Obama Re-election

SAshey

5-Year Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2012
Messages
39
Just curious, but what effects will the Obama re-election have on our military and specifically our service academies for the next four years?
 
Just curious, but what effects will the Obama re-election have on our military and specifically our service academies for the next four years?

Not much based on the proposed budget and past trends. Expect to still be out of Afghanistan in 2014.
 
It depends more on how Congress deals with the budget issues.
 
It depends more on how Congress deals with the budget issues.

Which also depends on the President.

I would not expect any budget increases for the military, more likely cuts. I'm not saying the military doesn't need a number of cuts, but don't expect more money to be available.
 
my guess is cut in manpower,

Defense industry will lobby to spare and defend big weapons systems.

No one to lobby for personnel.
 
With sequestration going into effect, I'd say that we will start to draw down more rapidly. Romney had planned to avoid it, but Obama has publicly stated that he will allow it to go through.

We will pull out of Afghanistan.

DoD will probably significantly downsize and focus more on post-war consolidation and our shift to the Pacific theatre of operations.
 
my guess is cut in manpower,

Defense industry will lobby to spare and defend big weapons systems.

No one to lobby for personnel.

What about military bases being closed? I don't think congressmen from either party will be happy if any of the bases in their districts close.
 
"Lame Duck" Congress Must Act to Prevent Sequestration

http://http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-nashhoff/lame-duck-congress_b_2084076.html

The clock is ticking -- only 55 more days until sequestration takes effect on Jan. 2, 2013. For the uninformed, sequestration is the across-the-board 10 percent cut in discretionary spending in the budget, including the Department of Defense budget, that is mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011. The mandatory entitlement spending of the federal budget, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, will continue to grow, along with the interest on the national debt.

If Congress is unable to reach a compromise on how to reduce our $16 trillion national debt, over $500 billion dollars in cuts to the defense budget over the next decade would be mandated to start Jan. 3, translating into a cut of about $55-60 billion for 2013.

Our government took drastic action to prevent the bankruptcy of General Motors, but the effect of sequestration would be like both General Motors and Ford going bankrupt. It would not only affect all of the major defense prime contractors, but would affect their subcontractors, and in turn, their vendors, all the way down to the bottom of the defense and military supply chain. The lower tiers of the supply chain are nearly all small businesses, many of them disadvantaged businesses in the minority, veteran, or women-owned categories.

After three and a half years of a weak recovery, the last thing we need is a drastic cut in defense and military spending. In many regions of the country, defense and military spending has been the major factor in helping a region to recover. My hometown of San Diego is one of these regions that would be impacted severely.

According to the San Diego Military Advisory Council (SDMAC) 2012 Economic Impact Study, "a total of $20.6 billion of direct spending related to defense was estimated to flow into San Diego County during fiscal year 2012," and "the military sector is responsible for 311,000 of the region's total jobs in 2012 after accounting for all of the ripple effects of defense spending. This represents one out of every four jobs in San Diego."

"Defense‐related activities and spending were predicted to generate $32 billion of gross regional product (GRP) for San Diego County in fiscal year 2012," more than the total economic output estimated for Colorado Springs, Colo., or El Paso, Texas.

The report states that "dollars linked to national security enter San Diego through three primary channels: wages and benefits for active duty and civilian workers; benefits for retirees and veterans; and direct spending on contracts, grants, and small purchases" by the military and other Department of Defense (DoD) agencies.

According to the report:

"San Diego will not be immune to the planned cutbacks in troop levels and spending by the Department of Defense. The Marine Corps is expected to see its size gradually reduced over the next five years primarily through attrition and a reduction in recruiting.

The number of Navy personnel based in San Diego is projected to increase in fiscal year 2013 with the return of a second aircraft carrier, the USS Ronald Reagan. The shift in strategic focus to the Asia Pacific region will continue to support the Navy's presence in San Diego as with the potential addition of a third aircraft carrier."


In the San Diego region, the manufacturing industry is the largest business sector that provides goods and services to the military. One-third of all companies reported some dependency on the defense industry. Over 1,700 companies of the San Diego companies profiled on the Connectory.com database of primary industries reported that military and government contracts make up a portion of their market share, so "an orchestrated approach to future defense downsizing and its impact on the manufacturing sector is needed."

Nearly all of the major defense prime contractors -- BAE Systems, Boeing, General Dynamics, General Atomics, Lockheed-Martin, Northrop Grumman, and United Technologies -- have a presence in the San Diego region.

According to an editorial by the president of the National Defense Industry Association, Lawrence Farrell Jr., about "$22 billion of the sequester cut of $54 billion for fiscal year 2013 will come from operations and maintenance accounts. About $21 billion of the reductions will be from investments in new weapons systems and technology." He also wrote, "With or without sequester, the near term reality for defense is military forces will be smaller, and weapons a bit older unless planned acquisition catches up with aging systems. Every branch of the military needs to modernize their aging fleets."

On Aug. 6, 2012, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said, "I've made clear, and I'll continue to do so, that if sequestration is allowed to go into effect, it'll be a disaster for national defense and it would be a disaster, frankly, for defense communities as well." Panetta called sequestration "an indiscriminate formula" that was never meant to take effect. "It was never designed to be implemented," he said. "It was designed to trigger such untold damage that it would force people to do the right thing. He urged the defense community leaders to do what they can to ensure Congress reaches a solution that avoids sequestration."

On Sept. 21, 2012, Sen. John McCain, ranking Republican on the Armed Services Committee and committee Chairman Carl Levin and four other Republican and Democratic senators sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) urging their party leaders to find a way to avert the spending cuts slated to begin Jan. 2, 2013 to "send a strong signal of our bipartisan determination to avoid or delay sequestration and the resulting major damage to our national security, vital domestic priorities and our economy.''

In an August 2012 article titled "A Smarter Way to Trim the Pentagon Budget," Charles Knight, co-director of the Project on Defense Alternatives, stated:

"There are numerous ways to save defense dollars that avoid both institutional disruption and most of the economic pain associated with deep cuts to government spending. An illustrative option is the Reasonable Defense plan, which will soon be released in its entirety by the Project on Defense Alternatives."
The Project on Defense Alternatives is a think tank which promotes consideration of a broad range of defense options and advocates resetting America's defense posture along more sustainable, cost-effective lines.

The plan would decrease the 2013 defense budget by only $30 billion vs. $55 billion, comparable to the 2006 defense budget adjusted for inflation, and the reduction over a 10 year period would be more gradual than the Budget Control Act cap on defense spending. Key points of the plan are:

•The Reasonable Defense budget for ten years would cost $560 billion less than the 2013 plan submitted by the White House.

•Over the course of ten years the White House plan is to provide the Pentagon with $5.76 trillion.


•The Reasonable Defense budget would provide the Pentagon with $5.2 trillion over ten years.


•The Budget Control Act would cap defense at about $5.18 trillion.

While this plan mitigates the pain of cutting the defense budget over the next ten years, even sequestration will not solve the overall budget deficit problem. "Defense {spending} today is around 3 percent of GDP, the lowest since 2001, and comprises about 18.5 percent of federal spending, which is on par with the 20-year average." Our deficit has been more than $1 trillion per year for the past four years, and sequestration would only cut $1.2 trillion over ten years. Yet, defense spending cuts would comprise more than 50 percent of the cuts.

The best way to solve the deficit problem is to bring manufacturing back from offshore to create higher-paying jobs for more Americans. It's simple: Americans with good-paying manufacturing jobs pay taxes and generate tax revenue for the government, while Americans without jobs cost the government money in the form of unemployment benefits, Medicaid, and food stamps. If we could bring back half of the 5.5 million jobs we have lost, we could reduce the federal budget deficit significantly, as well as reduce state and local budget deficits. Harry Moser of the Reshoring Initiative states that the top reasons to re-shore are:

•Brings jobs back to the U.S.
•Helps balance U.S., state and local budgets
•Motivates recruits to enter the skilled manufacturing workforce
•Strengthens the defense industrial base
Regardless of the outcome of the election, the members of the "lame duck" Congress must act like statesmen instead of the intensely partisan politicians of the past several years to prevent sequestration. Call your U. S. Senator and Congressional representative to urge them to approve a budget that will prevent sequestration. Otherwise, one of companies that closes or the jobs lost may be your own.
 
Back
Top