Audit Questions Savings in Plan to Cut Strategic Command, Other Staffs

U.S. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel passes the Strategic Command flag to Navy Adm. Cecil Haney during a change-of-command ceremony in 2013. A recent congressional audit has found that a Pentagon plan to reduce the number of senior staff assigned to the nuclear-weapons command and other military headquarters might not result in significant cost savings.
National Journal
Rachel Oswald
June 30, 2014, 9:23 a.m.

A Pentagon plan to cut costs by re­du­cing seni­or staff at Stra­tegic Com­mand and oth­er mil­it­ary headquar­ters may not pro­duce sig­ni­fic­ant sav­ings, an audit says.

De­fense Sec­ret­ary Chuck Hagel last year ordered across-the-board re­duc­tions of 20 per­cent of the budget of all mil­it­ary com­mand headquar­ters. Con­gress dir­ec­ted its Gov­ern­ment Ac­count­ab­il­ity Of­fice to ex­am­ine the ef­fects of those dir­ec­ted cuts on the Pentagon’s three “func­tion­al com­pon­ent com­mands,” which are Stra­tegic Com­mand, Spe­cial Op­er­a­tions Com­mand and Trans­port­a­tion Com­mand.

In find­ings re­leased last Thursday, the ana­lysts said that lim­it­ing cuts to just those per­son­nel in man­age­ment roles at the com­mand or­gan­iz­a­tions would po­ten­tially ex­clude from con­sid­er­a­tion more than 75 per­cent of the headquar­ters po­s­i­tions.

In their 73-page re­port, aud­it­ors “found that less than a quarter of the po­s­i­tions at the func­tion­al com­batant com­mands are con­sidered to be man­age­ment headquar­ters even though many po­s­i­tions ap­pear to be per­form­ing man­age­ment headquar­ters func­tions such as plan­ning, budget­ing and de­vel­op­ing policies.”

The GAO of­fi­cials con­cluded the Pentagon does not have “a clear or ac­cur­ate ac­count­ing of the re­sources be­ing de­voted to man­age­ment headquar­ters to use as a start­ing point to track re­duc­tions,” in part be­cause it re­lies on self-re­por­ted data from the com­mands, which can be in­con­sist­ent.

Stra­tegic Com­mand is re­spons­ible for de­tect­ing and de­ter­ring stra­tegic at­tacks against the United States and its al­lies. The Neb­raska-based com­mand has com­bat re­spons­ib­il­ity over all U.S. bal­list­ic mis­sile sub­mar­ines, nuc­le­ar-cap­able bombers and in­ter­con­tin­ent­al bal­list­ic mis­siles.

Cur­rently headed by Adm. Cecil Haney, the com­mand in fisc­al 2013 spent $623.4 mil­lion sup­port­ing its headquar­ters op­er­a­tions, which cov­er ser­vice com­pon­ent com­mands such as Air Force Glob­al Strike Com­mand; co­ordin­at­ing cen­ters such as the Cen­ter for Com­bat­ing Weapons of Mass De­struc­tion; and one sub-uni­fied com­mand — Cy­ber Com­mand, ac­cord­ing to the re­port. Com­par­at­ively, less than $200 mil­lion was spent in fisc­al 2001 on STRAT­COM headquar­ters activ­it­ies.

The nuc­le­ar com­mand also has seen the num­ber of mil­it­ary and ci­vil­ian per­son­nel as­signed to it and its sub-com­mands bal­loon in re­cent years, rising from few­er than 2,000 people in fisc­al 2001 to a total of 4,466 au­thor­ized po­s­i­tions in fisc­al 2013.

Much of that re­cent growth can be at­trib­uted to the cre­ation in 2009 of Glob­al Strike Com­mand, which was es­tab­lished to ad­dress short­com­ings in the Air Force’s man­age­ment of its nuc­le­ar bomber and ICBM mis­sions. The ser­vice com­pon­ent com­mand had just un­der 600 mil­it­ary and ci­vil­ian per­son­nel as­signed to it in the last fisc­al year.

The Pentagon par­tially agreed with the con­gres­sion­al aud­it­ors’ re­com­mend­a­tion that it re­con­sider its de­cision to fo­cus mil­it­ary com­mand cuts to just man­age­ment po­s­i­tions at headquar­ters. At the same time, the de­part­ment ar­gued the re­com­mend­a­tion fell out­side the scope of the GAO re­view man­date, which was to ex­am­ine the re­sources and per­son­nel as­signed to the three func­tion­al com­mands.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Maher Weighs in on Bernie, Trump and Palin
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

“We haven’t seen a true leftist since FDR, so many millions are coming out of the woodwork to vote for Bernie Sanders; he is the Occupy movement now come to life in the political arena.” So says Bill Maher in his Hollywood Reporter cover story (more a stream-of-consciousness riff than an essay, actually). Conservative states may never vote for a socialist in the general election, but “this stuff has never been on the table, and these voters have never been activated.” Maher saves most of his bile for Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, writing that by nominating Palin as vice president “John McCain is the one who opened the Book of the Dead and let the monsters out.” And Trump is picking up where Palin left off.

Source:
×