Cheers and Jeers: Bush Outlines FY 01 Defense Supplemental Request
May 31, 2001
Press Release - 31 May 2001
Contact: Luke Warren - 202.546.0795 × 127 or Dan Koslofsky - 202.543.4100 × 115
Yesterday, President Bush outlined the Pentagon’s $5.6 billion fiscal year 2001 Supplemental budget request. On the positive side, the request primarily funds health care, housing, increased salaries, and rising fuel costs. These additions are needed and welcome, since they directly help our men and women in uniform. Also, there is very little money for weapons modernization and none for anti-ballistic missile development.
On the negative side, the request still represents a $5.6 billion increase for an already bloated and wasteful Pentagon budget.
“No other countries are even remotely close to the U.S. in military technology or spending,” claimed Dan Koslofsky, the Council for a Livable World’s head defense budget analyst. “If we can’t defend ourselves with our current budget of $310 billion, adding billions more will not help,” Koslofsky added.
In fact, the supplemental request will spend $6.1 billion on various military items. However, $475 million is being offset by a cut in V-22 Osprey production funds from fiscal year 2001 and about $25 million from a B-52 program.
Those offsets are a new twist since readiness funds are usually raided to fund Cold War weapons. Now that process has been changed, and could be a sign of things to come.
“Offsetting the supplemental by cutting weapons programs, particularly the troubled V-22, is a step in the right direction by the Administration,” stated Koslofsky. “It could have easily payed for the whole supplemental request by taking funds from unneeded weapons systems.”
Nonetheless, this supplemental bill continues the noxious practice of allowing Congress to shortchange basic operations, such as housing, increased salaries, etc… while paying for pork projects during the regular appropriations process. Then, the Pentagon and Congress can point to a shortfall in, for instance, the fuel account, and claim that the military needs extra, emergency money bill to address the fuel shortage. The end result is that the military gets more money than for which it was officially budgeted. No other federal agency benefits from such a convoluted spending process.
“The request funds many important readiness and quality of life programs and adds virtually nothing to wasteful weapons systems, like anti-missile technology,” said Koslofsky. “But the supplemental process in general is corrupt, and adding billions to an already bloated budget simply encourages wasteful practices.”
RSS Feed