One of the most interesting undercurrents at last weeks Association of the US Army conference was worried talk about whether the recession or downturn or whatever were calling it will affect defense spending.
Army Secretary Pete Geren was relatively hopeful. Congress, he told reporters, understands what the Army is trying to do and largely supports it. FCS, the Armys premier modernization effort, is in good shape and has strong congressional support. As you can tell, Geren was all about Congress and declined to talk about the larger economic issues.
As I went from display to display on the floor I spoke with about a dozen industry sources about the economy and the budget. Most were gravely concerned about their 401Ks and a bit less worried about the budget. Still, they all expressed concern that the Army will have to begin choosing between so-called reset choices and those of modernization. This is one of several major friction points in the coming budget. First, the services have all made noises about how they are going to build the spending that has been in supplementals into their regular budget baselines. Thats one place for tradeoffs. Then there is the squeeze that will probably result from lower government revenue figures. There will be political pressure to withdraw from Iraq and thus lower operational costs. Operational and maintenance money has been very important to the Army, in particular. And then there is the normal budget wrangling. That offers an awful lot of places where Army or any other services spending can be whittled away.
And the Army is going to face skepticism over FCS even if the economy does hold relatively firm during first three months of next year. For example, when I asked Maj, Gen. Charles Cartwright during the big FCS briefing whether House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) supported the Armys approach on FCS, the general offered all sorts of explanations about how the program was on track and, in the best tradition of message management, avoided issuing a potentially damaging statement. To his credit, Cartwright did it with style and humor, even when pressed. The problem is that Skelton made clear after the Army scrambled to restructure the program and get more FCS components to troops as quickly as possible that he (and Airland Subcommittee Chairman Rep. Neil Abercrombie D-Hi.) worries the Army may be rushing the testing on the programs. Included among them are: Tactical and Urban Unattended Ground Sensors; the Non Line of Sight-Launch System, network kits for Humvees; the Class I Unmanned Air Vehicle; and the Small Unmanned Ground Vehicle.
Of course, during AUSA reporters were watching the worlds stock markets plummet day after day and no one knew whether there would be an upside any time soon. With the encouraging ballistic trajectories in the market so far this week, one could argue its all moot except that the US economy already appeared headed to rough waters before the market plunges.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
As you can tell, Geren was all about Congress and declined to talk about the larger economic issues.
Why should he be? Congress doesn’t talk about the larger economic issues. Congress just ordered up $1 trillion be put into circulation. What’s another billion here or there in the defense budget?
Good Morning Folks,
With a likely Obama win in November it is unlikely that defense budgets will decrease or that any major weapon or development programs will be wither trimed or cut.
The reason is two fold. First there is still a war(s) going on and the Democrats will be very sensative to being weak on defense. Second is the economy. Defense spending means jobs, nothing more needs to be said.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
The government has money for Wall Street bailouts and handouts for everyone but I will bet money they will run out of money, for the Defense Dept., with the inauguration of Obama.
The Dems always find ways to cut defense but not a penny from any other program.
No matter who wins in the election, there will be cuts in the defense budget. The only issue is what programs and how much. Obama wants to cut Missile Defense and McCain wants to cut the Littoral Combat Ships. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will make cutting large expensive weapons programs easier to get through congress.
When the social security solvency issue is factored into the mix, then the defense budget is in serious trouble. Best for defense contractors to look outside the US for contracts in the coming decade.
Fund Blackswift & USS Gerald Ford carrier.
Fund those.
More jobs & more careers.
Blackswift esp.
Long term for both projects.
Mustr have Spaceplane or US crews to ISS- obsolete.
Fund Ideas
See Military Channel Backyard to Battlefield.
Fund Blackswift & USS Gerald Ford carrier.
Fund those.
More jobs & more careers.
Blackswift esp.
Long term for both projects.
Mustr have Spaceplane or US crews to ISS- obsolete.
Fund Ideas
See Military Channel Backyard to Battlefield.
What will happen to the defense industry if the big ticket programs are cut? It seems like the industry has already consolidated itself into two big corporations, and since we can’t let either one die from lack of contracts, we just keep doling out the cash, cost over-runs and all, just to keep them in business. If we cut the LCS, do we have a naval ship building capacity left? Do we even have one now, now that all the competition has gone out of the system?
Ok I get the fact that you need to sustain current resources deployed in the current crisis zones and you need the budget to do so, but what I don’t get is the billions being poured into R&D for fancy new toys that never see the glory of battle.
Regardless of who wins the presidency the greed of those sales men worried about their bonus’s and the congressmen getting kick backs for promoting these new toys, will have to take a back seat and just be happy with what they have now. (A military force shouldn’t be making money off the blood of its people and others anyway.)
Its not like the US is having any trouble in the current crisis’s, fully dominating in Iraq for instance. With the toys they have.
At the rate things are going those Vets returning from combat will be coming home to no jobs, poor medical, and very little support.
Surely there is a bigger picture? You can fund the military forces at their current strength with out the need to pour billions into boats that never said, weapons systems that never fire, and aircraft that never fly. The R&D cost is billions alone.