With maintenance costs becoming more visible due to fleet age and extra wear as the result of the ongoing war, US land forces are facing a large maintenance overhang – and wondering where to find the budget for it, given existing programs and other needs (including finding survivable and durable alternatives to the Hummers when that contract expires soon). Meanwhile, the 1990s procurement holiday has left critical services like the Air Force with an aging equipment base of its own on several fronts, from aerial tankers, to bombers, to fighters, to medium and light transports. When combined with the Defense Procurement Spiral of weapons systems whose costs rise in real inflation-adjusted terms each generation (and hence get fewer bought each time), the US military faces a significant budgetary challenge in the years ahead. This will be coupled with demographic pressures of an aging population curve that may be less severe than Europe’s, Japan’s, or China’s, but will nonetheless affect policy and budgets.
The Pentagon budget is usually a zero-sum game in which the maximum figure for the next year’s budget is handed down from the White House in the spring, and the services jockey for extra dollars within those constraints to get allocations from the Secretary of Defense, while congress plays its own third-party role afterward on the way to passing a final military budget. In a very rare move, however, Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker has received permission from Donald Rumsfeld to make the Army’s 2008 budget case directly to the US Office of Management and Budget (which coordinates budgets across the entire federal government). This allows them to fight for items they need, without necessarily jeapordizing other service budgets.
The LA Times claims that the Army says it needs $138 billion in FY 2008, rather than the $114 billion offered. This would also be $26 billion more than the FY 2007 total. “We felt we had a challenge we couldn’t overcome in ’08 – ’13 program,” Schoomaker said. See SpaceWar/UPI article for more.
UPDATE: The Army’s case was refused by the OMB; they were reportedly offered $121 billion instead. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker said in July 2006 that it will cost the Army up to $13 billion per year over the course of the war, and several years beyond, to repair or replace worn equipment.