Search

The article looks at the U.S. military budget and examines how policymakers should approach defense spending. It notes the views of former Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates on appropriates for the Department of Defense and also covers budgets under the administration of President Barack Obama. Particular attention is given to the effects of the 2011 Budget Control Act and sequestration measures.

The article discusses the issue of the funding for the national security in the U.S. Topics discussed include the preparedness and ability of national security in terms of the economy, strategic defenses, and budget, the funding and sequestration of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), and the effect of authorization for underfunding defense in the DoD.

The article reports on the funding of nuclear triad in the U.S. Discussion and highlights are given on the modernization and maintenance of the nuclear forces in the country using the triad, the issue of the long-term budget for the planned military innovations, and the use of automated budget cuts also known as sequestration.

The article offers information on the efforts of the U.S. Department of Defense to manage sequestration and focuses on the budget cuts. It mentions that Republicans proposed increased defense spending and defense cuts with tax revenue. It states that Pentagon can decrease its budget by 100 billion dollars without changing military readiness.

The article looks at U.S. military spending, as of October 2013. It notes that under the U.S. Budget Control Act (BCA), the U.S. Department of Defense's budget has been cut as part of the law's sequestration requirement. The author suggests that the department will face tighter budgets for the foreseeable future and analyzes how it can adapt without damaging the country's military strength. She discusses personnel costs, including salaries and health care costs for military personnel and civilian employees, as a major area for potential savings. She discusses the balance between naval and land capabilities and between active duty and reserve forces. Other topics include military readiness, equipment modernization, and overall U.S. military strategy.

The article reports on the move of Air Guard to double its remotely piloted aircraft (RPAs) units in the U.S. It mentions that the National Guard is set to double its drones as it decided to add fie more units in 2014-2015 in which most of them will fly Reapers that can fire missiles and laser-guided bombs. However, the National Guard Bureau states that its aircraft conversions and plans to add RPAs could be delayed by lack of funds due sequestration.

The article offers the author's insights on the uncertainty and lack of stability in the budget situation faced by the defense industry in the U.S. He points out that as defense is a cyclical business, budgets should not correlate to perceptions of national security needs. The author's apprehension to the implementation of sequestration in January 2013 is mentioned. He hopes that the administration will reach a political compromise that will detrigger sequestration.

The article reports on the strengths and weaknesses of the U.S. military forces for the period 2018-2023. It highlights the missions of the Army which include prevention of conflict through deterrence and improvement of the international security environment. It notes the challenges face by the Navy and the Air Force on how to modernize and strengthen their aging fleets following the government's sequestration program.

The article discusses the significant activities taken by the U.S. military rotorcraft programs under the situation of sequestered defense cuts and threats. The U.S. Navy plans for a new presidential replacement helicopter despite a VH-3D Lift Improvement Program and upgrades. The Marine Heavy Lift Replacement helicopter still remains the only rotorcraft development program of the Department of Defense (DoD). The plans of Air Force to replace its combat rescue helicopter is also tackled.

The article focuses on the taxation in the U.S. in 2013. According to the Tax Policy Center (TPC), a joint project of the Bookings Institution and the Urban Institute, the tax hike which will take effect on January 1 , 2013 will take away an average of $3,500 for every household. It says that combined spending cuts and tax increases under the sequestration provision of the Budget Control Act of 2011 can lead to recession. It also cites capital gains, Obamacare tax, and military spending.

The article discusses the implementation of sequestration in the U.S. Armed Force. It mentions that the sequestration is the automatic budget cut, which was legislated in the 2011 Budget Control Act (BCA). It also discusses the initial idea of sequestration was to pressurize the Super Committee to find savings in the federal budget.

The article offers information on the long-term impact of the sequestration policy of the government on the U.S. Air Force. The author mentions that sequestration will not only last for 10 years but will stay. Moreover, the projection on the effects of sequestration on Air Force's efficiency are also mentioned.

The article discusses the U.S. nuclear weapon policy under the administration of President Barack Obama. It explores the aging nuclear weapons and support infrastructure of the country and its impact on American military deterrence capacity. It notes the implication of the sequestration on the government's goal to modernize its key nuclear and delivery platforms.

The article looks at the issue of defense spending the U.S. It highlights the budget sequestration in Washington, which may result in a 9.4 percent reduction in military programs. According to Senator John McCain, the implementation of sequestration may disable the secretary of defense to defend the nation. The potential impact of sequestration reductions on services of the Department of Defense is discussed.

The article explores the economic and political events in the U.S. which led to the sequestration. It looks on the implementation of budget cuts with regard to defense spending. It examines the projected and realized impact of sequestration on the economic fortunes of defense contractors and how they are adjusting their business plans to succeed despite the tightening government budgets. It also discusses sequestration in the context of funding federal programs.

The article reports on the Pentagon's fiscal 2016 budget by the U.S Congress which puts caps on Pentagon's spending in the Defense Department programs. It mentions that the real risk of sequestration is that the Pentagon will let the cuts fall on embryonic programs that could deliver military advantage. It also informs about science and technology (S&T) programs that will sustain industry's ability to develop and produce new weapon systems.

The article focuses on several aspects of military taxes in the U.S. and transferring of that tax to the U.S. Dept. of Defense. It mentions that people in the U.S. are advocating for raising military spending more than general domestic spending. It presents views of Jim Mattis, Secretary of Defense in the U.S., on impact of sequestration on readiness of the U.S. military. It also mentions that military taxes will fund military and bypass Washington's budget process.

The article talks about the U.S. Department of Defense (the Pentagon) and its proposed two-year budget for 2016 -17 which could lead to the possible passage of the annual defense authorization and appropriations bills. Topics include the mandatory federal budget caps or sequestration passed under the bipartisan budget act in 2011, the Pentagon's Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funding, and the delays in federal appropriations measures, including the fiscal 2016 defense budget.

The article reports on the coalition between U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and Congress on military spending plans for fiscal 2016. Topics discussed include the views of Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James regarding budget sequestration, the primary focus of the budget for health care of military personnel, and the perspectives of Representative Mike Turner on the impact of the budget for military services.

The article reports on the impact of a second round of sequestration cuts set by the government of the U.S. for fiscal 2016 on the plan of the Navy to cap deployments at seven months as the service is on the move to cut deployments and boost training. It mentions that the sequestration will focus on budget cuts from readiness accounts including ship availabilities, aircraft depot work and flying hours. Navy's diminishing funds to fix an aging fleet are also tackled.

The article informs that agriculture leaders including lawmakers from President Donald Trump's Republican Party criticized his planned 21 percent cut to discretionary spending at the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to increase defense spending.

The article provides information on the priority projects of the U.S. Air Force (USAF) amidst the 2013 sequestration cuts that have derailed military spending plans. The article notes that the top priority programs of the USAF include the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the KC-46 aerial refueler and the long-range bomber. According to General Mark Welsh, Air Force chief of staff, he also plans to start projects that will replace the aging E-8C ground-surveillance and T-38 fast-jet trainer fleets.

The article discusses the impact of the U.S. 2013 budget sequestration on the Pentagon military establishment's priorities. The topics include cyclical decline in military spending, the shift of American military strategy from Europe to Asia, and speculation that there will be fewer purchases of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF). Quotes from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments' Todd Harrison and Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey are noted.

The article reflects on gridlock and indecision in U.S. politics and how it threatens U.S. credibility as a world leader as of February 2013. It states despite pending deep indiscriminate cuts to government spending on defense, space and civil aviation, Congress and President Barack Obama have shown indifference to the situation by going on vacation. It suggests Obama is using sequestration to gain political approval and is uninterested in resolving the deficit, while Republicans show no concern for the military.

The article discusses the impact of a sequestration on U.S. defense strategies and budget cuts as of February 2013, focusing on five defense-related programs and contracting issues which should reportedly be addressed in the wake of spending cuts involving American defense contracts and initiatives. A ban on top-tier contractor consolidation and military maintenance are mentioned, along with proposed fines for losers of U.S. Government Accountability Office contract protests.

An interview with Todd Harrison, senior fellow for defense budget studies at the think tank Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, is presented. When asked how current U.S. defense drawdowns are similar and dissimilar to previous drawdowns, he said the buildup that preceded it was fundamentally different than previous buildups which were dealt with by returning to pre-war end-strength levels. He talks about sequestration, the lack of decision-making in Congress, and time constraints.

The article focuses on the possible effect sequestration may have on U.S. defense spending. It states Congress has until March 1, 2013 to come up with a budget agreement to reduce the federal deficit and increase the debt ceiling or across-the-board budget cuts will be enacted as a result of the sequestration agreement in 2012. It mentions Republicans in the House of Representatives may hold firm on sequestration and military spending cuts unless Democrats accept cuts on entitlement programs.