Obama Asks $533 Billion for DoD

Obama Asks $533 Billion for DoD

The Obama administration released its DoD budget today for FY 2010, requesting $533.7 billion, a 4 percent increase over the 2009 budget of $513 billion. If funded, the 2010 budget would be the highest defense budget in real terms since World War II, exceeding even the peak years of the Reagan era defense build-up. 

The increase supports Obama’s desire to expand the ground forces to 547,400 soldiers and 202,000 Marines by the end of 2009. The administration also wants $130 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for 2010, down from $144 being spent this year.

The budget outline provided by the White House says the administration intends to focus on the military’s “internal” challenges, these include: restructure the force to better address long-term security challenges; care, compensation and benefits protection for troops and their families; and reform weapons development and acquisition. The administration promises to match spending to strategic goals “in an upcoming Defense Review.” 

The budget request includes a proposed pay increase of 2.9 percent and pay and benefits that “keep pace with or exceed those of the private sector.” It doesn’t specify which career path in the private sector. It lists a number of proposed benefits expansions for retirees and veterans including disability compensation, mental health care, as well as military housing and base improvements. 

It says the budget will include “placeholder” estimates of $50 billion per year for 2011 and beyond for war costs, although it says those estimates are subject to change. That figure would be consistent with the administration’s stated goal of achieving savings through winding down the war in Iraq. The budget proposal moves into the base budget a number of items previously paid for by emergency supplementals, such as security assistance to foreign governments and various aerial sensor and other intelligence programs.

While the 2010 request is an increase over 2009, if you’re a weapons builder, the $533 billion figure is bad news. Here’s why:

DOD’s base budget for 2009 was $518 billion. That included $309 billion for operations and support activities, including $129 billion in personnel costs and $180 billion in the operations and maintenance accounts, which includes civilian military pay and costs to run the military on a daily basis, such as base operations, most military healthcare and equipment operations and maintenance. Those personnel costs are clearly going up. 

Also, Obama’s budget will begin to move expenses that had been paid for in the supplementals into the base budget’s operations and support accounts. Those expenses will likely include reset costs, repairing the Army and Marine’s war worn battle fleet, likely to carry at least a $15 billion a year price tag for the next few years. If the administration plans to drop supplemental war costs to $50 billion a year, including an increased troop presence in Afghanistan, then reset costs will not be funded through the supplementals. 

So that 60 percent or so of the DOD budget is not only off limits to any future trimming but will in fact expand. There’s a good chance that the 4 percent increase in the 2010 defense budget will occur entirely in those operations and support accounts. The Congressional Bugdet Office projected that the operations and support accounts, driven primarily by rising personnel costs, would increase to somewhere around $342–352 billion. 

That leaves the acquisition budget, which consists of the research and development and procurement accounts as the only place to acheive any cost savings. In the 2009 budget, acquisition costs totaled $184 billion. CBO estimated that DOD could develop and build those weapons it has in the pipeline, if costs can be controlled, for about $185 billion a year. Of course nobody believes that will happen. Using historical weapons cost growth, CBO estimated that DOD’s investment plan would more likely cost $200 billion a year. 

Steven Kosiak, who now handles the defense portfolio at OMB, wrote in a study last year that even CBO’s high-end estimates were probably too low. He guessed DOD’s modernization plan would cost $210 billion per year. 

A funding gap is looming. The Obama administration’s plans to increase personnel expenditures and move expenses from the supplementals into the base budget will force pretty heavy downward pressure on acquisition. Be prepared for a battle royal between the services and OSD. 

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Join the Conversation

wow a 2.9% pay raise thanks.

2.9% is better than nothing.

Give me a break Navy guy, this dude needs to give us a Reagan type raise with all his hype in his election, how about a nice 11–16%, Heck Turbo-Tim and Chris Dodd give Billions to Wall Street and they get some big bonus and never come close to doing what we do…Come on Obama if all you can do is 2.9 then I guess congress should be tied to us and the rest of the government, I bet we would see more then. Oh yeah, Bush was never this low in raises either…

I guess Fred doesn’t remember the first Bush administration that gave us a pay freeze for two years, and we only got the anemic pay raises we did because Democrats in the Congressional majority at the time gave us those in the appropriations bill.

2.9% is one line item. Increasing the size of the Army and Marine Corps are more important right now than pay increases. The fact that this is probably the first accurate picture of our military budget in a while is another.
The “proposed benefit expansions for retirees and veterans including disability compensation, mental health care, as well as military housing and base improvements” is long overdue.
Let’s be clear, 2.9% is not a big increase, but
Cheney-Bushed the retirees and disabled pay away from the active rate for years. It is proposed now to tie it to the Social Security rate that is based off COLA’s and the inflation index rather than fall of the cliff as it has been doing. The cool part about this gentleman is that these are projected numbers and can moved as seen fit when the April Budget comes out. Just for your information, the disability tables that the service branches use is probably
based of of 1960’s numbers. If you need a 100% rate and you cannot provide income because of your disability,like some of our brothers and ssisters, it should be at least based on what income you could have provided if you were not ddisabled.

This is an excellent article and Chief Houston is correct about the accuracy of this budget picture. Let’s not be hasty though in coming to conclusions. Congress and their self-interests haven’t weighed in yet. It’s been written that Rep Barney Frank is soon going to ask for a 25% reduction in the defense budget. Where’s that $133B going to come from?

Let me see, an E-7 takes home about 60K net a year, and I make 73K, and get to take home 43K… Parity?????????

And why not??
“The Obama administration released its DoD budget today for FY 2010, requesting $533.7 billion, a 4 percent increase over the 2009 budget of $513 billion. If funded, the 2010 budget would be the highest defense budget in real terms since World War II, exceeding even the peak years of the Reagan era defense build-up.”

After all, this President has been in office less than 50 days and has spent 3.4 Trillion+ dollars and still going strong. We never knew that spending could be so easy with no accountability today OR for tomorrow. If the military needs more money…no problem, just a minute please while I just print more. (My wife uses the same concept…as long as she has checks, she thinks she has money!!). Someday these chickens are going to come home, and then what? Who is going to pay for all this spending?

Obama is trying to buy off the military vote. He doesn’t want the military gnawing at his ankles about his non-Natural Born Citizen status and therefore being unqualified to be president.

Just more Chicago politics.

Having said all of that, I am much more comfortable with him going that way, rather than the other way. In the coming years of strife, our military needs to remain the best in the world.

Have a good one.

Military personnel have to be given better economic education. The money for the military comes from the productive part of the economy. This Real Manufacturing Economy has been shrinking for a while and now it is shrinking even faster. It doesn’t matter how much dollars you get, it matters what real economy stands behind them. The banks messed up the real economy while the government slept. Now both of them are making it worse by propping up our broken financial system without trying to fix it. This is bad news for everybody, military included. It doesn’t make sense to ask troops to risk their lives for the country if that same country is being taken down by economic strife and infighting-induced chaos. Even more, without Productive Economy there is no way to get decent pay, much less a Real pay raise. After age starts to interfere with service you guys and galls will have to settle down in the above mentioned Real Economy. So in order to understand how much you CAN get, now or later, you have to look into the economic and political conditions in the US. It’s an entire new game for you but I know you are a tough bunch and you can do it.

Wow.…I wonder if any of you guys have been in the military and understand the sacrifices we endure.…the guy who is complaining that an E-7 takes 60k net a year and for his 73k he only net’s 43k.…well do you work 6 days a week 14–16 hours a day? Do you have to share a bunk due to rotations? Do you have to risk your life everyday? Are you seperated from your family day in and day out for months at a time to come home and try to spend a little time with your family before going back out in the thick?

You guys drive me crazy! Fat and nasty sitting at home crying because your too lazy to get off your rump to get the remote control so you can turn up the volume to hear “that guy” talking about how he’s not going to raise taxes on the “little guy” what about the mortgage intrest right off that’s going away next year.…hello.…directly raising taxes on the little guy. Obama is no Messiah, he is just a plain mess how is a wonderul orator ONLY.

Sorry for the gramatical mistakes. I am fuming and sometimes my fingers can’t keep up with my brain

Use this vehicle to get things done that were never able to be accomplished before due to the lack of opportunity to discuss these issues. We must all learn together. Keep the political BS to some other chat rooms! We veterans, active, reserve and retired have to learn to reach high, not low, when we are given such an opportunity to discuss important issues. Any fool can take the low road!

Nobody put a gun to your head to make you sign!

Obama, Bush, Cheney.…their all Cousins and working on the same behalf anyways! 

& I bet the public school system could use more than a 3% fund increase, so why are you complaining?

FYI: Roughly over 25% of all homeless in the U.S. are Veterans.

“They got money for WARS, but can’t feed the poor!” –Tupac

I would like to Know how much of the defence budget is being used to pay foreign governments?
It seems that a lot of money is coming out of someones budget.

Let see. The government give bilions and trillions of dollars to companies to survive in this economy. sometimes twice and sometimes three times. So does this mean the veterans should be short changed in this economy. We need the extra cash more than the companies who take the money given by the government to use for bonuses to people for make a healthy salary in the first place. Something is wrong here and the government doesn’t see it.

*required

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement