Report: Current Budget Fight Hints at Long-Term Battle Between Pentagon and Budget Hawks

U.S. Naval Institute ^ | December 7, 2017 | Ben Werner

[Retain Mike]

While Mattis is pushing for Congress to lift DoD spending caps, Mick Mulvaney, White House director of the Office of Management and Budget is known in Congress as being a budget deficit hawk and routinely calls for spending cuts.

Even now, Mulvaney routinely talks about the need to restrain government spending by slowing the rate of growth in government programs. He frequently makes this argument on Twitter and on Sunday morning news shows.

[Retain Mike]

I found this article of interest because of the table about federal expenditures at the White House website.

I like to go to the percent of outlays and compare 1964 and present. Notice defense spending falls continuously throughout Vietnam and thereafter (from 46.2% to 15.4%), while direct payments to individuals (from 24.5% to 59.1%) skyrockets.

Of course, 1964 marks the birth of Johnson’s Great Society/War on Poverty, and there has been a continuous follow on of incestuous, inbred, imbecilic, morally vacuous policy offspring ever since. Therefore, I like to say the Arsenal of Democracy has turned into just another Gulag of Dependency.

Federal Budget Historical Tables (OMB) Table 6.1 http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals

[Gen.Blather]

I spent thirty plus years in defense manufacturing. We could vastly decrease the cost of defense spending by eliminating the non-defense agenda items in every contract. Requirements for women and minority venders, most of whom are not qualified. Eliminate the requirement for diversity, LGBT outreach programs and all the non-defense social trivia. Go back to Mil-std 9858 in place of the huge cost of ISO 9000. Eliminate the green agenda madness; using green fuel, not buying from companies that use cadmium or chromium on any of their products, not just the ones you are buying for this contract.

Everybody in procurement is aware of how to reduce the costs. But every requirement goes back to some Senator giving taxpayer funds to a favorite special interest.

[Retain Mike]

How pathetic. That is right in line with the way social engineering has taken over any thought of excellence in finding the best capable personnel for combat operations.

[AndyJackson]

And there is the subterfuge caused by the Defense Acquisition Program Executive process to increase employment of feds and support contractors and consultants to manage the acquisition process.

[Gen.Blather]

“And there is the subterfuge caused by the Defense Acquisition Program Executive process to increase employment of feds and support contractors and consultants to manage the acquisition process.”

The only way to bring defense contracting abuse under control is to put somebody in charge of it who reports directly to President Trump. Only the president can change the contract. Nobody else has the required power to change much of anything. The worse thing is, industry can’t challenge anything without being judged non-compliant. They can submit a counter proposal, but why bother? Nobody wants to change anything or save any money. And, the more something costs the more the supplier makes. It’s a thoroughly bad process from the taxpayer’s and the military’s perspective.