Search

The article discusses the increasing U.S. defense budget and criticizes U.S. Department of Defense policies that have caused the budget to swell to more than $700 billion. The author points to spending on soldiers as a primary reason for the high budget with high salaries, benefits, and health care costs as factors. The Pentagon's procurement process and spending for unnecessary equipment such as the F-22 fighter jet, the B-2 bomber, and nuclear submarines are pointed to as other reasons. The efforts of U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates to curtail this spending are described.

Comments on the United States' defense budget under the administration of President Richard Nixon. Increase in defense procurement; Controversial navy projects that are getting a boost in the fiscal budget; Budget allocated for defense research and development; Appropriations for the Army; Defense spending, such as the purchase of the Sparrow; Army's request for funds for equipment to replace the materials turned over to South Vietnam; Budget message of Nixon.

The article discusses developments in the operation of the U.S. Defense Department as of April 2015, particularly the issues involving the department's fiscal 2016 budget. Among the issues are the proposed elimination of 8,200 Army Guard soldiers in 2016 and 7,000 in 2017, and the plan to takeover the Army Guard's 192 AH-64 Apache attack helicopters. Also cited is the comment by U.S. Congressman Steve Womack on the developments.

The article discusses the budget allocation for the U.S. Department of Defense. Topics include the negotiation techniques employed by the government body in its budget proposals, the three options determined by congressional members to address the proposed defense budget, and the challenges faced by congressional appropriators in their examination of the proposed defense budget.

The article examines the 2014 U.S. defense budget proposed by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel for fiscal year 2015, focusing on how potential spending reductions would impact individual branches of the U.S. military. Details are provided on the possible decrease in the Army's size, training, and equipment as well as how Hagel's plan would affect the Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force.

The article discusses efforts to reduce the size of the U.S. military budget, as of January 2011. The question of whether the U.S. should devote 56 percent of its discretionary spending to its expansive array of military goals is addressed. An argument is presented that the U.S. Department of Defense could prioritize its various missions more effectively, in terms of appropriations and expenditures. A prudent review of military spending and priorities could enable significant cuts to be made without compromising military readiness.

The article discusses the high rates of U.S. defense spending and ways to reduce it. The author argues for matching U.S. military readiness goals, once it leaves Iraq, more rationally with the nature of the main threats to national security, including Islamic terrorism and the proliferation of nuclear and biological weapons of mass destruction (WMD), which do not call for massive conventional forces. Other topics discussed include the threat from China, the costs of preventive war and humanitarian military intervention, and a history of U.S. defense spending since World War II.

Reports on the request of United States President George W. Bush's administration for an increase in the defense budget for fiscal 2002. Comparison of the amended budget with the defense budget for fiscal 2001; Plans of the Department of Defense for the requested budget increase; Recommendations of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Reports that the U.S. Pentagon dropped a controversial plan to lease 100 air-refueling tankers from the Boeing Company. How an alternative plan by the Pentagon could save taxpayers billions of dollars; Criticism of the Air Force by lawmakers for planning to lease planes instead of buying them at significantly cheaper prices.

Focuses on the lack of funding for procurement and modernization for the United States Department of Defense. Reduction of active and reserve force levels; Effects of the ten-year procurement holiday; Depletion of war reserves due to the operations in Kosovo and Serbia.

Focuses on the proposed budget of the United States Department of Defense for fiscal year 2000. Views on the current budget debate; Budget percentages; Share of various military services; Other ideas on military funding; Funding requirements of Reserve forces; Importance of the National Guard & Reserve Equipment Account's funding.

Offers a status report on the major defense and foreign policy issues before the 103rd Congress. Defense spending; B-2 `stealth' bomber; Military pay raise; C-17 cargo plane; Defense conversion; Base closings; Chemical Weapons Convention; Foreign aid; State Department authorization.

Focuses on the fiscal 1995 defense authorization bill (S 2182). Ground combat; Long-range bombers; Tactical air combat; Naval forces; Air and sea transport; Strategic systems; Military personnel issues; Operations and maintenance; `Burden sharing'; Public vs. private jobs; More.

Reports on the proposed defense budget of U.S. President George W. Bush for 2003. Deal of Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. with the U.S. Air Force; Proposed increase to the budget for procurement; Requests of Bush for the U.S. Navy; Amount proposed by the U.S. Defense Department on the Predator and other unmanned vehicles. INSET: Top Defense Contract Winners..

The article reports on the fiscal 2019 budget request for the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) which asks for 686.1 billion U.S. dollars in military spending. The DOD seeks a base budget of 597.1 billion dollars and an overseas contingency operations budget of 89 billion dollars. The request includes increases in the procurement budgets of the U.S. Army, Navy and Air Force compared to their 2018 requests.

The article reports on the 2007 and 2008 defense budgets for the United States Army. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld encouraged Secretary of the Army Francis Harvey and Army Chief of Staff Peter Schoomaker to take the Army budget gap directly to the White House Office of Management and Budget. Equipment and manpower needs are discussed.

Focuses on the increase in the United States Department of Defense's budget outlined in the conference report on the fiscal year 2000 budget resolution adopted by Congress. Plans in using the additional budget; Emergency funding of the department; Proposed spending for the purchase of weapons and military modernization; Limits set on annual discretionary spending.

The article argues against cuts in military forces under the administration of U.S. President Bill Clinton. It contends that such cuts amounted to disarmament that would not make a repeat of the military victory achieved by the U.S. forces over the Iraqi forces during the Persian Gulf War in 1991. It assesses the extent of the reduction in the lethality of the U.S. air power. It warns on the implications of the reduction in the defense budget which prompted the Defense Department to sacrifice operations and maintenance programs.

Reports that from Bosnia to Haiti, crises are testing the skills of United States military forces as never before. Operations which are also draining military coffers, idling units across America and curtailing important training exercises; Various operations that have diverted millions from funds earmarked for training and maintenance.

Reports on the proposed United States defense budget for fiscal year 2002. Increase in defense budget proposed by U.S. President George W. Bush's administration; Budget limitations faced by the U.S. armed forces; Implications for the armed forces modernization efforts.

The author discusses the poor fiscal outlook for the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) in the 2020s. Topics addressed include the high cost of many new projects such as the revamping of bomb factories and the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile, the cost of existing programs such as the KC-46 tanker and the T-X trainer, the continued outpacing of inflation by personnel costs, and the DoD's need to spend less than what it plans on other things in order to fund its new projects.

The author discusses fiscal debates in the U.S. Congress over the 2016 budget of the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). Topics covered include legislators' consideration of cost-reduction measures such as base closures, the budget increase won by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) budget request. Also mentioned are the costs of DoD defense programs such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

Covers United States Defense Secretary Richard B. Cheney's plan to cut military force levels by 25 percent over the next five years, and the possibility it may spur Congress to further cut defense spending. Reduction impacts; Army cuts; Programs most hurt.

The article reports on the 2016 budget appropriation proposed by the U.S. Department of Defense to finance its weapons programs, which include research, development and procurement, and its Overseas Contingency Operations programs. Topics discussed include the justifications of Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work on the increased defense budget, and a summary of the allocation of funds in the proposed budget.

The article discusses the defense budget problems of the U.S. government. Topics addressed include the inability of a budget agreement in 2013 to resolve basic structural problems that have been growing since 2000, the U.S. Department of Defense's military spending in fiscal 2014, and an increase in defense personnel costs in the 2000s. Also mentioned are base realignment and closure (BRAC) activities, contractual restrictions governing depots, and pressure on research and development budgets.

The author reflects on the impact of the inadequacies of budget allocation for the American military on its ability to combat and deal with security threats. He provides overview of the condition of the Armed Forces in the country and recommends ways on how the new administration can further improve the sector. The author suggests three important requirements that the new administration may consider to enhance the condition of the Army.

The article discusses the uncertainty over the future of S. 1429, a fiscal 2014 defense spending bill that was approved by the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee on August 1, 2013. It mentions language added to the bill to restrict the government's ability to wage an extended U.S. military operation in Syria without authorization from the U.S. Congress. Funds to be provided for the U.S. Department of Defense's base budget and for overseas contingency operations are also cited.

Discusses the proposed changes to the acquisition system of the U.S. Defense Department that may be in place by the end of 2007. Principles behind the proposed evaluation of military procurement; Comment on the plan to give combatant commanders more of a role in the acquisition process; Suggestion for improving the functions of the office of the under secretary of defense for acquisition.

Focuses on the U.S. Department of Defense's 2005 spending plan. Increases for various weapons programs; Pay increases for troops; Emergency supplemental appropriations to pay for war costs; Sources of tension between U.S. President George W. Bush's Administration and the U.S. Congress over the defense budget.

The article discusses the U.S. defense budgeting process, arguing that the system in which the U.S. Congress approves the budget and spending plans of the U.S. Department of Defense is overly complicated and does not allow the country to respond adequately to threats. The author argues that the budget process needs to be fixed and provides suggestions on biennial budgeting.

The article discusses the U.S. Department of Defense's research and procurement budget, examining the effects of sequestration cuts which will occur following the failure of the U.S. Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to agree on spending cuts. The author argues that it is possible to cut the defense budget and maintain national security, providing examples from the Vietnam War and Cold War, but says that the debt-ceiling agreement will likely reduce research and development (R&D).

U.S. aerospace industry-related news briefs are presented. The U.S. Department of Defense is drafting a budget request for the fiscal year 2013 which assumes that sequestration cuts from the 2011 Budget Control Act. Todd Harrison of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments says that the Budget Control Act could cut defense research and procurement budgets. The U.S. Air Force believes that the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program will not be cut.

The author offers opinions on U.S. military policy and appropriations for U.S. armed forces. It is argued that Department of Defense appropriations for research and development must be maintained as a matter of national security, as technological innovation is the most important element in the capabilities of the armed forces.

The article examines the appropriations requests of the U.S. Department of Defense for the U.S. fiscal year 2012 budget, focusing on appropriations for operations and maintenance. A decline in the amount requested by the department for its overseas contingency operations (OCO), funds related to the Iraq and Afghan Wars, is considered. Robert Hale, the department's Chief Financial Officer, cites a need to transfer maintenance operations to U.S. military bases.

The author offers opinions on U.S. military policy and Defense Department appropriations and expenditures. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is praised for a May 8, 2010 speech in which he called for a reorganization of the department's budget to spend less money both personnel and weapons to maintain a smaller but more efficient armed forces.

This article laments the fiscal 2009 budget proposal for the U.S. Department of Defense, the last crafted by the Bush administration, will not address the needs of the Department of Defense. The budget is also the first in six years in which there is a realistic possibility that the costs of war in Iraq and Afghanistan will decrease by a meaningful degree. It explains that the Department of Defense must tend to the war's wounded, repair and replace weapons and restore stockpiles among many others, therefore the agency needs more funding.

This article explains that the U.S. Senate still must pass a defense spending bill for Fiscal Year 2007 when it returns this week from its summertime recess. The $466.5-billion defense spending measure adopted by the Senate Appropriations Committee was bogged down amid a flurry of amendments before the recess. The Senate measure is $9 billion less than the Pentagon's request, and President George W. Bush has threatened to veto any defense measure that cuts more than $4 billion from the administration's mark.

This article explains the U.S. Department of Defence's smooth process of building an annual budget takes a dramatic turn this year. Squeezed dry for cash and out of tricks to pay for the war in Iraq, the Army decides not to submit its Fiscal 2008 budget request to the department's top civilian leadership. In past years, the DoD has said it will pay for the war through supplemental requests to Congress, although the draining effects of overseas actions have been felt in all of the Pentagon's operations and procurement accounts.

Editorial. Comments on the fiscal year 2002 defense budget proposed by United States President George W. Bush. Failure of Bush to fulfill his election promise to increase the country's defense budget; Implications for Bush's credibility.

The article offers information on the 2011 budget proposal of the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) for its Air Force, Navy, Army and agency spending. It mentions that DOD proposed a total budget of $708 billion in which the $549 billion is for discretionary spending and the $159 billion is for wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Further, it notes that DOD also proposed $17.45 billion for communications, electronics, telecommunications, and intelligence (CET&I) technologies.

The article discusses the interim rule issued by the Department of Defense (DOD) which amends the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) to implement Sections 846 and 847 of the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act. The interim rule states that a covered or former DOD official must obtain a written opinion citing post-employment restrictions before accepting compensation from a contractor. The new rule also contains a clause requiring contractors to inform employees of their whistleblower rights and protections.

The article focuses on the Department of Defense Appropriations Act which provides appropriations to the Department of Defense (DOD) for military activities including appropriations for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO).

The article reports on the plan of U.S. senators to begin consideration of a defense authorization bill. Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, stated that he would introduce the measure before the legislative body finished business on June 29, 2007. Also noted is that Democratic Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin of Michigan is expected to propose an amendment that would require the military to start reducing the size of its Iraq force within 120 days.