Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

  • Policy Issues
    • Fact Sheets
    • Countries
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • Non-Proliferation
    • Nuclear Security
    • Biological & Chemical Weapons
    • Defense Spending
    • Missile Defense
    • No First Use
  • Nukes of Hazard
    • Podcast
    • Blog
    • Videos
  • Join Us
  • Press
  • About
    • Staff
    • Boards & Experts
    • Jobs & Internships
    • Financials and Annual Reports
    • Contact Us
  • Donate
  • Search
You are here: Home / Security Spending / Pentagon Budget / Factsheets & Analysis on Pentagon Budget / Analysis of FY2008 “Bridge” War Funding Supplemental (Attached to Omnibus Appropriations Bill S. 2764): Cost of Wars Now Surpasses Vietnam War

December 20, 2007

Analysis of FY2008 “Bridge” War Funding Supplemental (Attached to Omnibus Appropriations Bill S. 2764): Cost of Wars Now Surpasses Vietnam War

by Travis Sharp

On December 18, 2007, the Senate approved an amendment introduced by Republican leader Mitch McConnell providing $70 billion in “bridge” funding for ongoing U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Bush administration has requested $196 billion in war funding for Fiscal Year 2008. The $70 billion “bridge” provides 36% of this total request.

The House passed the Senate’s $70 billion “bridge” amendment on December 19. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin said the Senate will not take up the remainder of the administration’s $196 war funding request until May or June 2008.

Unlike an earlier version of the “bridge” legislation introduced in the House, McConnell’s amendment did not include any policy language setting a goal for withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq or laying out specific missions for U.S. forces. Democrats tried to place restrictions on the war funding through two separate amendments introduced by Senators Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Carl Levin (D-MI), but these amendments failed to reach the 60 votes necessary to invoke cloture and proceed to debate.

For more Iraq-related information, see these Center analyses: “Oversight, Sectarianism Mar Iraqi Security Forces Development” (December 13), “America Spending More on Security Than Most Know” (November 16), and “CBO Says $1.765 Trillion to $2.365 Trillion for Iraq and Afghanistan by 2017” (October 24).

COST OF WARS TO DATE

Prior to passage of the FY2008 $70 billion “bridge” fund, the Congressional Research Service estimates that Congress had enacted $626 billion in war funding. This total includes $16.8 billion for Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles (MRAP) provided in the first Continuing Resolution (passed September 27) and the FY2008 Defense Appropriations bill (H.R. 3222).

With passage of the FY2008 $70 billion “bridge” fund, total war funding approved by Congress will reach nearly $700 billion to date. This cumulative total of $696 billion breaks down as approximately $505 billion for Iraq and $140 billion for Afghanistan.

If Congress approves the administration’s full $196 billion FY2008 request, total war funding will surpass $820 billion since September 11, 2001. This total breaks down as approximately $607 billion for Iraq and $164 billion for Afghanistan.

(NOTE: Breakdown of respective funding proportions for Iraq and Afghanistan is based on Congressional Research Service estimates. See “The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11,” updated November 9, 2007).

COSTS IN PERSPECTIVE

With passage of the FY2008 $70 billion “bridge” fund, the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan…

…surpasses the total cost of the Vietnam War (which ran to $670 billion) in inflation-adjusted dollars.

…is more than seven times larger than the Persian Gulf War ($94 billion) in inflation-adjusted dollars.

…is more than twice the cost of the Korean War ($295 billion) in inflation-adjusted dollars.

…will become the second costliest conflict in American history. Iraq and Afghanistan trail only World War II, but that was a time when 12 million Americans served, as compared with 1.42 million active duty soldiers and just over one million National Guard and reservists today.

(NOTE: Previous war costs based on Congressional Research Service estimates. See Amy Belasco testimony before the House Budget Committee on October 25, 2007).

WAR COSTS YOUTUBE VIDEO

TOTAL IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN WAR FUNDING THROUGH PASSAGE OF FY2008 “BRIDGE” SUPPLEMENTAL
(Budget Authority in Billions of Dollars)

  FY01 & FY02 FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 Bridge FY01-FY08 Enacted FY08 Request Remaining
Iraq 0 53 75.9 84.6 101.9 133.2 57 505.6 101
Afghanistan 20.8 14.7 14.5 20.9 19.1 36.8 13 139.8 24
Enhanced Security 13 8 3.7 2.1 0.8 0.4 0 28 0.4
Unallocated 0 5.5 0 0 0 0 0 5.5 0
Subtotal 678.9 125.5
MRAP Vehicles in First FY08 Continuing Resolution (CR)/FY08 DOD Appropriations Bill (HR 3222) 16.8
FUNDING TO DATE 695.7
EXPECTED FUNDING AFTER ENACTMENT OF FULL FY08 REQUEST 821.1
Table Notes
Source: Author’s analysis of Congressional Research Service data.

BACKGROUND ON FY2008 WAR FUNDING

In February 2007, the Administration submitted its FY2008 Iraq and Afghanistan war funding request alongside its normal “base” budget request for the Department of Defense. The “base” budget passed the House and Senate on November 8. The war funding request, which initially stood at $142 billion, has grown to about $190 billion, making it the largest Iraq and Afghanistan war funding request since 2001.

When FY2008 began on October 1, Congress had yet to pass a single appropriation bill. On September 27, lawmakers approved a continuing resolution (CR) providing temporary funding at FY2007 levels for all discretionary programs through November 16, approximately $5 billion of which went to GWOT operations according to estimates by the Congressional Research Service. This CR was extended by Congress through December 14 by language included in the Department of Defense “base” budget bill which passed on November 8.

Emergency supplemental funding has been used to pay for almost all of the costs in Iraq and Afghanistan. Because they are not subject to the same federal caps that apply to the “base” defense budget, however, supplementals are a tempting pot of money for services seeking to increase their annual procurement accounts.

HIGHLIGHTS IN $70 BILLION BRIDGE FUND

Afghanistan/Iraq Security Forces Fund – Provides $1.5 billion for the Iraq Security Forces Fund and $1.35 billion for the Afghan Security Forces Fund.

Iraq Freedom Fund – Provides $3.75 billion for the Iraq Freedom Fund, a “slush” fund that provides the Secretary of Defense and Director of National Intelligence with the authority to redirect funds at will provided they give Congress 30 days notice.

Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund – Provides $4.3 billion for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization (JIEDDO) to investigate, develop and provide equipment, supplies, services, training, facilities, and personnel to defeat IEDs.

Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities – Provides $192 million for Defense-managed counter-narcotics activities.

Commander’s Emergency Response Program (CERP) – Provides $500 million in operations and maintenance funding for the Commander’s Emergency Response Program, a popular program with U.S. officers that permits them to finance urgent humanitarian relief and reconstruction needs in their area of responsibility.

Transfer Authority – Authorizes $4 billion in transfer authority to the Secretary of Defense for shifting money between different accounts.

FUNDING PROVISIONS IN $70 BILLION BRIDGE FUND

NOTE: There are three sets of figures presented here – those from the Administration’s original February 2007 war funding request, those from the amended October 2007 war funding request, and those included in the “bridge” war funding amendment attached to the Omnibus Appropriations bill (S. 2764). There are in a number of cases significant discrepancies between the figures included in the original war funding request and the corresponding figures as reflected in the amended war funding request. In most cases, the figures for both the original February request and the amount reported in the October amendment are used, and are shown in normal print. Where significant discrepancies exist, the figures from the February request are shown in bold. Figures from “bridge” package are shown in italics, unless otherwise noted.

Total Funding

  • Request: $196 billion
  • Bridge: $70 billion (36% of total request)

Personnel

  • Request: $16.98 billion [Feb: $17.07 billion]
  • Oct. Amendment: + $769 million
  • Total: $17.75 billion
  • Bridge: $1 billion (6% of total request)

Operations & Maintenance

  • Request: $76.98 billion [Feb: $79.19 billion]
  • Oct. Amendment: + $11.67 billion
  • Total: $88.65 billion
  • Bridge: $61.1 billion (69% of total request)

Procurement

  • Request: $44.52 billion [Feb: $39.96 billion]
  • Oct. Amendment: + $27.07 billion
  • Total: $71.59 billion
  • Bridge: $6.06 billion (9% of total request)
  • NOTE #1: The October amendment does not reflect $4.9 billion for procurement for the National Guard and Reserve included in the original request, nor does it include any funding for these accounts. Neither does the “bridge” fund.
  • NOTE #2: The original request shows $4.83 billion for “Procurement, Marine Corps,” while the amendment shows $2.46 billion for the same figure, a difference of $2.37 billion.

Research, Development, Testing & Evaluation

  • Request: $2.88 billion [Feb: $2.86 billion]
  • Oct. Amendment: + $985 million
  • Total: $3.87 billion
  • Bridge: none

Military Construction

  • Request: $896 million [Feb: $908 million]
  • Oct. Amendment: + $1.53 billion
  • Total: $2.43 billion
  • Bridge: none
  • NOTE: Amendment includes $415.9 million in Base Realignment and Closure funding to expedite the replacement of the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C.

Revolving and Management Funds

  • Request: $1.68 billion [Feb: $1.68 billion]
  • Oct. Amendment: + $218 million
  • Total: $1.96 billion
  • Bridge: $1 billion (51% of total request)

Other DOD Programs

Defense Health Program (O&M portion only)

  • Request: $1.02 billion
  • Oct. Amendment: + $115 million
  • Total: $1.14 billion
  • Bridge: $576 million (51% of total request)

Drug Interdiction and Counter-Drug Activities

  • Request: $257.62 million
  • Oct. Amendment: none (however, $575 million was requested for the State Dept.)
  • Total: $257.62 million
  • Bridge: $192.6 million (75% of total request)

MAJOR WEAPONS SYSTEMS IN $70 BILLION BRIDGE FUND

UH-60 “Blackhawk” Helicopters

  • Request: $527 million for 39 UH-60M aircraft
  • Bridge: $483 million for 27 UH-60M aircraft

AH-64 Apache Helicopters

  • Request: $418 million to modify 12 aircraft
  • Bridge: $105 million to modify 3 aircraft

CH-47 Chinook Helicopters

  • Request: $636 million to modify 21 aircraft
  • Oct. Amendment: + $225 million for modifications
  • Bridge: $334 million to modify 11 aircraft

Bradley Fighting Vehicles

  • Request: $1.4 billion for work on 481 vehicles
  • Bridge: $813 million (includes both Fire Support and Fighting vehicles)
  • NOTE: Oct. Amendment included an additional request of $2.5 billion for Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker upgrades

Stryker Vehicles

  • Request: $403 million for 100 vehicles
  • Bridge: $41 million
  • NOTE: Oct. Amendment included an additional request of $2.5 billion for Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker upgrades

High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicles “Humvee”

  • Request: $1.3 billion for 6,690 vehicles, $455 million for recapitalization on 9,255 vehicles
  • Bridge: $455 million for vehicles, $140 million for recapitalization

Family of Heavy Tactical Vehicles

  • Request: $1.1 billion for 2,747 vehicles
  • Oct. Amendment: + $1.7 billion
  • Bridge: $427 million

M1 Abrams Tanks

  • Request: $338 million for modifications, $1.3 billion for Abrams Upgrade Program on 235 vehicles
  • Bridge: $200 million for modifications, $225 million for Abrams Upgrade Program
  • NOTE: Oct. Amendment included an additional request of $2.5 billion for Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker upgrades

Physical Security Equipment – Ground-Based Operational Surveillance System (G-BOSS)

  • Request: $640 million in Marine Corps equipment
  • Bridge: $340 million in Marine Corps equipment
  • NOTE: G-BOSS is a high resolution, thermal/infrared sensor system that assists troops see better on night patrols

Explosive Ordnance Disposal Systems (CREW)

  • Request: $3 million in Army equipment
  • Oct. Amendment: $687 million in Marine Corps equipment
  • Bridge: $172 million in Marine Corps equipment

SOURCES

Explanatory Statement Regarding Supplemental Appropriations for the Department of Defense, submitted December 18, 2007, available in Congressional Record pps. S15858-60.

Original FY2008 war funding request, released February 2007.

Amended FY2008 war funding request, released October 2007.

Posted in: Factsheets & Analysis on Pentagon Budget, Middle East

Tweets by Nukes of Hazard

Recent Posts

  • Growing number of high-security pathogen labs around world raises concerns March 17, 2023
  • Global Biosafety Fears Grow Amid Rise in Labs Handling Dangerous Pathogens March 17, 2023
  • Evolving Threats, Un-evolving Solutions: Geo-Politicization of Export Control Policy March 17, 2023
  • Fact Sheet: The Australia Group March 16, 2023
  • Fact Sheet: Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones March 14, 2023
Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

820 1st Street NE, Suite LL-180
Washington, D.C. 20002
Phone: 202.546.0795

Issues

  • Fact Sheets
  • Countries
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Non-Proliferation
  • Nuclear Security
  • Defense Spending
  • Biological and Chemical Weapons
  • Missile Defense
  • No First Use

Countries

  • China
  • France
  • India and Pakistan
  • Iran
  • Israel
  • North Korea
  • Russia
  • United Kingdom

Explore

  • Nukes of Hazard blog
  • Nukes of Hazard podcast
  • Nukes of Hazard videos
  • Front and Center
  • Fact Sheets

About

  • About
  • Meet the Staff
  • Boards & Experts
  • Press
  • Jobs & Internships
  • Financials and Annual Reports
  • Contact Us
  • Council for a Livable World
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Instagram
  • Facebook

© 2023 Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation
Privacy Policy

Charity Navigator GuideStar Seal of Transparency