Their collective desires to denude DoD of nearly $1 trillion spring not from a sense of what is best for the national defense of the US strategically, but primarily from the standpoint of how to find money within the existing discretionary budget to keep from making real choices on entitlements.
Here's the thing - a lot of the waste in the DoD stems from how money gets allocated in the first place. If I want more money for my budget next year, I have to prove that I need it by spending ALL of my money this year, and then demanding more.
It's a flawed system from the get go. If I actually cut back, trim my budget, and save the government money, then that's money that I WILL NOT GET NEXT YEAR no matter how much I need it. No matter if my mission has gone from 30 events to 50 events. "Well Dave, why do you need that much money? You didn't spend what you had last year!"
And I don't know where all the money is going. Most if it is likely going to personnel costs, and we're losing spots at an alarming rate. The Army is doing everything it can to clamp down on money being spent for people, and it's already hit my office. Out of a six man team, we lost two folks that we had on orders thanks to a change in rules. So we're down a third, but our optempo hasn't slowed down one bit.
Yes, there are things that can be cut in the military. Yes, we could save money by changing our practices. But our practices are created by Congress, and I haven't seen any indication that things are going to change.
By the way - should the military get cut, I want to see commiserate cuts throughout the government. There's more than enough fat, fraud and waste to go around, let's start cutting THAT!
The defense support personnel and contractors have taken massive cuts over the last year or more. Like you said, down in numbers but up in taskers. I've heard of some places in the Army being down 2/3rds or more in staff, with their remaining budget cut down as well.
ReplyDelete