MPO, if it would help any scholarship candidate it would be AF and Navy not Army because the last thing Obama or Gates wants is a third ground war. That would mean if they did increase the budget they probably would give more to them over the Army especially since we will be withdrawing from Afganistan.
That being said I do not believe it will have any impact at all re:Libya. The reason I state this is because they don't expect these candidates to serve for 4 more yrs. However, they will need to keep the AD budget high. Two different pots of money. They may increase the DOD budget, but you cannot assume that means they will increase the scholarship budget...one is operational needs, another isn't.
You may be right, Pima. That said, however, here's what I think (I definitely don't have a crystal ball!):
When the President submitted his budget "request" to Congress last month, he did so in competition with numerous other interest groups, such as AARP, teachers unions, etc., that want more money allocated to non-defense programs. As you know, whenever there is a budget deficit (as opposed to a surplus), every dollar given to defense is a dollar not going to social programs (and vice versa). In terms of decisionmaking, each of the MOCs have the responsibility to listen to the arguments advanced by each group and ultimately cast their vote in the manner they believe is in the best interests of the country. In the budget fight, the President has an edge over the other interest groups in attempting to persuade Congress, because he can try to shape things by threatening a veto. But at the end of the day, Congress can override the veto and thus it is up to Congress to make the ultimate decision on the budget.
Less than one month ago, the real behind-the-scenes debate was defense versus entitlements. Our country was facing a winding down of the sandbox wars, and MOCs were going through a series of CR extensions to position themselves for the real fight ahead. In this fight, there were many GOPers who don't want to cut defense, and there were dems who don't want to cut social programs. Each has a valid point, because there are compelling arguments favoring all of the interests at stake.
But there were a bunch of middle-ground MOCs who were being lobbied hard by all sides (including DoD) in an effort to win them over to one side or another. The lobbying efforts not only came from DoD, AARP, teacher unions, etc., but also came from fellow MOCs looking to secure more votes in their "camp."
I believe that the Libyan conflict will fundamentally change the debate over the coming months. Those who had previously called for Congress cut defense are now more likely now to get a "not now" response. It will be interesting to see the Sunday talk shows tomorrow to see if there is a definite change in tone among lawmakers. I suspect strongly that the budget issue will take a back seat.
I further believe that the President will ask for even more money than before. The Libya action is estimated to cost us $100M to $300M per
week (that's a lot of scholarships!). DoD simply does not have the resources to move that money from manpower, bullets, fuel, etc.
The one thing that the Libyan conflict reminds the MOCs is that we live in a very dangerous world. I think this fact ultimately weakens the arguments of those calling for defense cuts and strengthens the President's and DoD's arguments in favor of a larger defense budget. This is not Air Force or Navy specific, but also flows to the benefit of the Army as well.
In this regard, just because there are no ground troops currently slated to go into Libya, MOCs are now is less likely to hack away at our "ground troop" capabilities. The volatility of the Middle East is at the forefront of the minds of our MOCs.
Ultimately, the Libyan conflict may persuade MOCs to agree on a CR for the remainder of FY2011 and Congress may even decide to kick the can until the Presidential election in 2012 (where the budget debate will be front-and-center again).
I think this Libyan conflict will ultimately benefit our kids who are looking for scholarships (both from the March board and walk-ons in the fall) to realize their dream of serving our country but need some financial assistance from DoD to do so.
I also think that the Libyan conflict will remind some ROTC candidates that this whole scholarship business isn't a game -- accepting this commitment really means that they will be asked to put their life on the line some day.
In short, the Libyan conflict is a game-changer in many respects.