March 10, 2006
There is a lot of good news in the Army’s request for Fiscal Year 2007 was the way the Army’s top budget officer described the situation to attendees at our most recent Institute of Land Warfare Breakfast
In the Army’s request for $110.4 billion, excluding about $2 billion for chemical demilitarization work, Lt. Gen. Jerry Sinn said there was $5 billion for modularity, $3.6 billion for infrastructure; $1.7 billion for military and civilian pay raises. “You can reach out and touch them.”
Here is a sample of some other items that soldiers and their families can also “reach out and touch.”
- $263 million toward targeted pay increases for selected warrant officers and mid-grade and senior enlisted.
- $1.9 billion for retention bonuses.
- 5.9 percent increase in the Basic Allowance for Housing.
- $1.5 billion to build 48 barracks.
- $77 million for four dependent educational school projects.
- $68 million for eight child development centers.
- $39 billion for the Military Health System.
For now and the immediate future, here is a sample of what the request would do in equipping the active, Army National Guard and Army Reserve. It lays out a spending plan to move the Army to 70 modularized brigade combat teams in the active force and Army National Guard over the next five years and restructure combat support and combat service support – functional – brigades over the same time in all three components.
The research and development spending request remains about the same as last year at $10.9 billion:
$3.7 billion will go toward the Future Combat Systems, up $400 million. In the Defense Department’s long-range spending plan, FCS would receive $22.4 billion “to increase the lethality of the individual warrior.”
For FCS, $3.3 billion of that money will be spent on:
- Development of unmanned aerial vehicles, unattended ground sensors and prototypes of unmanned ground vehicles.
- Finishing fabrication of the automotive test rig and initial testing of design and some components of eight manned ground systems.
- More testing of the battle command network and software and developing embedded training capability.
- The rest will be spent on work on the Non-Line-of-Sight Cannon and its launcher.
The Army plans to spend $3.2 billion on vehicles:
- $796 million on 100 Strykers – 65 mobile gun systems, 22 command variants and 13 reconnaissance variants.
- $695 million for 4,119 Medium Tactical Vehicles.
- $583 million on 3,081 Humvees.
- $537 million on enhancing M1 tanks – 23 System Enhancement Program tanks and 320 Abrams Power Packs.
The Army plans to spend $2.8 billion for aviation:
- $795 million on AH-64 Apache attack helicopters including 36 Longbow upgrades.
- $740 million on 38 UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters.
- $620 million on two new and 21 remanufactured CH-47 F model Chinooks.
- $306 million in aircraft survivability infrared countermeasures.
- $199 million on 39 Light Utility Helicopters.
- $141 million on eight Armed Reconnaissance Helicopters.
What has drawn our concern in the request is the raising of fees – in some areas tripling costs over three years -- for retirees and their families who are under 65.
AUSA and The Military Coalition believe career military personnel and their families endure unique demands and sacrifices – including the willingness to put their lives on the line -- during a 20- to 30-year career protecting the freedoms of all Americans.
The primary offset for such selfless service is a system of retirement benefits, in particular health care coverage, that is better than that provided to non-military workers – provided by a grateful nation to those who served the national interest for so long. Comparing military health care costs to civilian costs is inappropriate for that very reason. The career demands of military service versus non-military service are not comparable.
The Department of Defense purports that the rising health care costs are competing with weapons programs and forcing tradeoffs. AUSA and The Military Coalition believe that our nation can afford to pay for both weapons and health care. Our defense budget is less than four percent of gross domestic product – about half the peacetime year average since World War II. If we can afford tax cuts and earmarks, we do not need to make military retirees pay more for health care in order to fund weapons.
The “number crunchers” in the Pentagon presume the proposed changes will save money by forcing about 14 percent of pharmacy users away from retail stores and by causing up to 600,000 current beneficiaries to leave TRICARE over the next five years.
So, in essence, the savings are in large part to come from deterring beneficiaries from using their earned military health benefits. Thanks for your service, but don’t try to use your benefits!
We will say it again: Congress has provided military retirement and health benefits that exceed civilian benefits as an essential offset.
I also want to share with you the very good news from my recently completely trip to the Middle East. I along with Col. John Davies, USA, Ret., the Association’s director of regional activities, and Command Sgt. Maj. Jimmie Spencer, USA, Ret., the director on noncommissioned officer and soldier programs, traveled to Kuwait to officially recognize AUSA’s 127th chapter and the Association’s first unit in the Middle East.
We from AUSA National told the soldiers, Department of the Army civilians and contractors in Kuwait have made many sacrifices – including leaving the families, friends and loved ones behind while they fight the global war on terrorism.
I added that “we are all grateful for all the sacrifices you have made for our country and for our great Army.”
|