Robert Gates' crafty but inadequate plan to cut the Pentagon budget

[SpartanDem]

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates' plan to cut Pentagon waste, abuse, and redundancies by $100 billion over the next five years is both more and less radical than it may seem.

The plan, which he laid out in a detailed 25-minute press briefing this afternoon, calls for cutting spending on contractors by 30 percent over the next three years, cutting the number of headquarters and commands (and the number of generals, admirals, and staff officers to go with them), eliminating duplication in intelligence staffs, and other economies—all with an eye toward replacing the Defense Department's "culture of endless money" with "a culture of savings and restraint."

Much of what he wants to do seems the sort of thing somebody should have done years ago. It makes no sense that the office of the secretary of defense—which includes the various deputy, assistant, and under secretaries and their staff—has swelled by 1,000 employees in the last decade. It makes no sense that the cost of contractors has grown from 26 percent of the DoD personnel budget to 39 percent (not including the contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan). It makes no sense that the Pentagon produces 700 reports and studies a year, a task involving 1,000 contractors. It makes no sense that, in an era when senior officers from the various services plan and execute joint operations routinely, the Joint Forces Command is staffed with 2,800 full-time personnel and 3,000 contractors at an annual cost of $240 million. (One thing Gates announced today is that he's eliminating that command.) It makes no sense that, 20 years after the end of the Cold War, a four-star general and the vast staff that goes with such a vaunted officer run the headquarters in Europe.

Yet ending these practices—as Gates announced he was doing or would fight hard to do—is guaranteed to kick up a huge political and bureaucratic storm. If Air Force generals rallied such fierce resistance against Gates' decision to halt production of their beloved F-22 fighter plane, imagine their reaction when he moves to slash the number of generals. (There are about 950 generals and admirals across the services; Gates wants, over the next two years, to eliminate the slots for 150 of them—"at minimum," he emphasized.)

Then again, Gates won the battle to halt the F-22. And he might win this battle as well—but for a reason that illustrates just how limited his budget reforms are

http://www.slate.com/id/2263349

It's kinda sad that the only thing Washington can agree on is that touching Dod budget no matter how small will be fought tooth and nail. I will also say I know alot of people didn't want to keep Gates, but he's proved useful in providing cover to do things like killing the F-22.

[rfranklin]

1. Get that in the range of $750 billion per year and you'll have something...

$20 billion a year can be reinserted through black budgets like so much chump change.

[zipplewrath]

2. he needs to go.

"I will also say I know alot of people didn't want to keep Gates, but he's proved useful in providing cover to do things like killing the F-22."

He's wasting far more in Iraq and Afghanistan than he's accomplishing with these minor cuts. He's protecting the torturers, advocating for the SOFA, and wasting huge sums in Afghanistan on a losing cause. He needs to go.

[Booster]

3. Why doesn't he just audit the Pentagon? I'm sure he could

recover a trillion or two.

[gratuitous]

4. Next: Ordering paper clips by the box, instead of paying for them individually

File this under "I'll believe it when I see it."