National Security Spending, Current State of Play September 22, 2010
Posted by Rebecca Williams in Analysis.Tags: budget resolution, defense appropriations bill, FY 2011 NDAA, House, Senate, state and foreign operations
add a comment
In Congress, there are plenty of exceptions, workarounds, and impromptu procedures that challenge the conventional budget and appropriations process. This year seems to be especially frustrating, mostly due to political maneuvering to delay voting on any divisive issue until after the mid-term elections in November.
The House did not pass a budget resolution for the first time since the creation of the budget committees, leading the Senate to not pass one as well. The House later passed a deeming resolution setting spending limits while the Senate’s only fixed point is the Appropriations Committee’s spending guidance, which is not binding on the full Senate.
In all likelihood, Congress has shelved passing any legislation until after the November mid-term elections. To date, the House has passed two of the 12 appropriations bills but has not reported out of committee the remaining 10. The Senate, on the other hand, has not passed a single appropriations bill but has reported out of committee 11 of the 12 spending bills. Given the state of play, Congress will have to pass a Continuing Resolution, an unfortunately common occurrence, to maintain federal spending at FY2010 levels.
Budget Insight will continue to track the legislation that determines U.S. national security spending. Here is the bill breakdown: (more…)
Senate’s budget resolution includes Feingold amendment making war spending deficit neutral April 29, 2010
Posted by Matthew Leatherman in Analysis.Tags: budget resolution, Defense Department, FY2011 Budget, Gordon Adams, John Ensign, Mike Crapo, OCO, overseas contingency operations, Russ Feingold, Senate budget committee
add a comment
Shaping the environment in which you operate is critical to a mission’s success, as diplomats, aid workers, and troops in the field well know. Even though the two are not the same – implementation matters even in favorable circumstances – they are very directly related.
For those back in Washington, the most critical responsibility is to prioritize our government’s activities wisely and to fund those priorities responsibly, taking into account our ability to pay both now and in the future. Our leaders have yet to fulfill this mission with respect to defense spending, as Dr. Gordon Adams and Matt Leatherman described in yesterday’s op-ed in The Hill.
During last week’s mark-up of the budget resolution, however, Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) led the Senate Budget Committee in a small but meaningful effort to shape the environment in which future leaders may better fulfill this mission. He did so by introducing an amendment requiring that overseas contingencies be funded either in a deficit neutral manner or, in truly unforeseen circumstances, through emergency supplemental appropriation.
Remarkably given the election-year partisan rancor, the amendment passed in bipartisan fashion, 15-8. All committee Democrats voted in favor, along with Republicans John Ensign of Nevada and Mike Crapo of Idaho.
Beyond the din of today’s politics, passing this amendment is significant for three reasons. Most importantly, it demands trade offs. Spending in the President’s standard war request must be offset elsewhere, forcing Congress and the administration to consider the importance of each additional dollar relative to activities elsewhere in the government.
Budget Resolution: Past meets Present April 20, 2010
Posted by Guest Blogger in Analysis.Tags: budget resolution, FY2011 Budget
1 comment so far
Each Tuesday BFAD features a guest blogger- these are experts from a variety of backgrounds writing about what they know best. This week features Stan Collender, partner at Qorvis Communications.
by Stan Collender
It’s long been forgotten, but the Congressional Budget Act — the law that created the requirement that Congress pass a budget resolution each year – came close to never being implemented.
It was 1975, Congress was supposed to adopt a budget resolution for the first time, and members of both houses were balking at voting on it because, in effect, they were being asked to approve a deficit. The representatives and senators who voted for the Congressional Budget Act the year before (It’s hard to imagine now but the legislation passed with overwhelming bi-partisan support in the House and Senate) were just realizing what they had actually committed themselves to do…and they didn’t like it a bit. Serious thought was being given to not doing a budget resolution that first year.
Rep. Richard Bolling (D-MO), the chairman of the House Rules Committee and the self-professed father of the budget act, is the one who supposedly saved the day and the congressional budget process. Bolling went to House Speaker Tip O’Neill, Jr. (D-MA) and told him he had to decide whether the Congressional Budget Act was really going to happen. O’Neill then insisted that the House not just consider but pass a budget resolution, the Senate followed the House, and the congressional budget process came into being.
All of this is important today because it is increasingly looking like Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) will need to get involved Tip O’Neill-style if Congress is going to get a budget resolution adopted this year. Members of Congress once again are balking at voting on a budget resolution because of the deficit and, like the situation in the mid-1970s, serious thought is being given to not doing one this year.
This may be a little surprising. Since they took control of the House and Senate in 2006, Democrats have made a budget resolution a priority and have put one in place each of the past three years. This is in sharp contrast to the GOP attitude toward budget resolutions which, in spite of the legal requirement, treated them as if they were totally discretionary and didn’t pass one when it suited their political needs.
But this year, some Democratic members see a debate on a budget resolution and a vote on the deficit as politically very damaging.
Without a budget resolution, and the discipline it provides, old habits concerning the foreign affairs and defense budgets will likely be exaggerated. Individual congressional members are less likely to stick their necks out for increases to the international affairs budget, despite calls from Defense Secretary Gates and others to strengthen our civilian institutions. At the same time, the politically popular defense budget is likely to receive even less scrutiny despite the historically high request.
Beyond the fact that it’s legally required, Congress should adopt a budget resolution this year because a budget resolution could be good rather than bad politics and it would show the markets the budget is being taken seriously. (more…)
Taking inventory of the tools of statecraft: putting the FY2011 request in context April 12, 2010
Posted by Matthew Leatherman in Analysis.Tags: Afghanistan, budget resolution, FY2010, FY2011, Haiti, Homeland Security, Iraq, Pakistan, WMD
add a comment
by Matt Leatherman and Rebecca Williams
Congress returns to session today with consideration of the FY2011 budget resolution atop its to-do list. Anticipating this debate, Budget Insight has hosted a five-part series offering a unique perspective on the intersection of foreign affairs and defense spending.
Taken together, these five budget categories are the substance behind the conventional wisdom that the American government engages the world primarily through the lens of security and in response to perceived threats.
This series includes contributions from Dr. Gordon Adams on defense, Joe Whitehill on international affairs, Larry Nowels on international development, Kenneth Luongo on securing weapons of mass destruction, and Bill Johnstone on homeland security.
The Top Line
President Obama responded to ballooning federal debt by announcing a three-year spending freeze in this year’s State of the Union address. National security-related costs are the only exception to this policy. Each of the spending categories featured below fall under that exemption, and each is requested to grow.
The administration requested increasing the defense budget $48 billion over current levels (FY10 enacted), a figure eight times that of the international affairs budget increase, $6 billion. If these requests are fully appropriated, they correspond to proportional increases of 15% for international affairs and 7% for the Pentagon.
Viewed alone, these proportions might suggest a coming shift toward international affairs spending. Set in historical context, however, international affairs spending (as a percentage of growth) tends to be more volatile and susceptible to external factors, including administration policy changes, human or natural disasters, among others.
International development, homeland security, and securing WMD spending (e.g., non-departmental budget categories)
are slated to grow at lesser but proportional rates, 15%, 2.4%, and 13% respectively.
Projections for each of these spending increases nevertheless hinge on the action Congress takes regarding the President’s supplemental appropriations requests.
President Obama submitted a request for supplemental FY10 appropriations at the same time as the FY2011 proposal and amended this request in March to account for costs associated with relief and reconstruction support in Haiti. If passed in full, these appropriations would substantially increase FY2010 spending and, consequently, reduce FY2011 growth projections. Supplemental appropriations requests include $37.5 billion for operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan ($33 billion for defense and $4.5 for international affairs), as well as $2.8 billion for efforts in Haiti.
The President has made supplemental requests in each of the past ten years, and this trend is likely to continue. Thus, the impression of spending growth lessened by FY2010 supplemental spending likely is temporary, enduring only until the administration issues a supplemental request for FY2011.
The Trade-offs
Two FY2011 priorities emerge with particularly clarity and importance from these five budget categories. A powerful focus on Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan is most evident. Alongside the FY10 supplemental request already mentioned, the administration has justified $159 billion of its FY2011 defense submission on war-related grounds.
The Week That Was: April 27-May 1 May 1, 2009
Posted by Stephen Abott in Analysis, News.Tags: 150, budget resolution, DOD, HASC, QDR, Rep. Berman
add a comment
In this new weekly item, Budget Insight will briefly outline the week’s blog posts and major news.
This week, BFAD highlighted items about DOD’s role in combating the swine flu outbreak and security assistance. The Department of Defense released its Terms of Reference (TOR) for the forthcoming Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), a document that excluded mention of the Pentagon’s interaction with State or USAID. The FY2010 budget resolution passed Congress, it included a 0.6% increase for total DOD funding (base and supplemental) over FY2009, and was in line with Obama’s request; the international affairs 150 budget request was cut by $2.8 billion, leading to an increase of only 2% over FY2009. Defense acquisition reform recommendations and legislation worked its way through Washington. The full HASC held a hearing on the House’s recent legislation on the topic, while the Defense Science Board released the report: “Creating a DOD Strategic Acquisition Platform“.
Congressman Berman, Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, kicked off a busy year dealing with foreign affairs issues, introducing legislation this week calling on the White House to, “develop and implement, on an interagency basis, a comprehensive national strategy to further the Unite States foreign policy objective of reducing poverty and contributing to broad-based economic growth in developing countries, including responding to humanitarian crises. This call is an important signal to the administration that Congress is expecting a reshaping of foreign assistance strategy this year. Because it does not propose any institutional changes for the foreign assistance agencies, it leaves the door open to a careful review of US foreign assistance structures. It will be important to initiate a dialogue between the new administration and the Congress about how to shape foreign assistance strategies, programs, and agencies.
Budget Resolution Update: International Affairs April 29, 2009
Posted by dglaudemans in Analysis, News.Tags: budget resolution, international affairs
1 comment so far
Senate and House conference negotiators agreed on a budget resolution for FY 2010, providing $51 billion in discretionary funding for International Affairs (Function 150, essentially splitting the difference between the Senate and House levels. While this is a $2.8 billion cut from the President’s request of $53.8 billion it is a $12.8 billion (33%) increase over the FY 2009 base level appropriations for International Affairs. However, the budget committees adopted the administration’s “change in concept” this year, resetting the Function 150 baseline to include funding provided to accounts through supplemental appropriations. The State Department has, for several years, underfunded certain accounts and requested additional funding in the supplementals intended largely for Iraq and Afghanistan operations. President Obama has said that this practice will not continue and his FY 2010 budget fully funds US foreign policy operations. Thus, a more realistic comparison of FY 2009 and the administration’s FY 2010 request shows a growth rate of 7.6%. The budget committee agreement constitutes a 2% increase from FY 2009 to FY 2010. See the tables below for details.
|
FY 2009 International Affairs Funding ($ in billions) |
|||||
|
|
FY 09 Base |
FY 09 Supp. (1st) |
Stimulus |
FY 09 Supp (2nd)* |
Total |
|
Function 150 |
$38.2 |
$4.1 |
$0.6 |
$7.1 |
$50 |
|
* Pending |
|||||
|
Function 150 FY 2010 Request and Resolution ($ in billions) |
||||
|
|
FY 10 Base Req. |
% Increase |
FY 10 Budget Resolution |
% Increase |
|
Function 150 |
$53.8 |
7.6% |
$51 |
2% |
While the agreement takes a first, much needed first step toward strengthening the State Department and USAID, the test for Congress will take place over the coming months as the details of the FY 2010 budget are worked out. The State Department and USAID need more people to do their job. If the FY 2010 budget funds significant personnel increases for State and USAID, it will go a long way toward strengthening the civilian instruments of American statecraft.
Budget Resolution Update: Department of Defense April 29, 2009
Posted by dglaudemans in Analysis, News.Tags: budget resolution, DOD
1 comment so far
The conference committee on the budget resolution came to an agreement on the FY 2010, fully funding the DOD budget request at $533.7 billion, a 4% increase ($20.3 billion) over the FY 2009 base budget of $513.4 billion. The defense budget request and the congressional action also took an important step toward budget transparency.
The President requested $130 billion to support military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, which the budget committees included in a separate budget function in their agreement. This brings the total FY 2010 budget request for DOD to $663.7 billion. This figure is comparable to the FY 2009 budget total of $659.4 billion, once enacted and pending FY 2009 supplementals ($141.4 billion) and DOD’s part of the stimulus package ($4.6 billion) are included. The FY 2010 President’s base request plus the $130 billion request for military operations represents a slight (0.6%) increase over the FY 2009 total. See the tables below for details.
|
DOD FY 2009 Funding ($ in billions) |
|||||
|
|
FY 09 Base |
FY 09 Supp (1st) |
Stimulus |
FY 09 Supp (2nd)* |
Total FY 09 |
|
DOD |
$513.4 |
$65.9 |
$4.6 |
$75.5 |
$659.4 |
|
* Pending |
|||||
|
DOD FY 2010 Request and Resolution ($ in billions) |
|||||
|
|
FY10 Base Req. |
FY10 War Funding |
Total FY 10 Request |
FY 10 Budget Resolution* |
% Inc. Over FY09** |
|
DOD |
$533.7 |
$130 |
$663.7 |
$663.7 |
0.6% |
|
* Includes Base and War Funding **Figure represents % increase over total FY 09 |
|||||
This budget is an important first step in controlling defense spending. Over the past eight years, the Defense Department’s budget has more than doubled and supplemental appropriations have been used to fund not only military operations, but also other spending, including procurement items, which has led to a breakdown of the Pentagon’s strategic planning process. The new transparency will provide a more realistic view of DOD’s budgetary needs.
The Coming Weeks April 17, 2009
Posted by Stephen Abott in Analysis.Tags: budget resolution, Defense Budget, Defense Supplemental
add a comment
Congress will return from its spring recess next week. It comes back after a significant amount of executive branch budget activity – Secretary Gates outlined his FY2010 DOD budget priorities and the Obama administration released its non-emergency war supplemental request. Needless to say, the Congress has a lot on its plate.
Next week, the House of Representatives is expected to take up the budget resolution and then begin the process of passing the war supplemental. Additionally, the President is expected to send his FY2010 budget to the Hill early next month. Thus, the next few weeks will see the passing of the budget resolution before Congress sees the President’s budget, the taking up of the war supplemental spending bill, and the transmission of the actual DOD and other executive branch agency budgets to the Hill (the DOD budget will include the results of Secretary Gates’ reorientation of the Pentagon’s funding priorities).
Spring is here, but it will be a busy time in budget world.
Budget Resolution Passes House and Senate April 3, 2009
Posted by dglaudemans in Uncategorized.Tags: budget resolution, DDG-1000, F-22, FCS, Function 150, House, international affairs, Kerry-Lugar, Senate, Supplemental, Virginia Class Submarine
add a comment
The House and Senate passed the Budget Resolution last night, setting out a broad spending and revenue blueprint for the next five years. Differences remain between the House and Senate versions however, and will have to resolved in conference when Congress returns from its two-week Easter recess. Of particular interest, is the difference in the amount of international affairs funding each chamber provided. The Senate, following the adoption of the Kerry-Lugar amendment, restored the $4 billion that was initially cut from the Presdient’s request. The House has yet to take action to restore the cuts made in the Chairman’s mark ($5.3 billion). Both chambers fully funded the President’s request for national defense ($556.1 billion).
Next week, look for the second FY 2009 supplemental to be submitted to an absent Congress and for the White House (led by OMB and Secretary Gates) to propose cuts in major defense programs such as the Army’s Future Combat System, the F-22 fighter-jet, the Navy’s DDG-1000 and the Virginia Class Submarine.
Budget Insight 