The Trump Administration’s proposed 2018 defense budget falls short of the dramatic boost to military spending he has repeatedly promised, focusing instead on beefing up near-term combat capabilities while setting the stage for future topline increases.
At $639 billion, the administration’s budget request is $52 billion above the Budget Control Act (BCA) caps for fiscal year 2018, but just $19 billion – or 3 percent – above previously planned DoD spending levels for that year.
That total includes a base budget $574 billion – $40 billion higher than its wartime peak of $530 billion in fiscal 2012 – and overseas contingency funding (OCO) of $64.6 billion, which is far below its wartime high of $187 billion in 2008.
Almost half the net $19 billion increase will go toward increased personnel cost associated with stemming the reduction of service force levels set by the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act. In all, the fiscal 2018 budget request pays for a 56,400 troop increase across all active and reserve services from the level projected in the current fiscal year budget.
John Roth, performing the duties of Pentagon chief financial officer, told reporters May 23 that Congress must either repeal the Budget Control Act of 2011 or increase the budget caps the law places on the fiscal 2018 defense budget.
“We must increase the defense budget cap in order to adequately protect U.S. national security,” he said during a May 23 briefing at the Pentagon. “Under the BCA, the military has … become smaller, readiness has eroded and modernization has been deferred. That is not a good place to be.”
Administration officials consider the budget the second in a three-step process of “rebuilding the U.S. armed forces.” The first step was the $30 billion requested enhancement to the Defense Department’s budget for the current fiscal year, of which it received about $21 billion. The third step, budget documents explain, will be the fiscal 2019 request and beyond.
In between, the fiscal 2018 president’s budget request “begins to balance the defense program and establishes a foundation for rebuilding the U.S. military into a more capable, lethal and ready force,” Roth said.
Army Lt. Gen. Anthony R. Ierardi, Joint Staff director for force structure, resources and assessment, said the fiscal 2017 budget as recently enacted was aimed at “immediate war-fighting readiness.”
“In ’18, we want to continue to build the baseline from which to move forward from,” he said. “You see continued significant investment in … unit preparedness, training and modernization to restore war-fighting readiness while setting the conditions for future sustained, comprehensive readiness,” Ierardi said. “This budget also supports combatant commander exercises and engagements to increase joint training capability and invests in critical aviation, munitions and ISR in support of combatant commander theater activities.”
For each service, the emphasis is on manning, training and equipping the existing force and “decisions were made to ensure the force is always ready to accomplish the mission to deploy to theaters of operation that we’re engaged in today while in some ways sacrificing the long-term readiness of the force and modernization.”
Joint procurement programs are funded at slightly increased levels, including 70 total F-35 Joint Strike Fighters – two more than in fiscal 2017 – for $10.8 billion. The plan also buys 2,775 joint light tactical vehicles for which the Army and Marine Corps would collectively pay $1.1 billion.
New start programs include the Marine Corps amphibious combat vehicle and the Army’s armored multipurpose vehicle, of which the budget request would cover 26 and 42 units, respectively. The Air Force’s B-21 strategic bomber would receive $2 billion in research and development funding. The Navy rakes in funding for eight new-build ships including two Virginia-class submarines, two destroyers and an aircraft carrier.
The ongoing campaign to destroy the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria has depleted the military’s store of ordnance, which resulted in a push for preferred munitions in the fiscal 2018 budget request.
“As we closed out this budget … a great deal of concern was raised with current inventory levels, in particular given some of the expenditures in the CENTCOM area of operations,” Roth said. “The secretary mandated that we fully fund at the maximum extent possible the full production capability for certain selected preferred munitions.”
That list includes 1,397 Hellfire Missiles, 12,822 joint direct attack munitions (JDAM), 4,458 guided multiple launch rockets, 5,039 small diameter bombs (SDB) and 34 Tomahawk missiles. That accounts for $2.1 billion in the base budget. Another $1 billion in OCO funding is also set aside to buy munitions.
About $13 billion is set aside for science and technology, which Roth described as “robust” and designed to accelerate delivery of new capabilities to the field. Focus areas include advanced alternative navigation, directed energy weapons, electromagnetic spectrum capabilities, high-speed strike weapons and low-cost unmanned systems.
In a move that contradicts previously “anemic” investment in facilities maintenance, the fiscal 2018 request proposes a 25 percent boost for improving Army infrastructure. It also calls, as the Pentagon perennially does, for a round of base realignment and closure in 2021. That move, which is politically unpalatable, could save $2 billion per year that could be reinvested in readiness and modernization, Roth said.
“We’re pretty pleased with our situation with facilities investment,” Roth said. “This is an area where, when you constrained budgets and you have lower toplines, you tend to take risk. You tend to defer.”
The request rolled out Tuesday is only a proposal and must be processed through both the Senate and House armed forces and appropriations committees before having a chance to become law. Under current law, the $54 billion proposed increase in defense spending must be offset by cuts in non-defense government spending, which is anathema to many members of Congress.
Rep.Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.), ranking democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, called Trump’s budget “cruel” and a “radical departure” from the recently enacted 2017 appropriations bill.
“Cutting $54 billion from nondefense services and investments would have a devastating impact on working families, hospitals, law enforcement, schools, and local infrastructure around the country. It is a false choice to suggest slashing these investments is the price of providing the equipment, training, and manpower our military needs. We can – and should – do both.
“Even the existing caps on defense and nondefense are insufficient to meet this country’s growing needs. A failure to raise these caps would make bipartisan consensus on government funding much more difficult, particularly given our late start to the Appropriations process and an erratic President who seems to want a government shutdown.
For others the increase is insufficient. Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) said the spending plan is far below the $640 billion base budget McCain has argued the Defense Department requires to fulfill its obligations under the current National Security Strategy.
“President Trump’s $603 billion defense budget request is inadequate to the challenges we face, illegal under current law, and part of an overall budget proposal that is dead on arrival in Congress. This funding level represents a mere 3 percent increase over President Obama’s budget projection for the coming fiscal year. After years of budget cuts amid growing threats around the world, this budget request fails to provide the necessary resources to restore military readiness, rebuild military capacity, and renew our military advantage with investments in modern capabilities.”