3
3
0
From: Army Times
The Pentagon is seeking an overall budget increase next year, but spending on military personnel will remain essentially flat, squeezed by cuts in the size of the force and recent efforts to scale back troops' pay and benefits.
The Defense Department's budget request for fiscal 2016, which starts Oct. 1, seeks a total budget of $585.3 billion, roughly 4.4 percent more than this year's total defense budget.
Meanwhile, the portion of the budget that accounts for military personnel will tick downward by a small fraction to $139.9 billion, or about $55 million less than the amount approved for this year, according to budget documents released Monday.
Those figures include both the base budget and funding for overseas operations.
Most of the 4.4 percent increase in the overall Pentagon budget will fund new weapons systems and more research and development for new technologies, the budget documents show.
The nominal decline in personnel spending sought for 2016 could make it the fifth consecutive year that the personnel budget account has dropped since reaching a peak of $152 billion in 2010.
The bulk of that reduction stems from a drawdown in the size of the total force, in particular the Army and Marine Corps, which have shed more than 70,000 service members over the past several years and brought the total size of the active-duty force down to about 1.3 million troops.
Specifically, this year's budget projects that the total force will shrink by another 11,900 troops. That includes cutting 15,000 soldiers from the Army while expanding the Navy by 1,500 sailors and the Air Force by 1,700 airmen.
Pentagon officials note that the per-troop costs have risen significantly since 2001 as Congress granted a series of generous pay raises and new benefits to troops during the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Top Pentagon officials say that cost growth is unsustainable and continue to seek reductions to military compensation in an effort to scale back the growth in per-troop costs.
"The department cannot allow its personnel costs to crowd out investments in the readiness and modernization portions of the budget which are essential to providing needed training and equipment for its warriors to carry into combat and accomplish the incredible array of missions undertaken around the globe every day," DoD officials wrote in their budget overview published Monday.
The budget request for next year also urges Congress to approve new cuts to Basic Allowance for Housing rates, new health care fees and reductions to the commissary benefit.
Spending on personnel, which includes health care, comprises about 33.5 percent of this year's budget, down from 36.1 percent in 2014, budget documents show.
The budget request includes another modest pay raise for service members next year, a proposed 1.3 percent that would mark a nominal uptick but would fail to keep pace with the projected growth in average private-sector wages. If approved by Congress, the 1.3 percent raise would cut into the real spending power for military families because it would fall well below the estimated 2.3 percent rise in annual private-sector wages, according to DoD budget documents.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/02/02/dod-wants-to-grow-total-budget-cut-personnel-costs/22757865/
The Pentagon is seeking an overall budget increase next year, but spending on military personnel will remain essentially flat, squeezed by cuts in the size of the force and recent efforts to scale back troops' pay and benefits.
The Defense Department's budget request for fiscal 2016, which starts Oct. 1, seeks a total budget of $585.3 billion, roughly 4.4 percent more than this year's total defense budget.
Meanwhile, the portion of the budget that accounts for military personnel will tick downward by a small fraction to $139.9 billion, or about $55 million less than the amount approved for this year, according to budget documents released Monday.
Those figures include both the base budget and funding for overseas operations.
Most of the 4.4 percent increase in the overall Pentagon budget will fund new weapons systems and more research and development for new technologies, the budget documents show.
The nominal decline in personnel spending sought for 2016 could make it the fifth consecutive year that the personnel budget account has dropped since reaching a peak of $152 billion in 2010.
The bulk of that reduction stems from a drawdown in the size of the total force, in particular the Army and Marine Corps, which have shed more than 70,000 service members over the past several years and brought the total size of the active-duty force down to about 1.3 million troops.
Specifically, this year's budget projects that the total force will shrink by another 11,900 troops. That includes cutting 15,000 soldiers from the Army while expanding the Navy by 1,500 sailors and the Air Force by 1,700 airmen.
Pentagon officials note that the per-troop costs have risen significantly since 2001 as Congress granted a series of generous pay raises and new benefits to troops during the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Top Pentagon officials say that cost growth is unsustainable and continue to seek reductions to military compensation in an effort to scale back the growth in per-troop costs.
"The department cannot allow its personnel costs to crowd out investments in the readiness and modernization portions of the budget which are essential to providing needed training and equipment for its warriors to carry into combat and accomplish the incredible array of missions undertaken around the globe every day," DoD officials wrote in their budget overview published Monday.
The budget request for next year also urges Congress to approve new cuts to Basic Allowance for Housing rates, new health care fees and reductions to the commissary benefit.
Spending on personnel, which includes health care, comprises about 33.5 percent of this year's budget, down from 36.1 percent in 2014, budget documents show.
The budget request includes another modest pay raise for service members next year, a proposed 1.3 percent that would mark a nominal uptick but would fail to keep pace with the projected growth in average private-sector wages. If approved by Congress, the 1.3 percent raise would cut into the real spending power for military families because it would fall well below the estimated 2.3 percent rise in annual private-sector wages, according to DoD budget documents.
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/pentagon/2015/02/02/dod-wants-to-grow-total-budget-cut-personnel-costs/22757865/
DoD
Budget
Downsizing
Personnel
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 18
15
15
0
So let me get this strait. We are buying new planes that cost $100 of millions yet the F-15 has never been shot down, the A-10 still is the deadliest plane on the battlefield, and B-52 still drops bombs weekly. Yet, the people that make this things work are not going to be taken care of.
How about this, stop buying shit we don't need and take care of the troops!
How about this, stop buying shit we don't need and take care of the troops!
(15)
(0)
12
12
0
CPT Zachary Brooks
Personally I think it would be a great honor to serve in Congress or the State Legislature even if it was an unpaid position. I would see that as a greater dignity personally...
(2)
(0)
7
7
0
Why is it that when budget issues arise the first thing anyone thinks about is cutting Soldier's pay? Obviously not one of our "leaders" care about anyone but themselves. For the last 10-15 years, the military has been in constant conflict with people in all branches being deployed time and time again. And instead of being thanked and taken care of for volunteering to do this, we get our pay cut and benefits reduced. I really feel ashamed of everyone in our government for this.
(7)
(0)
SGT Kristin Wiley
Research and innovation are clearly more important, didn't you know? I vote cut the pay for the higher ranks and politicans that are backing these ideas.
(0)
(0)
Lt Col (Join to see)
It is a crappy situation...on the Air Force side of the house, it seems it is because it's the only budget area they can cut without enormous kick-back ... for example, you dont hear senators speaking out / outraged when AF manning numbers are reduced, but they throw a fit whenever the CSAF tries to cut old weapons systems (in order to make room for the new systems), just as the A-10, RQ-4, etc. Instead, resolutions get passed to keep flying these systems, and then the answer defaults to cutting the personnel budget. So unfortunately it seems like its just the nature of the beast, as it doesn't start out as an intentional focus to slash, but is just the byproduct...
(0)
(0)
SGT William Howell
Since the Air Force has more contractors than all other branches put together they should bare the brunt of the cuts. Why would have a civilian clean the barracks at $120 a day plus benefits when you can have a E3 do it for $60? These things go across the board for the Air Force. Much of the the AF is managing civilians that do jobs that should be done by members of the military. Don't bitch when they look to cut budgets when you are under utilizing the resources you have. If the Marine Corp were ran like the Air Force they would be broke in 6 weeks. Go to any MC base and ask them who mows the grass.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google