Service "Shares"--That Which Cannot Be Discussed

My associate Tim Walton spends a good bit of his time attending events in DC that busy people would often like to go to, but then can't find the time.  He writes up nifty two-page summaries of them, and I shoot them out to a broad and generally appreciative audience.  Building the "brand", you might say.

Well, Tim attended an event yesterday morning hosted by Government Executive magazine, entitled "Focus on Defense:  Innovation and Management in the Military".  The panel featured the collective Undersecretaries of the Armed Services, and the Deputy Chief Management Officer of DoD.

I share a portion of Tim's report here with the broad Information Dissemination audience so that you can see what I consider to be a remarkable exchange during the Q and A toward the end of the report (Re-balancing the Budget?).  Truth be told, the questioner is Tim--a fearless young man with a dazzling mind.  The Undersecretary of the Army's answer--and the quick dismissal of the question by the panel moderator--are emblematic of the bureaucratic rot at the heart of the Department of Defense.  The suggestion that a panel made up of the #2 civilians in each of the Armed Services and devoted to "innovation and management" is the wrong forum for a discussion of one of the basic inputs of the budget process they help oversee--is ridiculous.

______________

Government Executive “Focus on Defense: Innovation and Management in the Military”

16 August 2024 at 0730 at the Crystal City Marriot Timothy B. Clark, Editor at Large of Government Executive, moderated a panel featuring:

Erin C. Conaton, Under Secretary, Department of the Air Force

Joseph W. Westphal, Under Secretary, Department of the Army

Robert O. Work, Under Secretary, Department of the Navy

Elizabeth A. McGrath, Deputy Chief Management Officer, Department of Defense

Budgetary pressures

Under Secretary Work discussed how the US is in its fourth post-WW II buildup and it is unique in four ways.  “Normally, we take cuts out of wartime funds.  Second, this is the first long war we’ve had with an all-volunteer force.  Now, we have a professional force that wants to stay instead of conscripts who wanted to go home.  Right now, the only way you can cut people is cut force structure.  Lastly, during war you normally build an incredible amount, but the Navy and Air Force haven’t built much during the war.” Thus, the age of Navy and Air Force systems has gone up. As the industrial base is already consolidated, precipitous cuts are not an option.

Under Secretary Work further stated DOD runs on processes run on inertia and that a consideration in reforming processes is the political feasibility of change. 

Under Secretary Conaton concurred stating, “we already took the low hanging fruit.”

Under Secretary Westphal argued “if you cut end strength right now too precipitously, then it might not protect programs and be unfair to families.”  He also expressed concern over the health of the defense-industrial base.  He also noted the “Catch-22” in which in order to achieve more efficiency more resources must be initially spent. 

Third Rail Issues

Under Secretary Work noted that since FY 1999 the average cost for sailors has gone up 18% and marines 20%, and when retirement and healthcare costs are added, manpower costs have increased at 27% since 1998, which is much faster than budget increases or inflation. 

The “third rail issues” of Pay, retirement, and healthcare must all be looked at, these third-rail issues.  The last thing we want to do is make choices to destroy the all-volunteer force. 

Rebalancing the Budget?

One questioner asked the panel of Under Secretaries: “We’ve heard there is a strategic review in the Department of Defense under way.  As the nation shifts to a more of an offshore balancing options strategy that primarily relies on the Navy and the Air Force and eschews major ground force commitments, how are the Services preparing to rebalance the current one-third, one-third, one-third allocation to shift resources to the Navy and Air Force?”

Under Secretary of the Army Westphal answered: “It’s not something that at any level we’ve been addressing.  We, the Army, have different stresses [related to the current wars]. […] For the Army, we have yet to achieve our bog to dwell times.  To say we can shift resources is just ridiculous.”  The moderator Timothy B. Clark, Editor at Large, Government Executive, then interjected “I think we can move on to another question.  The question of rebalancing the services is one for the very highest levels of the strategic planning process and doesn’t really apply to this group.”  

Bryan McGrath