Military Officer - December 2008 - (Page 35) washingtonscene All of those survivors — whether their military sponsor died on active duty or in retirement — saw their first SSIA payment in the November check. readiness through better equipment. If and when the nation is able to start drawing down troop levels in the combat zone — or if Congress thinks we’re going to be able to do that — we only have to look to the past to see the repeated propensity to declare a “peace dividend” and whack defense spending. Unfortunately, the defense budget is caught in the middle of four harsh realities: I Current wartime requirements don’t seem to be declining. Any troop drawdown that might be possible in Iraq likely is to be offset by the need for more people in Afghanistan. I Wartime growth in defense costs has depressed spending in other areas, and there are growing pressures to address those other needs, even as the financial crisis continues and concerns intensify about Medicare and Social Security solvency. I The past six years have proven today’s force is too small to meet wartime needs, and the extended war also has worn out equipment and weapons that must be replaced and modernized. I We never know when the next major contingency will be thrust upon us, just as no one expected on Dec. 6, 1941, or Sept. 10, 2001, that the nation would be at war the next day. You don’t have to be a fortune teller to read the tea leaves indicating that executive and legislative branch leaders most likely will do what they have done in the past: Follow the money. And in the defense budget, the easy way to save money quickly is to cut personnel — which means putting off even longer any real relief for the servicemembers and families who already have borne 100 percent of the nation’s wartime sacrifice. If told in 2001 that active duty, Guard, and Reserve forces would face combat deployments pretty much every other year for the foreseeable future, every single thinking force planner would have preDECEMBER 2008 Defense Budget Train Wreck Are leaders desensitized to families’ sacrifice? W ith a new administration and a new Congress coming to Washington next year, there are a lot of powerful people planning for significant budget changes. And nowhere in the government are those planners more in conflict than on the defense budget — in the middle of a two-front war, no less. Coming into its last three months, the Bush administration says it won’t submit a formal budget to Congress for FY 2010 but will leave that to the next president. Instead, Pentagon planners are composing a defense spending “wish list” — unconstrained by the White House budget office — that would add almost $450 billion for the next five years to past defense budget projections. Meanwhile, some influential leaders in Congress foresee a different scenario. In early October, the chair of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee told reporters that the defense budget will be squeezed by the fiscal bailout, domestic needs, and the presidential candidates’ proposed tax cuts. As a result, he said, planned increases in Army and Marine Corps force levels will be scaled back to pay for weapon needs. The chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee also has talked about “slimming down” personnel and improving VA Might Treat More Retirees I Congress has approved funds to let some additional “Category 8” veterans enroll in VA health care. These are nondisabled vets who exceed certain income levels. The VA stopped enrolling new Category 8s in January 2003 to protect priority access for disabled and indigent vets. The VA hasn’t said how many new Category 8s will be enrolled or when. MILITARY OFFICER 35
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.