Weak Hand

The Pentagon must play the cards it has, not the cards it wants.

Facing the end of a long spending spree, under fire for allowing high-level fraud and mismanagement, squeezed by cost and schedule overruns on huge weapons programs, the Defense Department hardly looks like the biggest winner at the federal procurement table. But it still is. Without counting war supplemental appropriations, the Defense base budget of $440 billion amounts to 3.9 percent of the nation's gross domestic product. In fiscal 2005, Defense contracts bested $278 billion, up from $229 billion in 2004. And it has doubled planned spending on new weapons systems over five years, from $700 billion in 2001 to nearly $1.4 trillion in 2006.

But the growing federal deficit and rising costs of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan threaten to gnaw away at Defense's edge. North Korea tested long-range missiles in early July; a surging China remains a challenge; and Hezbollah has emerged as a surprisingly well-equipped force in the Middle East as a proxy for Iran and Syria.

The Army and Marines continue to bear heavy burdens in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are planning to spend nearly $30 billion combined in 2007 just to maintain and repair equipment used in the fighting. The wear and tear on troops rotated in and out of the theater is equally daunting.

Despite the growing cost of those operations, the Pentagon remains committed to hugely expensive, multiyear programs such as the Army's Future Combat Systems, whose total life-cycle cost recently was recalculated at $300 billion, and the Joint Strike Fighter, whose cost has increased 27 percent-from $66 million to $84 million per plane since its inception.

A Government Accountability Office study released in April (GAO-06-368) evaluated 23 major weapons programs and found 10 running more than 30 percent over budget, or more than a year behind in hitting technical goals. GAO rapped Defense for speeding weapons into production without fully testing technologies.

The fiscal 2008 Defense budget will try out a new approach to large procurements-joint funding and management by more than one military service-to reduce duplication of effort and incompatible technology. Pentagon officials will direct the services to manage portfolios of capabilities, rather than individual projects, in intelligence, reconnaissance and surveillance, logistics and communications.

Meanwhile, missile defense advocates on Capitol Hill are capitalizing on fears of a rising threat from North Korea to boost funding for the already pricey program. A week after North Korea's July 5 test of its long-range Taepodong-2 missile, House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., announced his intention to use House-Senate conference negotiations on the fiscal 2007 defense authorization bill to expand missile defense spending and accelerate the program. The missile test, though unsuccessful, demonstrated that the United States needs an interceptor capability sooner rather than later to shoot down incoming ballistic missiles, Hunter says.

Republican leaders of the Senate Armed Services Committee reacted coolly to Hunter's plan, indicating that the $9.3 billion research and development request is sufficient, unless Defense tells them otherwise. Nevertheless, the Senate unanimously approved an amendment offered by Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., during floor debate on the defense bill that would increase missile defense testing accounts by $45 million.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from GovExec.com.
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Forecasting Cloud's Future

    Conversations with Federal, State, and Local Technology Leaders on Cloud-Driven Digital Transformation

  • The Big Data Campaign Trail

    With everyone so focused on security following recent breaches at federal, state and local government and education institutions, there has been little emphasis on the need for better operations. This report breaks down some of the biggest operational challenges in IT management and provides insight into how agencies and leaders can successfully solve some of the biggest lingering government IT issues.

  • Communicating Innovation in Federal Government

    Federal Government spending on ‘obsolete technology’ continues to increase. Supporting the twin pillars of improved digital service delivery for citizens on the one hand, and the increasingly optimized and flexible working practices for federal employees on the other, are neither easy nor inexpensive tasks. This whitepaper explores how federal agencies can leverage the value of existing agency technology assets while offering IT leaders the ability to implement the kind of employee productivity, citizen service improvements and security demanded by federal oversight.

  • IT Transformation Trends: Flash Storage as a Strategic IT Asset

    MIT Technology Review: Flash Storage As a Strategic IT Asset For the first time in decades, IT leaders now consider all-flash storage as a strategic IT asset. IT has become a new operating model that enables self-service with high performance, density and resiliency. It also offers the self-service agility of the public cloud combined with the security, performance, and cost-effectiveness of a private cloud. Download this MIT Technology Review paper to learn more about how all-flash storage is transforming the data center.

  • Ongoing Efforts in Veterans Health Care Modernization

    This report discusses the current state of veterans health care


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.