That's not the whole story, however. It's true, as you say, that the final number is set every year. And it's true that a future Congress can do whatever it wants.
Nonetheless, the Pentagon plans over a long period of time, and makes decisions that imply multi-year commitments of huge resources. Therefore, forcing the Pentagon onto a different budget path is a very big deal, that is likely to have long-term consequences, in terms of weapons systems, the size of the armed forces, the number of troops stationed in Europe, etc. On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Max Sawicky <[email protected]> wrote: > Defense spending is classified as 'discretionary', which among other things > means it is set annually. Like all discretionary spending, the only number > that matters is the one for the coming fiscal year. And when the U.S. is > waging war, that number doesn't matter either, since it always gets bumped > up by so-called 'supplemental appropriations' in the spring. > > It is true that projections of spending beyond the coming year set a > political tone to some extent, so in the future it would be difficult for > Obama, assuming he had the votes and desire, to reverse his stated support > for austerity. > > > > On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Robert Naiman <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> More numbers will be rolled out over the next few weeks. >> >> Catherine Lutz, editor of "The Bases of Empire: The Struggle Against >> U.S. Military Posts," has said: "the new proposal for Department of >> Defense base budget reductions over the next five years represents >> only a 4 percent decline in real, or inflation-adjusted, terms, >> according to the Project on Defense Alternatives." >> http://www.accuracy.org/release/is-the-military-budget-really-being-cut >> >> Here is PDA's new memo: >> http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/1201bm53.pdf >> >> In the President's speech, he said: >> >> "over the past ten years, since 9/11, our defense budget grew at an >> extraordinary pace. Over the next ten years, the growth in the >> defense budget will slow, but the fact of the matter is this—it will >> still grow... In fact, the defense budget will still be larger than it >> was toward the end of the Bush Administration." >> >> I'm on a list of analysts who want to cut the Pentagon budget. This >> list includes top insider-type budget analysts. >> >> I asked: >> >> "When the President said 'the defense budget will still be larger than >> it was toward the end of the Bush Administration,' was that a true >> statement in terms of constant dollars? >> >> One person responded: >> >> "Ashton Carter said that Obama's statement referred to nominal dollars >> (not adjusted for inflation)." >> >> One person responded: >> >> "See the numbers at >> >> http://defense.aol.com/2011/12/02/omb-dod-agree-on-523b-2013-budget-budget-chicken-game-begins/. >> The nominal numbers go up in the FYDP; in 2012 dollars its about flat, >> perhaps teeny-weeny up." >> >> So, I would sum that up by saying: the current 10 year projection is a >> cut from the previously projected growth. In real terms, it's cutting >> virtually all of the previously projected growth; it basically amounts >> to a freeze, in real terms, over 10 years. >> >> On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 12:16 PM, ken hanly <[email protected]> wrote: >> > After reading several articles on the cuts to defense spending I >> > noticed >> > there are not actual figures showing the defense budget for last year >> > and >> > this year or projected spending in the future. Is there actually a >> > decline >> > or simply a decline in the rate of expansion of the budget with cuts in >> > some >> > areas and increases in others? Anyone have the figures handy? >> > >> > Cheers ken >> > >> > >> > >> > Blog: http://kenthink7.blogspot.com/index.html >> > Blog: http://kencan7.blogspot.com/index.html >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > pen-l mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Robert Naiman >> Policy Director >> Just Foreign Policy >> www.justforeignpolicy.org >> [email protected] >> _______________________________________________ >> pen-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > -- Robert Naiman Policy Director Just Foreign Policy www.justforeignpolicy.org [email protected] _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
