(From right) Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Philip Breedlove, Vice Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Duford, Vice Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert, Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Chiarelli and Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn III listen to opening comments during the House Armed Services Committee hearing on efficiencies in the Department of Defense on Capitol Hill Jan. 26, 2011, in Washington. (U.S. Air Force photo/Scott M. Ash)
(From left) Vice Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert and Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Philip Breedlove visit with House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. McKeon (far right) on Capitol Hill Jan. 26, 2011 in Washington. General Breedlove, the vice chiefs from the other services and the deputy secretary of defense discussed Department of Defense efficiencies with committee members during a hearing. (U.S. Air Force photo/Scott M. Ash)
Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Philip Breedlove (right) listens to opening comments during the House Armed Services Committee hearing on efficiencies in the Department of Defense on Capitol Hill, Jan. 26, 2011, in Washington. General Breedlove shared the witness stand with the the vice chiefs from the other services and Deputy Secretary of Defense William Lynn III. (U.S. Air Force photo/Scott M. Ash)
1/26/2011 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- The Defense Department's plans to cut $78 billion from its budget over five years, and find more than $100 billion in savings for reinvestment, was a collaborative effort and a reasonable balance between military needs and budget constraints, said Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn III Jan. 26.
"Some will argue that our proposals cut defense too much, others will argue it doesn't cut enough," Mr. Lynn told the House Armed Services Committee. "We believe it strikes the right balance for these difficult times."
The vice chiefs of each of the services accompanied Mr. Lynn. Each agreed the budget plans were a collaborative effort that included service leaders.
"We were part of that process and agreed with the decisions that have been made," said Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the Army vice chief of staff.
Acting on Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates' directive, the services already have found more than $100 billion in savings. They expect to redirect those savings to spend $70 billion on improved weaponry and technical capabilities, and $28 billion on higher-than-expected operating expenses in the next five years, Mr. Lynn said.
In testimony related to the Air Force's ability to fund warfighter enhancements by identifying efficiencies, Air Force Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Philip Breedlove explained the service's intent to field a new bomber as part of a Long Range Strike family of systems.
The Air Force will bring the new long-range, penetrating bomber online in a manner the country can afford by leveraging today's technology, General Breedlove said.
"One of the cost savings approaches we have to this bomber is not to lean forward into technology that's not proven, but to bring our aircraft up to the current day's standards," General Breedlove said.
Army officials will realize savings partly from terminating the Army's Standoff Land-Attack Missile and Rolling Airframe Missile programs, as well as its nonline-of-sight air missiles.
With the savings, Army officials will invest more heavily in Abrams tanks, Bradley fighting vehicles and Stryker wheeled vehicles, Mr. Lynn said.
The savings will allow Navy officials to buy six more ships, including a destroyer, he said.
Secretary Gates made tough decisions, Mr. Lynn said, in terminating programs such as a new presidential helicopter, the F-22 Raptor, the Future Combat System and the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle.
"The department needs to make hard decisions early on (in procurement), and we are endeavoring to do that," he said. "We've often balanced in favor of performance, but then the budget and the schedule suffers. We're trying to balance better."
Quoting Secretary Gates' earlier statements, Mr. Lynn said the budget plans represent "reasonable, responsible and sustainable defense spending for the next five years."
The budget cuts $78 billion from the department's top line over five years, giving it a $553-billion baseline budget -- a modest increase -- for fiscal 2012, Mr. Lynn said. The cut was made in keeping with Obama administration efforts to lower the deficit, he said.
"The strength of our national defense depends on a strong economy as well," Lynn said.
The cuts will mean freezing most civilian personnel hiring through 2013, and cutting the department's contractor work force by 10 percent for three years, Lynn said.
The department also will seek savings through its TRICARE medical system, for which costs have nearly doubled in 10 years, he said. The budget would lift TRICARE enrollment fees for working-age military retirees, stop subsidies to nonmilitary hospitals and adjust pharmacy co-payments, he said.
Other streamlining measures include closing U.S. Joint Forces Command and merging its essential functions into other areas, eliminating the Business Transformation Agency and doing away with the position of assistant secretary of defense for network and information integration, Mr. Lynn said.
Force structure will grow 2 to 3 percent for fiscal 2012, then decline to the point of no growth in fiscal 2015 and 2016, the deputy secretary said.
Under the plan, the Army would lose 27,000 positions in end strength, and the Marine Corps would lose 15,000 to 20,000. Those reductions would not begin until after U.S. troops are scheduled to leave Afghanistan in 2014, Mr. Lynn said, and still would leave end strength higher than it was when Secretary Gates took office in December 2006, he said.
Even with the cuts, when the National Guard and Reserve are factored in, the Army will have 47,000 more Soldiers in 2015 than it had in 2006, General Chiarelli said.
(Master Sgt. Amaani Lyle contributed to this article)
Comments
2/9/2011 4:51:55 PM ET Stop downsizing MTFs to just clinics and see us retirees on-base. Of course Tricare costs will increase when we're made to patron civilian medical facilities.
Gary, OKC
1/28/2011 10:48:04 AM ET We are approaching a 1.5 trillion dollar national deficit. That is 1500000000000.00. I want congress reducing or cutting every program that is not essential to a safe stable America. We all need to sacrifice or we will not get out of this hole. We can't tell congress to cut benefits for everyone except ourselves. That mindset is what got us here.
Analyst, Barksdale
1/27/2011 10:07:31 AM ET Notice how the article says TRICARE fees will be lifted instead of the more accurate raised. Another broken promise to our retirees.
Mike, Florida
1/26/2011 5:37:59 PM ET It really is not fair to raise TRICARE costs for most retirees. People planned their investments, insurance plans and health care coverages based on receiving military-provided medical care and coverage -- free. A more fair approach would be to grandfather people who served a majority of their careers before TRICARE was enacted. This would be similar to how DoD handled changes for the GI Bill.
