Defense Spending

Obama Army Secretary Nominee Tussled With Obama, Gates Over Pentagon Budget

Brian Beutler | June 2, 2009, 11:44AM

As Eric Kleefeld reported, President Obama will nominate Rep. John McHugh (R-NY)--ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee--to be the Secretary of the Army later today. If all goes as planned, though, McHugh will be working in a Pentagon he has recently, and dubiously, attacked.

In April, McHugh criticized the administration's Pentagon budget outline, which he inaccurately characterized as a proposed defense spending cut. He suggested, moreover, that Pentagon officials had complained to committee minority that the budget would slash defense spending by $8 billion. That claim couldn't be verified, but Defense Secretary Robert Gates told reporters, basically, that McHugh was fudging.

"Some of these things we have put in the base budget we elected to put into the base budget to send a signal to the troops that these things were going to be a permanent part of the budget, that we weren't going to be dependent on a supplemental," Gates said. "[W]hat you chose to put into the supplemental and so on, is probably how Mr. McHugh gets to his numbers."

Read more »

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Obama To Ask Congress To 'Change' DADT...At 'Some Time'

Brian Beutler | May 25, 2009, 3:42PM

The Obama administration's plans for Don't Ask, Don't Tell are pretty clear at this point. They will call on Congress to repeal the law...in some way...at some point in time. And not a day sooner.

Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he is working on an assessment of what -- if any -- impact overturning "don't ask, don't tell" policies would mean for the military and its culture. In the meantime, the Pentagon plans to follow the existing rules, which say gays and lesbians can serve in the military if they do not disclose their sexuality or engage in homosexual behavior.

"The president has made his strategic intent very clear, that it's his intent at some point in time to ask Congress to change this law," Mullen said. "I think it's important to also know that this is the law, this isn't a policy. And for the rules to change, a law has to be changed."

Meanwhile, the Associated Press breathlessly headlines their article "Mullen: Military to comply if gay ban law changes". Good to know they're not considering mutiny.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Pentagon: Still No Real Talks With White House About DADT

Brian Beutler | May 20, 2009, 10:24AM

Yesterday, Defense Department spokesman Geoff Morrell offered an update of sorts on the progress of a long-awaited repeal of the Pentagon's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy, which forbids openly gay troops from serving in the military.

"I do not believe there are any plans under way in this building for some expected, but not articulated, anticipation that don't ask-don't tell will be repealed," Morrell said at a press briefing. Pentagon leaders, he said, are "aware of where the president wants to go on this issue, but I don't think that there is any sense of any immediate developments in the offing on efforts to repeal don't ask-don't tell."

Read more »

Defense Spending

Republicans Complain To Gates About Lack Of Transparency, Harbinger Of Budget Fight Ahead

Brian Beutler | May 15, 2009, 4:56PM

Several weeks ago, when Robert Gates released early details of the Pentagon budget, we noticed a peculiar, but, I suppose, predictable trend. With an assist from the media, conservatives and other stakeholders--seeking to attack the administration, and protect their parochial interests--began to portray the proposal as a soft-on-defense spending cut, when, in fact, the bottom line represented a modest defense spending increase.

You don't hear too much of that meme anymore. But you do hear quite a bit these days, from Congressional Republicans, and others, that the budget process has been maddeningly opaque--that, for instance officials have been barred via non-disclosure agreement from discussing budget details with anybody outside the Pentagon or relevant government agency while the document was being assembled. John T. Bennett of Defense News first reported the existence of the agreement in February, and he sends along a copy, which you can see for yourself here. The terms of the agreement were rescinded earlier this week.

Still, that didn't please members of Congress who will have ultimate say over the budget itself. At a House Armed Services Committee hearing yesterday, Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) grilled Gates about the so-called "gag order," and what he described as the general lack of transparency in the budget process as a whole.

Read more »

Barack Obama

Under Obama Progressive Reps Still Opposed To War Spending

Brian Beutler | April 9, 2009, 5:29PM

In 2007 and 2008, when George Bush was still President, Democrats took a lot of heat from their supporters for their inability or unwillingness to end the war in Iraq. To the extent that they tried, though, the challenge within the party fell to leaders to convince their right flank to sign on to the efforts.

Now that a Democrat is president and the war in Iraq is (or at least seems to be) coming to an end, the situation's somewhat flipped. Obama wants to ramp up U.S. efforts in a different war and--with most Democrats in support, but without an exit strategy--the new challenge may lie in convincing their left flank to play along.

Read more »

Barack Obama

Pentagon Officially Lifts Ban on Media Access to War Dead

Elana Schor | March 18, 2009, 1:54PM

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has notified members of Congress of the official lifting of the Bush-era ban on media access to deceased soldiers arriving at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware.

Gates' move was previewed two weeks ago, but today's guidance symbolizes the end of an era in which the human costs of war were essentially hidden from the American public. TPMDC has obtained a copy of the Pentagon's memo on the new proposal, which you can view after the jump.

Read more »

pentagon

Ex-Defense Lobbyist Leads Obama's Responsibility-in-Contracting Session

Elana Schor | February 20, 2009, 1:47PM

Hmmm ... let's say you were planning the schedule for Monday's Fiscal Responsibility Summit at the White House, and you were looking for candidates to talk about "Contracting and Procurement." Would you select the longtime defense-industry lobbyist who had to get an exemption from ethics rules in order to win his Pentagon post?

I only ask because Bill Lynn, the deputy defense secretary and former Raytheon K Streeter, will be one of those leading the "Contracting and Procurement" session (h/t to Ben Smith).

On another note, any thoughts about Treasury Secretary Geithner leading the "Tax" portion of the summit?

Barack Obama

Obama's F 22 Decision

Matthew Cooper | February 18, 2009, 2:07PM

If you're interested in the question of whether Barack Obama can change the culture of Washington, one of the things worth looking at is the lobbying efforts over the F 22 Raptor. The decision of what to do with this fighter aircraft is one of the more important defense procurement questions the administration will face. And, like all defense issues, it's wrapped up in politics especially in a deep recession when jobs are scarce and good-aying jobs are even scarcer.

Some background: Over decades, weapons systems have taken on a life of their own and proven hard to halt even when the Pentagon is ambivalent about having them. My former TIME colleague, Mark Thompson, a veteran defense correspondent, has, for instance, written at length about the problems bedeviling the V-22 Osprey aircraft and why, despite its woes, billions have been pumped into the project.

When it comes to the F 22 Raptor, the administration is facing a March 1 deadline to decide how many more F22s to order. Lockheed is supposed to deliver the last of the current batch of 181 on order in 2011. The argument against ordering still more F22s is that the Pentagon already has a similar aircraft, the F 35 Joint Strike fighter online and, besides, the more pressing issue for the U.S. is not air superiority in a conventional war but rooting out terrorists in the Khyber Pass. The Air Force has indicated that it would like a total of 381 but several senior Pentagon officials, including Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, have hinted that they'd like far fewer if not to put the kabosh on the program entirely. The Pentagon "has not demonstrated the need or value for making further investments" in the plane, the Government Accountability Office found.

So not surprisingly there's a lot of lobbying going on to keep the F 22 rolling. Northrop and Lockheed Martin are lobbying heavily to keep the plane in production and there's a large press availability this week where reporters can sit in simulators and learn all about the 95,000 jobs the plane's advocates say are at state. Any state where there's work related to the Raptor is lobbying for it. "With rising unemployment, we need to make sure that we're not making a knee-jerk reaction and we keep this program going strong," Keith Scott, president of the Baltimore County Chamber of Commerce told the Baltimore Sun. Our point is, No. 1, this preserves jobs, and No. 2, it is immediate. You don't have to develop anything," Lawson said. "This is 'shovel ready.' "

According to the Los Angeles Times, the F-22 program is directly responsible for 25,000 jobs at Bethesda, Md.-based Lockheed Martin and its major suppliers. But Lockheed officials say when jobs from sub-suppliers are added in, the F-22 program maintains 95,000 jobs in 44 states. Among the firms helping Lockheed in Washington is Public Strategies, home to George W. Bush media adviser Mark McKinnon. In Congress, prominent senators from Ted Kennedy to Judd Gregg to Dianne Feinstein signed a letter back in January urging then President Elect Obama to keep the F22 going. Not surprisingly there's a website, www.preserveraptorjobs.com that's just part of the lobbying campaign being waged by the Lockheed, Boeing and other suppliers of the jet fighter. We'll know soon whether their efforts have been successful.

pentagon

Alleged Pentagon Burrower Played Key Role in Pro-War Pundits Program

Elana Schor | February 6, 2009, 1:05PM

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is trying to get some answers on two potential cases of Bush political appointees "burrowing" into long-term positions at the Pentagon's detainee affairs office.

One of the two has right of return to a civil service position, according to the AP, but let's look for a moment at the second official -- Tara Jones, a special assistant in the detainee office.

Jones was a central figure in the "Pentagon Pundits" scandal, helping to coordinate the military's courtship of former officers who used TV appearances to promote George W. Bush's Iraq war policies. When the New York Times first broke the pundits story, using internal e-mails obtained through the Freedom of Information Act, it was Jones' account that the newspaper had asked to view. (The full complement of her publicly released emails is obtainable here.)

One would think Jones' past might make it easier for Feinstein to ensure she doesn't burrow into the system -- but that likely depends on what explanation the senator gets from the Pentagon.

Capitol Culture

Feinstein Wants Pentagon Investigation of Alleged Gitmo Burrowers

Elana Schor | February 6, 2009, 9:43AM

Remember the case of Kathie Olsen, the Bush political appointee who's now safely ensconced in a suspiciously junior position at the same agency where she was once the No. 2?

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) thinks she's uncovered a similar situation at the Pentagon's Office of Detainee Affairs, where former Bushies are still involved in politically sensitive debates over the Guantanamo Bay prison. Feinstein wrote to Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Wednesday seeking an inquiry into whether two political appointees "have been improperly converted to career positions within the Department of Defense." From her letter:

Read more »

pentagon

Right-Wing Talking Point Watch: Will Obama "Cut" Defense Spending?

Elana Schor | February 4, 2009, 11:03AM

The short answer is no. But conservative columnist Tony Blankley still does his part today to flog an already tired line of faux-skepticism about the Obama administration's alleged plans to "cut" defense spending in the upcoming budget.

Blankley claims that while total Pentagon spending for next year is in line for an 8% increase, the wild card of continuing Iraq and Afghanistan expenses raises the specter of a defense cut under Obama. It's almost as if he hasn't been keeping up with TPM alum Spencer Ackerman, who demolished this talking point as hogwash two days ago.

(Robert Kagan was the first right-leaning pundit out of the gate on this one.)

The tale is a simple one: Pentagon officials, aiming to start budget negotiations from a wildly advantageous point, submitted a spending estimate that wasn't completely vetted by the departing Bush administration. The Obama folks knocked the number down to a more realistic number -- that still reflects a higher military budget.

If only the truth could prevent conservatives from hyperventilating with fantasies of Obama cutting defense spending.

procurement reform

Procurement Reform is Sexy, Honest

Matthew Cooper | January 22, 2009, 10:20AM

It seems like ancient history now, but there was a time when Democrats were focused on Pentagon procurement, not just the scandal of $600 toilet seats and blunderbuss calls to cut the defense budget but a serious debate about the weapons systems we really need and how to avoid paying too much for them. Sen. Gary Hart was a leading advocate of this new thinking on defense and so was James Fallows whose book, National Defense, was the Bible of the movement.

My starting home in journalism, The Washington Monthly, long ran articles on topics of why the Air Force placed too small a priority on the small, but effective A-10 Warthog aircraft which is great at busting enemy tanks and was in love with vastly overpriced stealth bombers. Can President Barack Obama put an end to a procurement system that's only gotten worse over the years?

Read more »