Budget cuts vs. Strike Fighter

The confirmation hearing of Ashton Carter, President Barack Obama’s nominee for deputy secretary of Defense, highlighted the dilemma the Defense Department is facing. On the one hand, DOD must cut billions of dollars in spending. On the other hand, it has to maintain combat readiness and, perhaps most importantly politically, keep the support of members of Congress whose constituents are in need of jobs and economic gains.

So it's not surprising that during his confirmation hearing, Carter pledged his best efforts to cut defense spending by more than $300 billion in the next 10 years while also pledging his full support for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) had threatened to stall Carter's nomination until Carter assured him of his commitment to the program, Foreign Policy reports. Lockheed Martin builds the F-35s in Texas.

During the hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Carter vowed that if confirmed, he would work closely with Congress to identify and recommend cuts and savings that could realistically be implemented to help avoid the sweeping cuts that will kick in if a so-called super committee fails to pass a plan by mid-October to trim the federal budget.

However, those recommendations are supposed to be based on the results of a broad internal DOD review, which Carter said is now behind schedule. But the automatic cuts that would result from the super committee’s inability to agree on a strategy would be draconian, Carter said. He warned more than once that if the $500 billion-plus, across-the-board automatic cuts to defense spending were enacted under the sequestration process, it would be devastating to the military.

“Just the scale of it alone would lead us to have to consider truly draconian things: abandoning major weapons systems, furloughing civilian employees and abruptly curtailing training because we couldn’t pay for fuel, and so forth,” Carter said. “When we say ‘disastrous,’ that’s the kind of disaster we mean.”

About the Author

Amber Corrin is a former staff writer for FCW and Defense Systems.

FCW in Print

In the latest issue: Looking back on three decades of big stories in federal IT.


  • Anne Rung -- Commerce Department Photo

    Exit interview with Anne Rung

    The government's departing top acquisition official said she leaves behind a solid foundation on which to build more effective and efficient federal IT.

  • Charles Phalen

    Administration appoints first head of NBIB

    The National Background Investigations Bureau announced the appointment of its first director as the agency prepares to take over processing government background checks.

  • Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.)

    Senator: Rigid hiring process pushes millennials from federal work

    Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said agencies are missing out on younger workers because of the government's rigidity, particularly its protracted hiring process.

  • FCW @ 30 GPS

    FCW @ 30

    Since 1987, FCW has covered it all -- the major contracts, the disruptive technologies, the picayune scandals and the many, many people who make federal IT function. Here's a look back at six of the most significant stories.

  • Shutterstock image.

    A 'minibus' appropriations package could be in the cards

    A short-term funding bill is expected by Sept. 30 to keep the federal government operating through early December, but after that the options get more complicated.

  • Defense Secretary Ash Carter speaks at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference in San Francisco

    DOD launches new tech hub in Austin

    The DOD is opening a new Defense Innovation Unit Experimental office in Austin, Texas, while Congress debates legislation that could defund DIUx.

Reader comments

Fri, Oct 21, 2011 Ben Roth Fairfax VA

The DOD requirements process is broken. More importantly, the congress use of the Defense Budget for pork barrel spending must stop. We can no longer buy what we want in lieu of what we need for two verfy good reasons; first, what we want may well not provide us any real defense capability; and second, we can no longer afford this spend, spend, spend DOD lifestyle. Regarding defense needs, we need to step back and develop a foreigh policy that makes sense before we move forward with a defense posture that may in no way provide us any real defense.

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group