budget Cut
Jun 23, 2010
Will any of that cut come from defense?
The plan has not been formally announced, but AP reports that House Democratic leaders will propose a $7 billion cut in President Barack Obama's fiscal 2011 budget. The plan is expected to be attached to the rule for floor consideration of the supplemental, which could move this week
The House won’t pass a budget resolution this year, but sees its upcoming one-year spending plan as the “functional equivalent of a budget resolution.” The plan will set the cap for the 12 regular fiscal 2011 appropriations bills and include selected other provisions.
It looks like few of those bills are likely to be complete come Election Day, though, and will be passed in an omnibus bill during a lame duck session, post-election.
Stay tuned, the one-year “budget enforcement resolution” could be ready later today.
Defense Cuts Could Save Nearly $1 Trillion Over 10 Years
Jun 14, 2010
I’m proud to be a part of a new report that identifies options for nearly $1 trillion in savings over the next 10 years within the Department of Defense. Debt, Deficits, & Defense: A Way Forward was produced by the Sustainable Defense Task Force, a group of defense policy wonks put together by Representative Barney Frank to propose possible cuts to the military budget.
“I do not believe after this [proposed plan] is circulated that people will be able to dismiss the argument that you can responsibly, and at no cost to America’s genuine security, make reductions of over a trillion dollars for what has been proposed for the military budget,” Frank said at the release on Friday.
Cuts include further reductions to the U.S. nuclear arsenal and limits on the planned modernization of the nuclear weapons complex, which could save approximately $140 billion over 10 years. When missile defense and space spending are also selectively curtailed, that number is increased to $194.5 billion.
Over 100 congressional staffers, NGOs, and members of the press were at the briefing on Friday. When asked what his top three priorities might be for realistic savings within the defense budget, Frank included both nuclear weapons and missile defense.
See the briefing on C-SPAN here.
A Pretty New Pie Chart
May 21, 2010
The United States remains the global leader in defense spending, surpassing the next closest country by more than eight times.
In 2008, the most recent year for which complete global data is available, the U.S. approved $696.3 billion in defense budget authority (fiscal 2010 dollars). This figure includes funding for the Pentagon base budget, Department of Energy-administered nuclear weapons activities, and supplemental appropriations for Iraq and Afghanistan.
This number is eight times more than Russia, 15 times more than Japan, 47 times more than Israel, and nearly 73 times more than Iran.
Full HASC Backs F-35 Extra Engine
May 19, 2010
For the fourth year in a row, the House Armed Services Committee has ignored Pentagon recommendations (including a veto threat from Sec. Gates) and approved the continued development of the F136 alternate engine, developed by General Electric and Rolls-Royce, for the F-35 fighter aircraft program.
The measure would require the Pentagon to budget for the alternate engine starting in fiscal 2012 and withhold 25 percent of fiscal 2011 funds for F-35 development until the Pentagon's top arms buyer certified that all funds for the engine's development and procurement had been made available.
Rep. Roscoe Bartlett said during the markup today that “competition is warranted and critical and costs nothing more, according to the GAO.”
This isn’t quite true. Money for the upfront costs of building and buying an alternate engine are not included in current DoD plans, so any increase is just that – an increase – and any actual savings brought about by competition will easily be eaten up.
"Study on top of study has shown that an extra fighter engine achieves marginal potential savings but heavy upfront costs -- nearly $3 billion worth," Gates said on May 8.
Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell reiterated later today that Gates would recommend a veto if Congress budgets any funds for the alternate engine:
Pursuing an extra engine is an unnecessary luxury we simply cannot afford, especially in our current fiscal condition… Any savings that might result from an engine competition are years away, purely hypothetical and likely modest at best.
Morrell went on to say that amount we will spend to complete an alternate engine for the F-35 “would prevent us from providing our warfighters with more urgently needed equipment.”
Senate Budget Resolution Passes 12 to 10
Apr 22, 2010
Chairman Kent Conrad announced the passage of his fiscal 2011 budget resolution by the Senate Budget Committee today on a party line vote of 12 to 10. The document is a nonbinding framework that doesn't have to be signed into law by the president, but provides a strong indication of the budget road ahead.
Proposals include a $4 billion cut of President Obama's discretionary spending request, as well as a freeze of non-security discretionary spending for three years.
No surprises here – I’m sure we can all think of a few things that might be cut from the President’s request, and since it does make up over half of discretionary spending, it would be prudent to start with defense, right? Not according to Conrad.
The Chairman’s Mark finds its entire $4 billion cut in the budget for International Affairs, a move that, according to the document, is “strong on national defense” – meaning weak on development and diplomacy?
Where is the Pentagon’s Freeze?
Jan 28, 2010
Freeze? What Freeze?
An article in the Washington Independent today, in which I’m quoted, points to one – particularly glaring – problem with President Obama’s proposed spending freeze: Why does the proposal exclude defense spending?
From the piece, by Spencer Ackerman:
But while Obama did not rule out future defense cuts in the speech, many of these defense wonks could not understand why an effort at deficit reduction would explicitly exclude defense spending. “Defense spending is over half our discretionary spending,” Olson said. “It would be crazy not to include it. It begs the question whether this is a real effort.” Shortly before the speech, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the speaker of the House, told reporters that any spending freeze ought to include defense spending.
[snip]
Still, Todd Harrison, an defense-budget analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, said he believed the combination of massive defense budgets, massive federal deficits and a weak economy would inevitably compel Congress and the president to cut defense. “It’s likely in the future that everything will come under pressure, defense included,” Harrison said. But he conceded that a variable in that calculation is “political will” for such cuts — which is not in evidence in either the White House or, especially, the Congress, which loves to send defense money back home to individual states and districts.
Also today, Fred Kaplan writes that, “If some Rip Van Winkle had fallen asleep in 1982, woken up in 2009, and looked at the U.S. military budget as an indicator of what was going on in the world, he would assume that the Cold War were still raging.” He notes that, while every aspect of the Pentagon’s budget should not be subject to a spending freeze, there is certainly a large chunk that should.
