The US Department of Defense has submitted its FY 2010 budget request for $533.8 billion. This is 4% more than the FY 2009 base budget, but that is no longer an apples-to-apples comparison, as explained below. Weapons procurement represents $107.4 billion, or about 20% of the total budget. That put it in 3rd place, behind Operations & Maintenance ($185.7 billion), and personnel costs ($136 billion).
DID offers its readers a collection of links to useful reports and original documents related to the FY 2010 budget request, as well as some relevant outside reactions and testimony. So far, the President’s budget request generally matches Secretary Gates’ April 2009 preview. We will continue to add to this collection over time, and welcome reader suggestions re: useful materials, articles, and analyses via tips@…
* The American Budget Process
* Readings and Sources
The American Budget Process
This proposed budget is just the first step in a long process that involves separate bills drawn up in the House of Representatives and the US Senate. Those bills can add things, subtract or change other items, and even impose conditions on certain expenditures.
The House and Senate bills are based on a common Presidential budget proposal, which means they’re likely to be broadly similar, but political alignments and interests always differ, and so do the resulting bills. That’s why the House and Senate bills must be reconciled in committee into one common bill for the President to sign into law. The Pentagon generally hopes that this will be done by the time their fiscal year ends on October 1st. That is not always the case.
One feature worth highlighting in the current budget is supplemental wartime funding. Since 2001, the US Congress has made a conscious decision since 9/11 to fund the Global War on Terror’s operational components via supplemental budget requests. In theory, this separates “normal” pay, maintenance, and new equipment buys from war maintenance, aid to allied governments, and replacements for destroyed or broken equipment.
The FY 2010 begins to reverse that trend. Many items that were previously funded through supplemental appropriations, such as increasing the size of the US Army and Marine Corps, are now part of the base budget. There is a line item for “Overseas Contingency Operations” funding, but its scope is narrower and its size more certain.
Readings and Sources
* Pentagon DefenseLINK (May 7/09) – DoD Releases Fiscal 2010 Budget Proposal. Includes links.
* US DoD Comptroller’s Office – Fiscal Year 2010 Budget Request. Includes detailed documents, and even Excel sheets for some items.
* DID (April 6/06) – Gates Lays Out Key FY 2010 Budget Recommendations. Has been updated since, but this article will serve as the go-to point for post-release analysis, reactions, and items. The submitted budget’s broad outlines and specifics are faithfully reflected in the President’s budget request.
* Aviation Week (May 13/09) – Senators Push Panel For 15 More C-17s. “Last week the House Appropriations Committee included $3.1 billion for eight C-17s and 11 C-130 cargo aircraft in its $94.3 billion version of the supplemental war spending bill.”
* DoD Buzz (May 13/09) – GOP, Gates Join Budget Battle. Congress and the Secretary of Defense exchange salvos over the process, and the analysis underlying the recommendations.
* CG Blog (May 8/09) – DHS FY10 Budget Request is out; USCG’s getting thinner. By about $20 million, from $9.975 billion to $9.955 billion. The US Coast Guard works with the Navy, but is technically part of the Department of Homeland Security, not the defense department.
* CSBA (May 7/09) – Budget Request Begins Shift Toward a More “Balanced” Defense Posture: Press release [PDF] | Full Briefing [PDF]. The think tank compares this year’s budget request to the previous budget and provides more detailed analysis of significant changes.
* Lexington Institute (May 7/09) – Quadrennial Review Skirts Biggest Management Challenge. “…the process is ignoring the biggest single management challenge that Gates and his successors will face. That problem, bluntly stated, is that the All Volunteer Force is becoming unaffordable. Military personnel costs are out of control…”
* Lexington Institute (May 5/09) – Defense Market Drivers and Trends Through 2012
* Heritage Foundation (April 27/09) – The $64,000 Question: Is President Obama Actually Increasing the Defense Budget?