View Full Version : W. House: DoD Officials Must Vow Secrecy on Budget
A remarkable report. It seems the antithesis of transparency and openness. Or is this the usual way the DoD budget is handled?
LINK (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3956514&c=AME&s=TOP)
The Obama administration has directed defense officials to sign a pledge stating they will not share 2010 budget data with individuals outside the federal government.
In an undated non-disclosure agreement obtained by Defense News, the administration tells defense officials that "strict confidentiality" must be practiced to ensure a "successful" and "proper" 2010 defense budget process.
The secrecy pact comes as dozens of Bush-era Pentagon appointees remain on the job, asked to stay on by the Obama administration until replacements are confirmed to ensure continuity during wartime.
The Pentagon and Office of Management and Budget have agreed on a fiscal 2010 defense budget top line figure of $537 billion. That level is nearly $50 billion lower than the $585 billion defense plan created during the final months of the Bush administration, and $24 billion higher than the already enacted $513 billion 2009 defense budget.
The pledge covers any data about the 2010 budget, including: "planning, programming and budgeting system documents and databases, and any other information" that concerns the administration's internal discussions about "the nature and amounts of the president's budget for fiscal year 2010, and any supplemental budget request during the current fiscal year."
The administration is requiring defense officials to promise they will not divulge the kinds of information covered in the document "to any individual not authorized to receive it."
"Under no circumstances will I disclose such information outside the Department of Defense and other government agencies directly involved in the defense planning and resource-allocation process, such as the Office of Management and Budget," the agreement said.
Now you would think the Lame Stream Press would be all over this, front page news, all the talking heads yammering - wait - it's President Obama - no problem.
Soft Target
02-21-2009, 07:22
IMHO - The President needs to have his administration and congress sign non-disclosures first (Feinstein comes to mind).
didn't these same people want to hang president Bush in the town square for keeping 'secrets'...
hypocrites
Red Flag 1
02-21-2009, 08:22
Me thinks the lack of pentagon/military leadership changes are likely due to: 1. BHO has no clue who to hire, and 2. May have had some trouble finding "volunteers".
In that light, the secrecy demand could be another laryer of protection for the administration to hide it's inabitity to grasp anything military. I'll bet the funding will raise more than eyebrows.
Anybody expect to see the funding needed to run the military?
:munchin
RF 1
I doubt that the secrecy is intended to hide general incompetence... to the contrary I fully believe the secrecy is to hide specific intent. You can't 'generate' a crisis if everyone knows what you are up to. Its hard to doubt intent when the Cheif of Staff openly and blatantly revels in the benefits of a well managed crisis.
It has already been shown that some of the military budget cuts are targeting health care and retirement benefits such as the higher co-pays for tri-care. ( I apologize for not posting links to the info, I don't have the links handy)
As we all know, you cant muzzle congress... (Senator Feinstein and AG Holder are a good example of that) You CAN however muzzle a service member... "speaking up" as a service member has real consequences, not this bullshit empty "censure" that our honorable elected leadership wave around like a punchline.
So when a budget includes all sorts of wacky shit that way or may not translate into pushing political agendas on the military and cutting/killing benefits for service members, or turning off needed developmental programs, how can you call your representatives and raise hell if no one knows what is in the legislation anyway.
What congress person wants to be on record as voting AGAINST military benefits, pay raises etc... when its easier to gag the military and vote behind close doors. If a service member in the know speaks up; wham, UCMJ removal from the position, bad paper, see ya later alligator.
I don't just wear my tin foil hat in private anymore.... it goes everywhere with me. Dark things are brewing and the military being sworn to secrecy over such a thing just seems like a good reason for me to add another layer of foil to my hat.
Admittedly I could be way off base with my thought pattern here but that's what all this tin foil does to a guy. Just my two cents.
Kinda seems like an easy way to (1) get a number of DOD ffolkes to retire/resign vs fired in a short period of time--which would reflect better on Barry in the MSM as they announced it was all just a bunch of GWB 'quitters'--and (2) set the stage for a 'witch hunt' that will make the Plame fiasco look like a no-contest plea over a parking ticket. I think I'll pull out the space blanket I keep in my car for emergencies and have my tailor make me a suit out of it, and start wearing the old high-quality aluminum hard hat my Dad used to wear on the job back in the 60's. I'm beginning to have some doubts about the kind of community that's being organized around here. ;)
Richard's $.02 :munchin
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123595811964905929.html
Declining Defense Obama's budget does cut one federal department.
For all of his lavish new spending plans, President Obama is making one major exception: defense. His fiscal 2010 budget telegraphs that Pentagon spending is going to be under pressure in the years going forward.
The White House proposes to spend $533.7 billion on the Pentagon, a 4% increase over 2009. Include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan, which would be another $130 billion (or a total of $664 billion), and overall defense spending would be around 4.2% of GDP, the same as 2007.
[Review & Outlook] AP
However, that 4% funding increase for the Pentagon trails the 6.7% overall rise in the 2010 budget -- and defense received almost nothing extra in the recent stimulus bill. The Joint Chiefs requested $584 billion for 2010 and have suggested a spending floor of 4% of GDP. Both pleas fell on deaf ears. The White House budget puts baseline defense spending at 3.7% of GDP, not including Iraq and Afghanistan. The budget summary pleads "scarce resources" for the defense shortfall, which is preposterous given the domestic spending blowout.
More ominously, Mr. Obama's budget has overall defense spending falling sharply starting in future years -- to $614 billion in 2011, and staying more or less flat for a half decade. This means that relative both to the economy and especially to domestic priorities, defense spending is earmarked to decline. Some of this assumes less spending on Iraq, which is realistic, but it also has to take account of Mr. Obama's surge in Afghanistan. That war won't be cheap either.
The danger is that Mr. Obama may be signaling a return to the defense mistakes of the 1990s. Bill Clinton slashed defense spending to 3% of GDP in 2000, from 4.8% in 1992. We learned on 9/11 that 3% isn't nearly enough to maintain our commitments and fight a war on terror -- and President Bush spent his two terms getting back to more realistic outlays for a global superpower.
American defense needs are, if anything, even more daunting today. Given challenges in the Mideast and new dangers from Iran, an erratic Russia, a rising China, and potential threats in outer space and cyberspace, the U.S. should be in the midst of a concerted military modernization. Mr. Obama's budget isn't adequate to meet those challenges.
That means Secretary of Defense Robert Gates faces some hard choices when he finishes his strategic review this spring. An early glimpse will come soon when the Pentagon must decide whether to continue to purchase more Lockheed F-22 Raptors. The Air Force is set to buy 183 of the next generation fighters, though it wanted 750, which would be enough to give the U.S. air supremacy over battlefields over the next three decades. Now the fighter may be prematurely mothballed.
Weapons programs, such as missile defense or the Army's Future Combat Systems, are also in danger. Others have been ridiculously delayed. The Air Force flies refueling tankers from the Eisenhower era. Mr. Obama's own 30-something Marine One helicopter is prone to break down and technologically out of date.
The Pentagon shouldn't get a blank check, though much of its procurement waste results from the demands made by Congress. Mr. Gates has also rightly focused on the immediate priority of irregular warfare and counterinsurgency. But history also teaches that a nation that downplays potential threats -- such as from China in outer space -- is likely to find itself ill-prepared when they arrive.
The U.S. ability to project power abroad has been crucial to maintaining a relatively peaceful world, but we have been living off the fruits of our Cold War investments for too long. We can't afford another lost defense decade.
What next a new oath of allegiance to the Great O? I guess it is not good enough that the DoD budget is Classified and if it is leaked you are in for a world of hurt. The Parts that are not just classify them and you are OK. There is no reason for a special I will not tell paper....... Hell look at how many trees he will kill printing and filing these new documents. So much for a new Greener Gov.
http://www.defenselink.mil/comptroller/budget.html
It is a good read.
The budget will be the only thing not leaked to the press. :D Breaking new: The NY Times agreed not release budget papers provided by insider for the sake of national security. Please. Where's that drink I was making?
I think I'll pull out the space blanket I keep in my car for emergencies and have my tailor make me a suit out of it, and start wearing the old high-quality aluminum hard hat my Dad used to wear on the job back in the 60's.
Alright, be honest. You know you have had a hankering to wear that aluminum outfit for while now. :D
My name is Richard. I like long walks on the beach, unicorns and my aluminum outfit. :eek: