FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Brownian Motion and the Defense Budget

by WINSLOW T. WHEELER

The defense budget politicians are going ga-ga over a monster they helped to create: the “sequester” of $492 billion out of the defense budget over the next nine years—the broadly undesired effect of the Budget Control Act and the failed Super Committee of 2011.  The most palpably political Secretary of Defense in decades, Leon Panetta, says it’s “doomsday” but has instructed his staff to do nothing about it—at least visibly.  The capital’s self-anointed Pentagon money huckster, Congressman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.), the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, provides new hyperbole every few days, and senators from both parties busy themselves, as recently as last week, demanding reports whose only real effect will be to help them write more speeches.

All this “Brownian Motion”[i] is the embodiment of the dysfunction in Washington.  It’s not that they can’t do anything about something they all profess to be horrible; it’s that they don’t want to.

That the Department of Defense (DOD) must be defended from sequester is one of the few unifying beliefs in Washington, even if it is quite poorly informed. Maneuvering for the elections is more important to the actors in an elections spectacle.  The Republicans want to label Democrats as “anti-defense,” idly standing by as the defense budget is cut, and the Democrats paint the Republicans as wantonly obstructionist. Both sides think they’ll leverage more votes in November and are avidly sticking to their game plan.

Their opposing motivations resulted in typically dysfunctional legislation last week: an amendment to tell them something they already think they know—a report from the executive branch that says sequester means too many cuts too deep, administered in a mindless, automatic fashion.[ii]  The only real purpose to be served is providing fodder for newly elevated bombast. Yet, the authors of the amendment preen themselves play-acting they secured a meaningful step forward.[iii]

But, they may not even want that report from the executive brand.  It would mean an end to the endless games Washington has been playing with the numbers sequester can mean.

For example, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has repeatedly testified the sequester would cause the national defense budget function to lose $492 billion over nine years,[iv] but as late as last week[v] politicians, and even journalists,[vi] were saying the cuts would be $600 billion.

The games hardly end there.  CBO has further explained that sequester would impose a $55 billion reduction in the 2013 defense budget;[vii] others say it would be $60 billion;[viii] still others say more.  It depends on what “baseline” you work from: CBO’s; the larger amount of the Obama defense budget request for 2013, or still higher projections for 2013—such as what House Republicans are seeking.  Carefully selected baselines are useful things.

Think tanks, budget analysts and reporters are having a field day with the numbers expressed as percentages.  Two different think tanks separately reported 15 percent[ix] or 7.5 percent[x] reductions in the defense budget in 2013 from sequester.   CBO estimates it at 10 percent;[xi] CRS says 11.5 percent.[xii]  Bloomberg at BDOV Insight says 13%.[xiii]  They all—well most—make a plausible argument; some seek to justify words like “indefensible,” “catastrophic,” or—of course—“doomsday.”

One of the more intriguing things about sequester is a rumored subterranean debate about whether or not the sequester cuts must occur as a mindlessly automatic, across the board cutting operation in every separate “program, project and activity” in the defense budget, as most believe and expect.[xiv]  There have been hints,[xv] off-hand remarks, [xvi] and rumors[xvii] that the White House’s agent, the Office of Management and Budget, has something different in store.[xviii]  OMB might even attempt to make it rational.

But that would imply additional cuts in the defense budget are both feasible and appropriate.  To propose that before the elections would be for the Democrats to jump into the Republicans’ “anti-defense” trap. That’s not going to happen.

As a result, the noise will continue.

Winslow T. Wheeler is director of the Straus Military Reform Project and editor of  The Pentagon Labyrinth: 10 Short Essays to Help You Through It.

Notes. 

[i] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion.

[ii] http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/06/22/murray-amendment-to-request-study-on-trigger-cuts-passes-in-farm-bill/.

[iii]http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice.PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=1018ce65-b8aa-39b5-3434-c904f1a45c0d.

[iv] pp 13 of http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-31-2012_Outlook.pdf

[v] http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/06/mckeon-sequestration/.

[vi] http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/20/how-to-cut-600b-not-on-the-radar-at-pentagon/.

[vii] p. 12 of http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-31-2012_Outlook.pdf.

[viii] http://www.industryweek.com/articles/viewpoint_five_things_you_probably_didnt_know_about_sequestration_of_the_defense_budget_27606.aspx.

[ix] p. 5 of http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/6-7-12%20FINAL%20Sequester%20White%20Paper.pdf

[x] p. 4 of http://www.cbpp.org/files/12-2-11bud2.pdf.

[xi] p. 12 of http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/01-31-2012_Outlook.pdf.

[xii] p. 7 of http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42506.pdf.

[xiii] http://newprioritiesnetwork.org/pentagon-may-sequester-13-of-432-billion/.

[xiv] p. 5 of http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/6-7-12%20FINAL%20Sequester%20White%20Paper.pdf

[xv] http://thewillandthewallet.squarespace.com/blog/2012/3/13/sequester-rules-or-does-it.html.

[xvi] DOD Comptroller Robert Hale’s comments at http://thewillandthewallet.squarespace.com/blog/2012/3/9/the-plan-is-no-plan.html.

[xvii] http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/20/how-to-cut-600b-not-on-the-radar-at-pentagon/.

[xviii] http://www.defensedaily.com/sectors/congress/Admin-Would-Have-Flexibility-In-Applying-DoD-Sequestration-Cuts_16461.html or http://defensetracker.com/web/?p=1681.

[xix] http://dnipogo.org/labyrinth/.

 

 


Winslow T. Wheeler is the Director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Project on Government Oversight.  He spent 31 years working for the Government Accountability Office and both Republican and Democratic Senators on national security issues.

February 09, 2016
Andrew Levine
Hillary Says the Darndest Things
Paul Street
Kill King Capital
Ben Burgis
Lesser Evil Voting and Hillary Clinton’s War on the Poor
Paul Craig Roberts
Are the Payroll Jobs Reports Merely Propaganda Statements?
Fran Quigley
How Corporations Killed Medicine
Ted Rall
How Bernie Can Pay for His Agenda: Slash the Military
Neve Gordon
Israeli Labor Party Adopts the Apartheid Mantra
Kristin Kolb
The “Great” Bear Rainforest Agreement? A Love Affair, Deferred
Joseph Natoli
Politics and Techno-Consciousness
Hrishikesh Joshi
Selective Attention to Diversity: the Case of Cruz and Rubio
Stavros Mavroudeas
Why Syriza is Sinking in Greece
David Macaray
Attention Peyton Manning: Leave Football and Concentrate on Pizza
Arvin Paranjpe
Opening Your Heart
Kathleen Wallace
Boys, Hell, and the Politics of Vagina Voting
Brian Foley
Interview With a Bernie Broad: We Need to Start Focusing on Positions and Stop Relying on Sexism
February 08, 2016
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Privatization: the Atlanticist Tactic to Attack Russia
Mumia Abu-Jamal
Water War Against the Poor: Flint and the Crimes of Capital
John V. Walsh
Did Hillary’s Machine Rig Iowa? The Highly Improbable Iowa Coin Tosses
Vincent Emanuele
The Curse and Failure of Identity Politics
Eliza A. Webb
Hillary Clinton’s Populist Charade
Uri Avnery
Optimism of the Will
Roy Eidelson Trudy Bond, Stephen Soldz, Steven Reisner, Jean Maria Arrigo, Brad Olson, and Bryant Welch
Preserve Do-No-Harm for Military Psychologists: Coalition Responds to Department of Defense Letter to the APA
Patrick Cockburn
Oil Prices and ISIS Ruin Kurdish Dreams of Riches
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange, the UN and Meanings of Arbitrary Detention
Shamus Cooke
The Labor Movement’s Pearl Harbor Moment
W. T. Whitney
Cuba, War and Ana Belen Montes
Jim Goodman
Congress Must Kill the Trans Pacific Partnership
Peter White
Meeting John Ross
Colin Todhunter
Organic Agriculture, Capitalism and the Parallel World of the Pro-GMO Evangelist
Ralph Nader
They’re Just Not Answering!
Cesar Chelala
Beware of the Harm on Eyes Digital Devices Can Cause
Weekend Edition
February 5-7, 2016
Jeffrey St. Clair
When Chivalry Fails: St. Bernard and the Machine
Leonard Peltier
My 40 Years in Prison
John Pilger
Freeing Julian Assange: the Final Chapter
Garry Leech
Terrifying Ted and His Ultra-Conservative Vision for America
Andrew Levine
Smash Clintonism: Why Democrats, Not Republicans, are the Problem
William Blum
Is Bernie Sanders a “Socialist”?
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
We Can’t Afford These Billionaires
Enrique C. Ochoa
Super Bowl 50: American Inequality on Display
Jonathan Cook
The Liberal Hounding of Julian Assange: From Alex Gibney to The Guardian
George Wuerthner
How the Bundy Gang Won
Mike Whitney
Peace Talks “Paused” After Putin’s Triumph in Aleppo 
Ted Rall
Hillary Clinton: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Gary Leupp
Is a “Socialist” Really Unelectable? The Potential Significance of the Sanders Campaign
Vijay Prashad
The Fault Line of Race in America
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail