This handout was created by FCNL for the Rebuild and Renew America Now budget campaign.
Military spending has grown an average of 9% per year above inflation in the last eight years, compared to 1.3% per year for domestic discretionary programs. President Obama’s proposed slight increase in Pentagon spending 2010 budget continues that trend, though with some restraint. Given the rapid growth of the military budget, and the stark challenges presented by the economy and the environment, limiting and reducing military spending is a sensible strategy.
Congress can help to provide better security for the taxpayer dollars we spend. By adopting different approaches to national security, the nation can be safer while spending less. We ask you to consider the following:
Eliminate Outdated Pentagon Programs and Weapons. Among the weapons in the U.S. arsenal, there are some that have virtually no possibility of being used in modern warfare. Some were designed for Cold-War era missions, some have never passed basic operational tests, and some are far too expensive and complex for the missions for which they are being designed. The Unified Security Budget, released by the Institute for Policy Studies, identifies $49 billion that can be saved in 2010 by scaling back the U.S. nuclear arsenal to a mere 1,000 warheads and ending some outdated weapons programs. The report suggests eliminating:
- the F-22 Raptor (a Cold-War era fighter jet),
- the Virginia-Class submarine (a “weapon in search of an enemy”),
- the DDG-1000 (a Cold-War era destroyer), the V-22 Osprey (a helicopter/ airplane hybrid which continues to fail operating tests),
- the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (an amphibious vehicle for Marines that continues to break down every eight hours on average),
- the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (which is being rushed to production before designs are complete),
- the Army’s “Future Combat System” (a complex of 18 air and ground weapons systems),
- Missile Defense and
- Offensive space weapons.
Introduce Accountability and Transparency to Department of Defense Spending. All federal departments are required to meet audit standards and to report regularly to the President’s Office of Management and Budget and the Congress on their efficiency and effectiveness in carrying out federal programs. Except the Pentagon. The Pentagon has never passed an audit. Its chief financial officer has told Congress that a complete audit is still several years in the future. Meanwhile, the Pentagon has been unable to account for billions expended in Iraq, and continues to pay premium prices on “no-bid” and “cost-plus” contracts with inadequate oversight of quality and performance.
Senators Levin and McCain, the chair and ranking member of the Senate Armed Services committee introduced the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act (S.454) to tighten performance requirements for weapons producers. In a recent Armed Services Committee hearing, Senator Levin said that the Pentagon's 95 largest acquisition programs are “an average of two years behind schedule and have exceeded their initial budgets by a combined total of almost $300 billion.” The House Armed Services Committee, led by Representative Ike Skelton, has announced the formation of special panel on “Defense Acquisition Reform.” President Obama has directed his staff to look into federal contracts that do not provide enough value for taxpayers, and has appointed Ashton B. Carter, a leading expert on arms control and critic of Pentagon spending, as the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics. Congressional action will be extremely important in bringing about a more disciplined and transparent way of doing business via military contracts.
Reduce U.S. Oil Dependence. Securing access to petroleum supplies from countries around the globe makes heavy demands on the U.S. military budget. Nearly all cars in the U.S. (96%) run on petroleum, and the U.S. imports nearly 60% of its petroleum supplies. Five countries supply more than three-quarters of U.S. oil imports: Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Canada, Mexico and Venezuela. According to the National Priorities Project’s 2008 report, The Military Cost of Securing Energy, the U.S. military will expend $103.5 billion in 2009 to secure U.S. access to energy supplies, not counting the cost of the war in Iraq.
Meanwhile, U.S. energy use per person has grown by 57% since the 1950s, and we draw less than four percent of that energy from renewable sources. Investment in the development of renewable energy could turn the country away from its solid dependence on fossil fuels and reduce the need for military protection of this resource.
Prevent More Wars. Wars are different now from the state vs. state conflicts fought decades ago. They are more likely to be triggered by violent outbreaks in weak and failing states over scarce resources. Eighty to ninety percent of the victims of wars in this century are civilians, and fighting intensifies more and more often to the level of genocide and ethnic cleansing. Preventing these wars is both possible and practical, using diplomatic and development tools in the early stages of conflict.
Unfortunately, the U.S. has allowed its civilian tool-box to wither from neglect. Out of all the money that the U.S. spends to engage with the rest of the world, only about 5 – 7% percent supports non-military engagement with other countries. In 2007, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates called for increases in funding for non-military foreign affairs programs. He pointed out that the current budget for the Department of Defense -- not counting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- was nearly half a trillion dollars, while the total foreign affairs budget request for the State Department was $36 billion.
Obama’s budget proposal and the 2009 Omnibus appropriations bill make some additional investments in non-military defense tools. The recent Omnibus appropriations bill for 2009 will fill half of the 1000 empty diplomatic desks in the State Department and Obama’s budget proposal would double the foreign aid budget over several years. He has also named a goal of securing all loose nuclear materials around the globe that could fall into the wrong hands, within four years. These important steps, with congressional support, will strengthen the ability of the U.S. to prevent wars and save the lives and dollars that wars claim from all parties to out-of-control conflicts.
Rev: March 13, 2009
For further information, contact: Ruth Flower
Friends Committee on National Legislation – 202-547-6000