Official Site of the U.S. Air Force   Right Corner Banner
Join the Air Force

News > Gates will present president with cost-cutting options
Gates will present president with cost-cutting options

Posted 4/19/2011 Email story   Print story

    


by Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service


4/19/2011 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates is "a leader when it comes to fiscal responsibility" and will provide President Barack Obama with options, along with the pros and cons of each, to make additional defense cuts, the assistant secretary of defense for public affairs said yesterday.

Secretary Gates "has made some very hard choices and some very innovative decisions in doing his efficiencies exercise," said Douglas B. Wilson.

President Obama announced recently that he would work with Secretary Gates and Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to find additional cost savings beyond the $400 billion in reductions the department has made over the past two years.

The goal is an additional $400 billion in national security cuts through 2023, to help realize $2 trillion in savings as part of a plan to reduce federal borrowing by $4 trillion over the next 12 years.

"We have been given a mission, and the secretary will undertake it," Mr. Wilson said.

It's too early to determine where exactly those cuts will be made, he said, noting that President Obama called for a review of the nation's role in the world, along with its missions and responsibilities.

"That will be the framework for this initiative," Mr. Wilson said. "And the secretary of defense is committed to providing the president with the options necessary and the choices and the implications of those choices."

Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said Secretary Gates believes that the Defense Department cannot be exempt from efforts to trim the federal budget.

"However, it is important that any reduction in (defense) funding be shaped by strategy and policy choices, and not by a budget math exercise," Mr. Morrell said.

Secretary Gates "has been clear that further significant defense cuts cannot be accomplished without reducing forces structure and military capabilities," Mr. Morrell added. "The comprehensive review of missions, capabilities and America's role in the world will identify alternatives for the president's consideration."

Accomplishing the president's goal, Mr. Morrell said, "must be about managing risks associated with future threats and national security challenges and identifying missions that the country is willing to forego."

President Obama has acknowledged that the Pentagon has been at the forefront of eliminating "unneeded, duplicative and obsolete programs and administrative overhead," Mr. Morrell said.

The president "wants us to continue this effort with the goal of significant additional savings over the coming decade," Mr. Morrell added.



tabComments
4/22/2011 6:14:27 AM ET
You make a good point John G. Even though BAH is for the member DoD should cut it if the couple is mil to mil. They're living WAY too good. Cut one member's BAS as well. We can't have them eating too good either. In fact I see no need to give both members their full base pay. Give one full base pay with BAH and BAS but only give the other member half of their base pay. Excellent personnel management suggestion John G. There's no POSSIBLE way that could backfire.
CKJ, SWA
 
4/21/2011 3:16:19 PM ET
John G Langley- you just said the reason why they shouldn't cut BAH. BAH is to provide adequate housing but a person's base pay is not enough to do so and keep up with living expenses. ESPECIALLY if they have kids or if they are only Airmen. No don't cut it. Keep the cap on it i.e. @ Lackland BAH is 888.83 and if the couple have a house under the combined BAH pay then just pay them what they pay. AF personnel should not be punished for something that they cannot control.
Humwhistle, Lackland AFB
 
4/21/2011 12:15:20 PM ET
John G there is no reason to penalize mil to mil couples by virtue of their status as mil members. Just as those who spend less on rentutilities than BAH can pocket the leftovers it is the prerogative of mil to mil couples to do the same if they so choose.
Advocate, FL
 
4/20/2011 9:51:47 PM ET
How much money would we save by cutting flight incentive pay bonuses and gate pay for pilots? If they don't want to be in the Air Force, let them leave. That will help the force cap so that we quit firing support officers. These cuts are giving us a one to one dwell ratio. How many more support officers do we fire order to protect these sacred pay programs?
Jim, Deployed
 
4/20/2011 5:13:52 PM ET
Get rid of BAH for both when it is mil to mil. I hear most people say they pocket the extra. BAH isn't meant to put your kids through college - it is to provide adequate housing.
John G, Langley
 
4/20/2011 4:54:47 PM ET
A military that cannot defend the country is worse than no military at all. If you cut capabilities to the point you cannot defend vital national interests it is better to just scrap defense completely and prepare to surrender quickly. That will avoid a long and costly war that ends in defeat. Now is the time to decide which way to go.
Jerry, Oklahoma
 
4/20/2011 4:24:50 PM ET
Perhaps the biggest blunder the DoD made was financing the F-22 project. We spent billions of dollars way over budget on something that has hardly seen much combat use but more as a movie prop LOL. I think Secretary Gates was wise in cutting nearly all of the R and D projects for new aircraft and diverting resources into maintaining upgrading our current fleet inventory. Now the uniform issue is another can of worms.
Steve, Tampa
 
4/20/2011 2:46:38 PM ET
Dave C - BAH does include utilities. 'BAH rates are based on local area rental market data and vary by geographic duty station pay grade and dependency status. The cost of utilities and renters insurance is also considered. BAH is based only on rental properties not homeownership costs like mortgage payments and property taxes. The goal is that members receive a BAH that is sufficient to live a reasonable distance from a duty station.'
Analyst, Barksdale
 
4/20/2011 1:18:55 PM ET
I hope the Sec of Def is reading these comments or hearing of them as there is some good directions stated and most people agree the majority of overseas bases need to be reduced to caretaker status with maybe one major base in England kept as active. It is well beyound the time to reduce our presence around the World and allow those Countries to shoulder their own burden of defense. Thanks to all who continue to serve our Great Nation.
Air Force Retired, USA
 
4/20/2011 1:06:04 PM ET
Retired - cutting the civiliAn work force will make things worse. If we bring in military to do those services again the AF will be broke before you know it. You don't have to feed, house or pay for civilians medical insurance, child care, uniforms and the various other allowances. In addition you can count on them being there to get admin services done because they won't be closed for training or at the PT track.
RB, DCMA
 
4/20/2011 12:28:43 PM ET
How about getting rid of Flight suits for non fliers - those that operate satellites for instance; reduce the clothing allowance to fliers since they wear bags most of the time. Scrap the leather coat. The silver bullet program can go away - that is the DV module that hauls generals around in KC-10s and C-17s; they can fly commercial or on small military transports. How about make those in base housing pay utilities instead of the gov't paying the bill? BAH is for rent, not utilities. Or better yet, scrap base housing and pay BAH - supports the local economy and gets military families used to the real world and not have to deal with the shock upon separation.
Dave C, OH
 
4/20/2011 10:13:03 AM ET
Once again this is not hard to accomplish. Get rid of the end of year fall out money spend it all or lose it next year mentality. Get rid of all the civilians working in the orderly rooms doing nothing more than managing EPR/OPR and decorations. You could actually cut the Civilian work force by 90 percent and save all that money. Yes I know we have civilians for consistency. The military members can do the same job and be consistent just as easily as a bunch of civilians. This is especially true now that the Air Force does not move folks every 3 years as they use to do. How much money is wasted time and time again for a year's worth of preparation for some upcoming exercise or inspection? Of course there are the countless overpriced Govt contracts. The list of places to make cuts that will not endanger a single life is huge. Unfortunately due to the politics involved nothing ever really changes.
Retired, Ohio
 
4/19/2011 8:18:57 PM ET
Why don't we go to other Government Agencies and ask what they can cut? Why is it that only DoD gets their Budget cut over 400B? Dept of Energy, Commerce, Transportation, Education...there are other Government Agencies out there; most of them all duplicate or triplicate of each other.
Retired, AZ
 
4/19/2011 7:54:11 PM ET
Our weapon systems and air mobility has improved to the point that permanent oveseas bases is no longer needed. We can also reduce the number of CONUS bases and continue consolidating bases between the services.
Paul, Boston
 
4/19/2011 1:32:47 PM ET
Anyone who's played the boardgame 'Risk' knows that reducing your force strength at locations already minimally-manned increases the chance of those locations being overrun by the enemy. The bet bet would be make the cuts but do so by shutting down bases abroad. The world can police itself.
Eric, AK
 
Add a comment

 Inside AF.mil

ima cornerSearch

tabSubscribe AF.MIL
tabMore HeadlinesRSS feed 
KC-46 enters critical design review phase

Slideshow: Fifth-generation formation  1

Air Force Week in Photos

Chaplains provide support and comfort for families

IDS agencies team up to teach life skills to new Airmen

ANG director discusses way forward

Carter: Sequestration would have effect of 'hidden tax'

CMSAF: 'Be the best, know your Airmen, tell your story'  1

Carter urges stepped up progress on cyber defense

Partnerships develop Air Force youth  1

Air Force leaders offer perspectives at four-star forum

Dempsey: Insider attacks won't affect NATO's Afghan strategy  1

'Teammates wanted' to deliver future

Personnel chief: Road ahead for Airmen tough, but bright  3

tabCommentaryRSS feed 
Sept. 17: A day for Constitutional conversation  2

Losing Your Future to Sexual Assault   24


Site Map      Contact Us     Questions     Security and Privacy notice     E-publishing