The Pentagon’s Budget Arrives With a $79 Billion Mystery

The Defense Department still doesn’t know how much to request from Congress for spending on wars.

Image has been reviewed by U.S. Military prior to transmission.) In this handout provided by the U.S. Air Force, a HH-60G Pave Hawk hovers over pararescuemen and Brig. Gen. Jack L. Briggs, the 455th Air Expeditionary Wing commander, during a training mission at Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, Sept. 24, 2010. The training mission provided a glimpse of what the 33rd Expeditionary Rescue Squadron brings to the fight and the capabilities it provides to combat commanders.
National Journal
Sara Sorcher Jordain Carney
March 4, 2014, 8:18 a.m.

The Pentagon’s $496 bil­lion budget re­quest re­leased Tues­day con­tains a laun­dry list of weapons sys­tems and troops’ be­ne­fits the mil­it­ary wants for next year. What the massive re­quest does not in­clude, however, are any de­tails about how it plans to spend money on its most im­port­ant func­tion: fight­ing wars.

In­stead, the De­fense De­part­ment is toss­ing out $79 bil­lion as a “place­hold­er” re­quest to Con­gress for spend­ing on wars, known as the “over­seas con­tin­gency op­er­a­tions” ac­count.

That is the ex­act amount the mil­it­ary asked for last year. But, giv­en that the Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion is in the pro­cess of wind­ing down the war in Afgh­anistan, of­fi­cials are in­sist­ing their place­hold­er should not be taken ser­i­ously. “It’s not a real num­ber,” Act­ing Deputy De­fense Sec­ret­ary Christine Fox said last week.

So why can’t the Pentagon tell Con­gress how much it needs to fight the na­tion’s wars?

For one, the pace and fu­ture of the Afghan draw­down re­mains in flux.

Afghan Pres­id­ent Ham­id Kar­zai is de­fy­ing ex­pect­a­tions by re­fus­ing to sign the U.S.-Afgh­anistan se­cur­ity pact, which could al­low the United States to keep 10,000 troops sta­tioned in the Cent­ral Asi­an coun­try. But if Kar­zai re­fuses to sign the agree­ment, and if his soon-to-be-elec­ted suc­cessor re­fuses as well, the White House has said it is mak­ing plans for a com­plete pul­lout of U.S. forces.

The even­tu­al num­ber of troops sta­tioned there ob­vi­ously will greatly af­fect how much mil­it­ary op­er­a­tions will cost in 2015, and so Con­gress may get a much clear­er pic­ture if the next Afghan pres­id­ent signs the se­cur­ity pact fol­low­ing the up­com­ing elec­tions.

And Con­gress may not, in fact, be in any hurry to find a ri­gid ceil­ing for the war-spend­ing ac­count. The fund is not sub­ject to Con­gress’s strict budget caps, and in the 2014 budget, the Pentagon and Con­gress ad­ded some $30 bil­lion for items not dir­ectly re­lated to war — in­clud­ing de­pot main­ten­ance for ma­jor weapons sys­tems, and pay and be­ne­fits for ser­vice mem­bers who may or may not be de­ployed.

What We're Following See More »
AT LEAST NOT YET
Paul Ryan Can’t Get Behind Trump
14 hours ago
THE LATEST

Paul Ryan told CNN today he's "not ready" to back Donald Trump at this time. "I'm not there right now," he said. Ryan said Trump needs to unify "all wings of the Republican Party and the conservative movement" and then run a campaign that will allow Americans to "have something that they're proud to support and proud to be a part of. And we've got a ways to go from here to there."

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trump Roadmapped His Candidacy in 2000
16 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The Daily Beast has unearthed a piece that Donald Trump wrote for Gear magazine in 2000, which anticipates his 2016 sales pitch quite well. "Perhaps it's time for a dealmaker who can get the leaders of Congress to the table, forge consensus, and strike compromise," he writes. Oddly, he opens by defending his reputation as a womanizer: "The hypocrites argue that a man who loves and appreciates beautiful women (and does so legally and openly) shouldn't become a national leader? Is there something wrong with appreciating beautiful women? Don't we want people in public office who show signs of life?"

Source:
‘NO MORAL OR ETHICAL GROUNDING’
Sen. Murphy: Trump Shouldn’t Get Classified Briefigs
16 hours ago
THE LATEST
JOINS BUSHES, MCCAIN
Romney to Skip Convention
17 hours ago
THE LATEST

An aide to Mitt Romney confirmed to the Washington Post that the 2102 GOP nominee will not attend the Republican convention this year. He joins the two living Republican presidents, George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush, as well as 2008 nominee John McCain in skipping the event. Even among living Republican nominees, that leaves only Bob Dole who could conceivably show up. Dole did say in January that he'd prefer Trump to Ted Cruz, but his age (92) could keep him from attending.

Source:
#NEVERTRUMP
Sen. Sasse Calls for a Third Candidate
20 hours ago
THE LATEST

Sen. Ben Sasse, the most prominent elected official to declare that he's #NeverTrump, wrote an open letter on Facebook to the "majority of Americans who wonder why the nation that put a man on the moon can’t find a healthy leader who can take us forward together." Calling to mind recent conversations at a Fremont, Neb., Walmart, the senator pitted the presumptive general election battle between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton as such a "terrible choice" that there would be an appetite for another candidate to emerge. In a parenthetical aside to reporters, Sasse ruled himself out. "Such a leader should be able to campaign 24/7 for the next six months," he wrote. "Therefore he/she likely can’t be an engaged parent with little kids." Meanwhile, his colleague Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) admitted in a private recording obtained by Politico that Trump hurts his reelection chances.

Source:
×