Panetta Asks Congress to Undo Sequestration, Approve BRAC

WASHINGTON, Feb. 15, 2012 — Defense Sec­re­tary Leon E. Panet­ta today urged Con­gress to undo an auto­mat­ic $500 bil­lion cut to defense spend­ing due to go into effect next year, and made his case for two new rounds of mil­i­tary base realign­ments and clo­sures.

Panet­ta raised the issues as part of his pre­sen­ta­tion of the pro­posed fis­cal 2013 defense bud­get to the House Armed Ser­vices Com­mit­tee. He was joined by Army Gen. Mar­tin E. Dempsey, chair­man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Robert F. Hale, Defense Depart­ment comp­trol­ler and under­sec­re­tary of defense for finance. The pro­pos­al — a $525.4 bil­lion base bud­get plus $88.5 bil­lion for over­seas con­tin­gency oper­a­tions — includes reduc­tions toward $487 bil­lion in defense spend­ing cuts over 10 years man­dat­ed by the Bud­get Con­trol Act, which Con­gress passed last year.

It does not, how­ev­er, account for more than $500 bil­lion in addi­tion­al cuts that will go into effect in Jan­u­ary if Con­gress does­n’t act to stop it. Those addi­tion­al cuts, known as “seques­tra­tion,” were writ­ten into the Bud­get Con­trol Act as auto­mat­ic, across-the-board cuts to the fed­er­al bud­get if mem­bers of a con­gres­sion­al “super com­mit­tee” could not agree on spend­ing cuts by a Novem­ber dead­line. They did­n’t.

Panet­ta said DOD lead­ers took seri­ous­ly their respon­si­bil­i­ty to plan for the $487 bil­lion in cuts in a way that does not hol­low out the mil­i­tary. Mil­i­tary and civil­ian DOD lead­ers are unit­ed in sup­port of the bud­get pro­pos­al that involved care­ful delib­er­a­tions based on strat­e­gy, he said.

“We need your part­ner­ship to do this in a man­ner that pre­serves the strongest mil­i­tary in the world,” the sec­re­tary told the com­mit­tee. “This will be a test for all of us: whether reduc­ing the deficit is about talk or about action.

“Let me be very clear,” he con­tin­ued. “When you take a half a tril­lion dol­lars out of the defense bud­get, it comes with risks.”

Those risks include work­ing with a small­er force, depend­ing on new tech­nolo­gies, need­ing to mobi­lize quick­ly and tak­ing care of the all-vol­un­teer force, Panet­ta said. “There is very lit­tle mar­gin for error in this bud­get,” he added.

Con­gress must do every­thing pos­si­ble to avoid seques­tra­tion, Panet­ta said, because it would amount to “a meat-ax approach” of cut­ting at least 8 per­cent more from each defense bud­get cat­e­go­ry. “And that, we are con­vinced, would hol­low out the force and inflict seri­ous dam­age to the nation­al defense,” he said.

“It would be dev­as­tat­ing,” he added. “Anoth­er $500 bil­lion and I’d have to throw the strat­e­gy I just pre­sent­ed to you out the win­dow.”

Panet­ta said defense lead­ers would wel­come work­ing with Con­gress on a way to stop seques­tra­tion before it takes effect.

“What­ev­er we can do on both sides to devel­op an approach that we detrig­ger seques­tra­tion, we’re cer­tain­ly will­ing to work on that,” he said.

The sec­re­tary also not­ed that the admin­is­tra­tion will make a for­mal request next month that Con­gress cre­ate base realign­ment and clo­sure process­es for fis­cal 2013 and fis­cal 2015. Panet­ta acknowl­edged that realign­ments and clo­sures require sig­nif­i­cant upfront finan­cial costs, but said they are need­ed in the long term not just for cost-sav­ings, but also as part of rebal­anc­ing the force from a draw­down after a decade of war.

As a for­mer Con­gress mem­ber from Mon­terey, Calif., Panet­ta said, he knows first­hand how hard it is for rep­re­sen­ta­tives to over­see base clo­sures in their dis­tricts. He served in the House in the ear­ly 1990s when Fort Ord was closed, he not­ed. The post along the Mon­terey coast, he added, rep­re­sent­ed 25 per­cent of the local econ­o­my.

“As some­body who went through the BRAC process in my own dis­trict, I rec­og­nize how con­tro­ver­sial this process is for mem­bers and for con­stituen­cies,” Panet­ta said. “And yet, it is the only effec­tive way to achieve need­ed infra­struc­ture sav­ings.”

The most recent BRAC round, in 2005, result­ed in the depart­ment clos­ing 14 major mil­i­tary instal­la­tions and realign­ing near­ly a dozen oth­ers. Panet­ta agreed with some com­mit­tee mem­bers that the 2005 BRAC cost much more than expect­ed and has yet to real­ize the sav­ings that were planned. But, hav­ing been through three rounds of BRAC, he said, there are lessons learned for the next time.

There are only so many areas in the defense bud­get to find cost sav­ings, the sec­re­tary told the House pan­el, and infra­struc­ture needs to be among them.

Source:
U.S. Depart­ment of Defense
Office of the Assis­tant Sec­re­tary of Defense (Pub­lic Affairs)

More news and arti­cles can be found on Face­book and Twit­ter.

Fol­low GlobalDefence.net on Face­book and/or on Twit­ter

Team GlobDef

Team GlobDef

Seit 2001 ist GlobalDefence.net im Internet unterwegs, um mit eigenen Analysen, interessanten Kooperationen und umfassenden Informationen für einen spannenden Überblick der Weltlage zu sorgen. GlobalDefenc.net war dabei die erste deutschsprachige Internetseite, die mit dem Schwerpunkt Sicherheitspolitik außerhalb von Hochschulen oder Instituten aufgetreten ist.

Alle Beiträge ansehen von Team GlobDef →