Pentagon Budget: Forced To Diet On Only $614 Billion

Laicie Olson | Jan 26, 2012 | there are 0 comments 0

Those seeking further details on changes in the Pentagon budget received some satisfaction today in a briefing delivered by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey.

Secretary Panetta revealed that the budget, expected to be released in full detail on February 13, will contain $525 billion in base spending for fiscal 2013.  This excludes funding for the wars as well as nuclear-related activities at the Department of Energy, and represents a $6 billion decrease from the fiscal 2012 base budget approved by Congress.  Congress’ final number for fiscal 2012 was rolled back by $22 billion from the administration's original proposal in order to comply with the Budget Control Act.  

In addition, the Pentagon will request $88.4 billion in funding for the wars overseas, approximately $27 billion less than fiscal 2012 due to the withdrawal of troops from Iraq.

The Pentagon’s stated “hope and plan,” according to Secretary Panetta, is to grow the base budget (PDF) to $567 billion by fiscal 2017.  Although the budget would decrease slightly this year, 2.3 percent in real (inflation-adjusted) terms, it would see a real increase of about a half a percent over the remainder of the next five years.

The Pentagon has taken a hard look at its priorities and scaled back some of its most pie-in-the-sky projects, but its actions have not impacted the country’s ability to fight a war.  "This budget is a first step — it's a down payment — as we transition from an emphasis on today's wars to preparing for future challenges," said Dempsey, "This budget does not lead to a military in decline."

In fact, the Pentagon document, titled “Defense Budget Priorities and Choices,” notes that “Even with these reductions, the Army and Marine Corps will be larger than they were in 2001.”

If anything, the debt debate has provided the Pentagon with a long overdue opportunity to reexamine its priorities and reevaluate its strategy in light of ongoing and realistic threats.  The last Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) punted on the subject, recommending that the Pentagon choose to prepare for everything short of a zombie invasion.

Read more

tags Security Matters, Defense Spending, Panetta, Dempsey (all tags)

About This Blog

Search This Blog

Center Analysis

The Dawn of Nuclear Sanity?
There are signs that nuclear sanity is slowly gaining a foothold. Proposals are being considered by the Obama Administration that could pave the way for deep cuts in the number of U.S. nuclear weapons....

Rep. Turner vs. the Budget Control Act: More Nukes is Good Nukes
Rep. Michael Turner (R-OH) argues that the FY 2013 budget request does not provide enough money for the National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA) nuclear weapons programs. But not only did Turner lose this funding battle when Congress passed the B...

BRAC: The Next Steps for the Administration and Congress
The Pentagon is proposing to pursue two new base realignment and closure rounds in the coming years writes Senior Science Fellow Phil Coyle. But many questions remain....

Multibillion Los Alamos Project Threatened
John Fleck of the The Albuquerque Journal wrote a piece entitled "Multibillion Los Alamos Project Threatened" quoting Center for Arms Control and Non Proliferation's Kingston Reif on the Los Alamos Laboratory's most expensive project in New Mexi...

The Case Against Increasing Plutonium Pit Production Capacity
In this new analysis Policy Fellow Nickolas Roth explains the origins and purpose of the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement Nuclear Facility (CMRR-NF), its significance in terms of U.S. nuclear strategy, and potential consequences....