Congressional Budget Office Projects Rising Defense CostsOctober 22, 2009

 

The Obama administration is low-balling the amount of funding required to meet its long-term defense plans, according to recent testimony from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) before the House Budget Committee.

The President's 2010 budget request – excluding overseas operations like the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and military actions to combat terrorism – would require funds averaging $567 billion annually in constant 2010 dollars from 2011 to 2028, according to CBO projections. That is about 6% more than the $534 billion the administration has requested for its regular non-war related 2010 budget.

The CBO testimony, presented by Matthew S. Goldberg, acting assistant director, pegs this shortfall to four factors as follows:

  • the likelihood of continued growth in pay and benefits for the Defense Department's military and civilian personnel;

  • the projected rise in operations and maintenance costs for aging equipment and for newer, more complex equipment;

  • the Pentagon's plan to develop advanced weapons systems to replace many now nearing the end of their service lives; and

  • the growing investment in new capabilities, such as advanced intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems to meet emerging security threats.

During the hearing, John Spratt, D-S.C., said he was concerned by the constant growth in military personnel and operations and maintenance costs, which account for nearly two-thirds of the Pentagon budget, according to an article by CongressDaily. Those costs, he said, are threatening to "squeeze out" funding for procurement, and research and development, the foundation of the military's modernization efforts.

Meanwhile, Steve Daggett, a defense budget analyst at the Congressional Research Service told the panel that if there is no real growth in the defense budget, acquisition accounts could slide from 35% of the budget in 2010 to 24% by 2020. CongressDaily noted that without real growth in the budget, the military would be forced to cut the size of its force to avoid slashing its acquisition accounts.