BabyBoomer50s
Capitalist
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2018
- Posts
- 12,021
WSJ
“Congress has been working on next year’s defense budget, and for the second year in a row members of both parties have rejected President Biden’s proposal as insufficient. This is a welcome development, though Washington is only starting to address the threats the U.S. faces.
“The Senate Armed Services Committee recently passed a national defense authorization for 2023 that would provide the Pentagon $817 billion, up from the roughly $773 billion the Biden Administration requested, about a $45 billion difference. The House amended its initial draft in committee to add $37 billion to President Biden’s request. These increases are aimed in part at mitigating inflation, which is crushing the Pentagon’s buying power, especially on fuel and housing.
“Both chambers included a 4.6% pay increase for service members, consistent with the Biden request. This in normal times would be generous but not with inflation at 8.6%. The services need to offer competitive pay to weather “arguably the most challenging recruiting year since the inception of the all-volunteer force,” as Marine Lt. Gen. David Ottignon put it earlier this year to Congress.
“Army end strength in both proposals falls to 473,000 from 485,000, as Team Biden requested, not because the land branch doesn’t want the manpower but because it is struggling to fill openings.
“Also important: Bailing out some of the water the U.S. Navy has been taking on. The Biden budget asked to build eight ships but retire 24, putting the fleet on track to shrink to 280 ships in 2027 from about 300. The amendment that added $37 billion to the House bill, sponsored by Democrats Elaine Luria and Jared Golden, offers money for five additional ships, including another destroyer and frigate.
“Meanwhile, the House and Senate precluded some ship retirements. That would at least put the Navy on a more stable course, but the U.S. needs a larger and more lethal sea service within the decade to counter China’s growing naval power.
A bright spot is that both chambers dedicated money for the sea-launched nuclear cruise missile, known as SLCM-N. The Biden Administration wants to kill that program as a bow to the arms-control lobby, despite the advice of military commanders who want to keep it. The missile was conceived to deter Vladimir Putin from using a tactical nuclear weapon in Europe, an especially salient goal as the Russian dictator has spent much of 2022 making nuclear threats against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
“The House and Senate will have to iron out their differences, and the money will still have to be appropriated in a budget deal. The reality is that even the $45 billion plus-up won’t change the U.S. trajectory of managed military decline. Defense spending will stay at roughly 3% of the economy, down from between 5% and 6% in the 1980s when the U.S. was showing the Soviet Union it couldn’t win the Cold War.
“But at least Congress has stepped in to prevent the Biden Administration from bleeding the U.S. military amid one of the most volatile world moments in 80 years.
Congress Rejects Biden’s Defense Budget
The House and Senate add to his request, but it’s still not enough.
“Congress has been working on next year’s defense budget, and for the second year in a row members of both parties have rejected President Biden’s proposal as insufficient. This is a welcome development, though Washington is only starting to address the threats the U.S. faces.
“The Senate Armed Services Committee recently passed a national defense authorization for 2023 that would provide the Pentagon $817 billion, up from the roughly $773 billion the Biden Administration requested, about a $45 billion difference. The House amended its initial draft in committee to add $37 billion to President Biden’s request. These increases are aimed in part at mitigating inflation, which is crushing the Pentagon’s buying power, especially on fuel and housing.
“Both chambers included a 4.6% pay increase for service members, consistent with the Biden request. This in normal times would be generous but not with inflation at 8.6%. The services need to offer competitive pay to weather “arguably the most challenging recruiting year since the inception of the all-volunteer force,” as Marine Lt. Gen. David Ottignon put it earlier this year to Congress.
“Army end strength in both proposals falls to 473,000 from 485,000, as Team Biden requested, not because the land branch doesn’t want the manpower but because it is struggling to fill openings.
“Also important: Bailing out some of the water the U.S. Navy has been taking on. The Biden budget asked to build eight ships but retire 24, putting the fleet on track to shrink to 280 ships in 2027 from about 300. The amendment that added $37 billion to the House bill, sponsored by Democrats Elaine Luria and Jared Golden, offers money for five additional ships, including another destroyer and frigate.
“Meanwhile, the House and Senate precluded some ship retirements. That would at least put the Navy on a more stable course, but the U.S. needs a larger and more lethal sea service within the decade to counter China’s growing naval power.
A bright spot is that both chambers dedicated money for the sea-launched nuclear cruise missile, known as SLCM-N. The Biden Administration wants to kill that program as a bow to the arms-control lobby, despite the advice of military commanders who want to keep it. The missile was conceived to deter Vladimir Putin from using a tactical nuclear weapon in Europe, an especially salient goal as the Russian dictator has spent much of 2022 making nuclear threats against the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
“The House and Senate will have to iron out their differences, and the money will still have to be appropriated in a budget deal. The reality is that even the $45 billion plus-up won’t change the U.S. trajectory of managed military decline. Defense spending will stay at roughly 3% of the economy, down from between 5% and 6% in the 1980s when the U.S. was showing the Soviet Union it couldn’t win the Cold War.
“But at least Congress has stepped in to prevent the Biden Administration from bleeding the U.S. military amid one of the most volatile world moments in 80 years.
