TOPICS

Nominee expects few changes to fiscal 2010 budget request

By Megan Scully CongressDaily January 15, 2009

President-elect Obama's choice for the no. 2 civilian slot at the Pentagon Thursday said he does not plan to make sweeping changes to the Defense Department's fiscal 2010 budget request, which has been drafted.

William Lynn told Senate Armed Services Committee at his confirmation hearing that reviewing the remainder of fiscal 2009 supplemental funding needed for warfare, as well as the fiscal 2010 request, would be among his first priorities upon assuming the post of deputy Defense secretary.

But while the incoming administration does not expect to send details of its fiscal 2010 budget to Capitol Hill until late March or April, there is little time to make significant changes.

RELATED STORIES

"This is a problem common to all new administrations," Lynn declared in a written response to questions. "The review of the FY 2010 budget request will, of necessity, be limited in scope, addressing the key initiatives of the new administration such as ground forces end strength, quality of life programs, and selected acquisition programs."

Lynn, Raytheon's senior vice president for government operations, also expressed impatience with the slow pace of reform of the military's problem-plagued acquisition system. He pledged to have an "active reform agenda" for the department, including strategic planning, budget and oversight. "Acquisition reform is not an option," he told the panel. "It is an imperative."

Lynn did not provide specifics on how he viewed particular weapons systems, but stressed the importance of carefully balancing cost, schedule and performance goals for all programs. If confirmed, Lynn added that he would place a high priority on reviewing acquisition processes to improve stability, accountability and the effective execution of defense programs.

Meanwhile, Robert Hale, Obama's pick to become Pentagon comptroller, told the committee Thursday he hoped to wean the Defense Department off its reliance on supplemental spending. If confirmed, he said the military would need a supplemental for the remainder of fiscal 2009 and possibly in fiscal 2010. "In later budgets, we should be better able to minimize dependence on supplementals," he said in a written response to questions. At Thursday's hearing, which was friendly, the committee questioned Michele Flournoy and Jeh Johnson, Obama's choices, respectively, for undersecretary of Defense for policy and Pentagon general counsel.

VIEW ALL COMMENTS POST COMMENT

COMMENTS

  • The first acquisition reform that is needed is for senior acquisition execs, including the Deputy, to follow existing well settled DoD acquisition guidance. Most of the big problems could have been avoided, as reported by GAO et al, if the "deciders" had just followed existing policies, rather than cave to the siren songs (and political threats?) of the "got to have it yesterday" and "field it now and fix it later" and "its only software" and "lets budget on the chance that testing won't find any problems" and "this is mostly commercial off the shelf stuff" crowds. But chief among these shibboleths is the failure to seriously assess the likely affordability of each new program in the context of all the other planned DoD spending plans. To say "its only $10B per year - surely we can find room for that in a $500B/yr program budget" is maliciously naive and always intended to avoid having to make serious early decisions on trades and offsets, thereby allowing the defense program to become awash with unaffordable (and therefore unexecutable) programs of all types. If it is too hard for the deciders to make timely trades between force structure etc and modernization, then the Department should establish an intended multiyear acquisition "top line" and charge its acquisition execs to plan only properly priced and cost-effective acquisition programs and then manage to stay within the total year after year. oldwoodboats Posted January 16, 2009 1:29 PM
  • Oh, golly gee. Just what we need, more acquistion reform. Most of the problems we have today are due to acquisition reform. Thing like we don't need oversight on contractors, we can trust them. Faster-better-cheaper wasn't it? You want to improve cost & schedule? Then change one rule in acquistion - do away with the right companies have to protest. That one step alone will cut months to years off the procurement phase alone. bmj Posted January 15, 2009 11:29 PM
  • The fear over prematurely engaging the Defense lobbyists and concern over employment displacements in the Defense sector are the real reason for saying significant changes should not be expected for FY10. The prime areas where reductions are possible and justified are known, when those will be surfaced is unknown. Reductions to R&D and Procurement in the out years should be anticipated the the targets of opportunity are known as well. Does the new Administration want to telegraph those moves this early, given the economy, fiscal crisis and the political realities, probably not. It is naive to accept the notion that there is insufficient time to construct a different FY10 budget. The transition team has been engaged for some time, there is enough talent and experience in these matters resident. No it is a matter of the politics and ... its the Economy. Olderster Posted January 15, 2009 10:37 PM
VIEW ALL COMMENTS

TODAY'S MOST POPULAR