Washington, D.C., United States (AHN) – The Department of Defense budget proposals showed a downward spiral in defense spending that began in fiscal 2011 but the present package reflected a pragmatic approach according to top officials at the Pentagon.

“This budget plan represents a historic shift to the future, recognizing that we are at a strategic point after a decade of war,” said Defense Secretary Leon Panetta in a statement.

“This is a budget based on strategy and good management,” said Robert Hale, Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) and Chief Financial Officer of the U.S. Department of Defense.

Addressing journalists at a Pentagon news conference, Hale said, “It is a package that we put together that we think works well as a whole. We hope Congress enacts it as package, or it will lose the synergies that make it a strong package.”

Going down the memory lane using slides of chronological defense cuts after wars in Korea and Vietnam among others, Hale said, “It’s really not that different from past war-time drawdowns,” adding, “The total defense budget is coming down, freeing up resources for other national priorities.”

Hale noted that the proposal reflects a transition point in U.S. national security with the drawdown of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with the need to lower the federal deficit.

The proposal was “guided by the commitment by the president that our armed forces remain the best trained, best led, best equipped fighting forces in history,” Hale said.

The budget request adds $60 billion in cuts to meet a congressional mandate of $259 billion over several years, Hale said. “We understand we need to make more disciplined use of our defense dollars,” he said.


Joining Hale at the briefing Air Force Lt. Gen. Larry Spencer, the Joint Staff’s director of force structure told journalists that the fiscal 2013 budget package reflected not only President Barack Obama’s military strategy, but also the wishes of military leaders who had strong input.

“The chairman views this budget as the first installment in a series of budget submissions to shape the joint force the country needs in fiscal 2020,” Spencer said, noting, “During this process, everything was on the table.”

On the question of impending automatic reduction known as “sequestration” that will go into effect next year as a result of Congress not meeting a November deadline for prescribed reductions to the federal debt, Hale said, “We followed guidance that did not anticipate the sequester,” adding, “This is not a good policy. [Sequestration] was intended as a prod — (while) it didn’t work … They need to enact changes to replace the sequester.”

If sequestration is not undone, the automatic cuts will take an extra $54 billion from the fiscal 2013 budget. “It won’t be nice,” Hale said. “We’d end up reducing a lot of important programs, and probably end up in a [reduction in force] situation, and it would certainly impact readiness.”

While there were no pay freezes or cuts proposed, the latest proposal would slow the rate of personnel costs in pay and benefits that increased 90 percent since fiscal 2001, now making up one-third of the budget, Hale said.

The civilians working for the Department of Defense were not spared and the proposal called for reduced civilian pay raises — 1.7 percent for the next two years, 0.5 percent in fiscal 2015, 1 percent in 2016 and 1.7 percent in 2017.

Commenting on the proposed cut of 5.5 percent over five years, mostly in the Army and Marine Corps, which grew to accommodate the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq following the 9/11 attacks, Hale said, “We’ll try to do this in as humane a way as we can.”

Hale minced no words saying, “I don’t think I can stand here and say there won’t be any involuntary separations.”

Noting that the department would have a continuous reviewing of the impact of personnel adjustments, Hale said. “If we can’t attract and retain people at those numbers, we’ll stop doing it,” he said.

Moreover, the Navy and Marine Corps will be leaner and smaller, but still rapidly deployable according to Rear Adm. Joseph P. Mulloy, the Navy’s deputy assistant secretary for budget.

Addressing journalists at the Pentagon, the admiral said, “The Navy has come down almost 6,000 people over the last 10 years,” stressing that sailors and Marines would lose “not a dollar” under the budget request, though pay increases will slow after 2014.

On the number of ships, the admiral said, “We’re forecasting that in 2017 we’ll have the same number of ships that we have now,” adding, “We have 37 ships under construction … and nine more ships to award this year.”

Navy planners and leaders looked at long-term programs as the best source of cost reduction, he said, adding “The real driver here was, ‘What do we need to have?’”


View full post on All Stories