Skip to content

GOP chairmen want to know effect of huge spending cuts on national security – TheHill.com

August 13, 2011

GOP chairmen want to know effect of huge spending cuts on national security

By John T. Bennett – 08/13/11

Three House Republican committee chairs are pushing the Obama administration to explain how it anticipates up to $1 trillion in Defense cuts would affect U.S. national security.

The $350 billion in national security budget shrinkage mandated in a debt-ceiling deal signed into law by President Obama on Aug. 2 “would be an unprecedented drawdown in Defense while U.S. forces are committed to contingency operations,” the three GOP chairmen wrote to Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and White House budget chief Jack Lew in an Aug. 10 letter.

“More troubling than the lack of any historical precedent, however, is that this decision to reduce defense spending … has preceded any substantial analysis of the future roles, missions, and capabilities we want our military to perform,” wrote House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.), Appropriations Defense subcommittee Chairman Bill Young (R-Fla.) and Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard “Buck” McKeon (R-Calif.).

The Hill obtained a copy of the letter.

The GOP trio notes that the Budget Control Act of 2011, for the first time in U.S. history, defines national security agencies as the Pentagon, the Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs departments, the intelligence community, international affairs, and the National Nuclear Security Administration.

via GOP chairmen want to know effect of huge spending cuts on national security – TheHill.com.

Advertisements
One Comment
  1. August 13, 2011 12:04 PM

    What is the effect of hudge spending by the University of California spend thrift Chancellor Birgeneau? UC Berkeley’s Financial Adversity Spawns Positive Innovation, Financial Mistakes. (The author who has 35 years’ consulting experience, has taught at University of California Berkeley, where he was able to observe the culture & the way senior management work)
    University of California Berkeley (Cal) Chancellor’s huge mistakes: recruits (using California tax $) out of state $50,000 tuition students that displace qualified Californians from public university; spends $7,000,000 + for consultants to do his & many vice chancellors jobs (prominent East Coast university accomplishing same at 0 cost); pays ex Michigan governor $300,000 for lectures; Latino enrollment drops while out of state jumps 2010; tuition to Return on Investment (ROI) drops below top 10; QS ranking below top ten: NCAA places basketball program on probation: absence institutional control.
    Chancellor Birgeneau’s ($500,000 salary) fiscal track record is dismal indeed. He would like to blame the politicians, since they stopped giving him every dollar asked for, & the state legislators do share some responsibility for the financial crisis. But not in the sense he means.
    A competent chancellor would have been on top of identifying inefficiencies & then crafting a plan to fix them. Able oversight by the UC Board of Regents & the legislature would have required him to provide data on inefficiencies & on what steps he was taking to solve them during his 8 year reign. Instead, every year Birgeneau would request a budget increase, the timid president, regents would agree to it, and the legislature would provide. The hard questions were avoided by all concerned, & the problems just piled up to $150 million of inefficiencies….until there was no money left.
    It’s not that Birgeneau was unaware that there were, in fact, waste & inefficiencies during his 8 year reign. Faculty & staff raised issues with Birgeneau & Provost Breslauer ($400,000 salary), but when they failed to see relevant action taken, they stopped. Finally, Birgeneau engaged expensive ($7,000,000 +) consultants to tell him & the Provost what they should have known as leaders or been able to find out from the bright, engaged people. (Prominent east-coast University accomplishing same at 0 costs)
    We are sympathetic to the frustration of UC Chancellors running their campuses with declining support from the state. Cal. has been badly damaged by Birgeneau. Good people are loosing their jobs. Cal’s leadership is either incompetent or culpable. Merely cutting out inefficiencies does not have the effect desired.
    But you never want a crisis to go to waste. Increasing Cal’s budget is not enough; Birgeneau’s will continue huge mistakes; we believe the best course is to honorably replace Cal. Chancellor Birgeneau

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: