SASC recently announced its subcommittee membership. Of interest to the S&T community is the membership of the Emerging Threats and Capabilities Subcommittee which will be Chaired by Senator Cornyn. The full membership is:
Senator Cornyn, Chairman
Senator Reed, Ranking Member
Senator Roberts
Senator Kennedy
Senator Collins
Senator Byrd
Senator Ensign
Senator Bill Nelson
Senator Talent
Senator Ben Nelson
Senator Graham
Senator Bayh
Senator Dole
Senator Clinton
Senator Thune
Claude Bolton, who is assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics, and technology, reiterated the Army's support for the 3% of DoD TOA to S&T at the AUSA Winter Conference. The article stated that:
Bolton replied that DOD maintains a goal of spending three percent of the Army's budget toward science and technology programs.However, Bolton acknowledged a "food fight as to whether that's three percent [in] real growth, is that three percent compounded every year, or so forth," he said.
"We've tried to flat-line that," Bolton said. "We've got a war to fight and we're trying to do some other things. We're finding other ways to leverage the technology from the other services and industry."
Again its good to see another senior leader in the Pentagon embrace the goal of 3%.
Full article after the jump
Defense Today
February 17, 2005
Pg. 1
Bolton: Army Needs Two Years Of Supplemental Budgets After Wars End
By Scott Nance
FORT LAUDERDALE, FLA.—The Army will need supplemental appropriations even after combat in Iraq ends, so as to enable the service to complete its transformation into a modular force, according to Claude Bolton, the Army's top acquisition official.
Those peacetime supplemental measures would provide opportunities to industry in terms of Army procurement, added Bolton, who is assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics, and technology. He spoke at an Association of the United States Army conference here.
The Bush administration has been funding ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan through supplemental appropriations over and above the Department of Defense's regular annual budgets.
On Monday, Bush submitted to Congress a request for an $82 billion fiscal 2005 supplemental defense appropriation, separate from its $419.3 billion fiscal 2006 Department of Defense (DOD) budget. That supplemental amount would include $74.9 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Critics argue that the use of supplementals masks the true size of the administration's defense build-up and balloons an already-soaring federal budget deficit.
Supporters of supplementals say that those extra budgets offer needed flexibility to address day-to-day needs of war, which often are unknowable well in advance, noting that regular budgets move through a process that is about three years from conception to final spending .
However, the adminstration also has packed into its supplementals the funds that the Army needs to pay for its ongoing transformation to a more "modular" service, one based on brigade units of action.
Indeed,the administration should seek two years of supplemental measures even after wars end in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Bolton.
Senior Army officials have been pitching that idea over the last year or so to President Bush, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, members of Congress, and others, Bolton told Defense Today in an interview following his public remarks.
The two years of peacetime supplementals, Bolton said, would relate to the increase of 30,000 troops in Army end-strength, which the service has been using to help it accomplish its modular restructuring, while simultaneously engaging in combat.
"That's allowed all these changes. Otherwise, you couldn't do that," Bolton said.
"Some folks want to make that [increase] permanent. Our [position] is [that it's a] pressure-relief valve to allow us to do all these changes and eventually we would shrink that back to numbers the Congress would support," he added.
The Army needs a certain level of funding to enable its restructuring to happen, Bolton said.
"That level of funding is what we have right now—with supplementals," he said. "So if the war stops today, I'd still need two years' worth of that level of funding, which is supplemental."
The Army later would add that level of funding to its annual base budget, he said.
Bolton declined to elaborate on the specific amount of those two peacetime supplementals.
These supplementals, meanwhile, would provide opportunities to defense contractors in the form of additional Army procurements of trucks and other vehicles, "blue force" tracking systems, communications, and more equipment.
"That allows you just to modularize everything," he said. "Otherwise, if you drop it down, okay, fine, but how do I prepare this Army for the next fight?"
In related news, following his remarks, Bolton was asked about the Army's spending on research and development for advanced weapons and other systems.
Bolton replied that DOD maintains a goal of spending three percent of the Army's budget toward science and technology programs.
However, Bolton acknowledged a "food fight as to whether that's three percent [in] real growth, is that three percent compounded every year, or so forth," he said.
"We've tried to flat-line that," Bolton said. "We've got a war to fight and we're trying to do some other things. We're finding other ways to leverage the technology from the other services and industry."
In a recent op-ed in the Duluth News Tribune Secretary Rumsfeld noted the importance of science and technology to the Global War on Terrorism. The Secretary stated:
The president's budget also provides for close to $1.7 billion for the next generation of unmanned aerial vehicles like the Predator and Global Hawk, which have proved invaluable in operations against terrorists. These aircraft will be bigger, faster and far more lethal in their ability to locate and destroy targets with speed and precision. These advances are made possible by aggressive research and development efforts, which are funded in the new budget with $10.5 billion for science and technology.
In an op-ed that ran just 729 words on an agency the size of the Department of Defense with a nearly $420 Billion budget is is notable that the Secetary spent time discussing the importance of science and technology.
Full article after the jump.
Duluth News Tribune
February 11, 2005
Demands On Military Make Higher Defense Spending Necessary
By Donald Rumsfeld
Early in his first term, President Bush directed that the Department of Defense rethink its Cold War-era assumptions and transform into an institution capable of addressing the unconventional security challenges of a new century. The president's vision received added urgency with the attacks of Sept. 11 and the subsequent campaign against extremism and terror.
In response, defense spending has increased by more than 40 percent since Sept. 11, not including the additional spending for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The budget the president is proposing for the 2006 fiscal year will continue that spending commitment, with a 4.8 percent increase from last year to more than $419 billion.
These increases are needed. And, as a nation, we can afford them.
Even with the spending increases of the last several years, the United States commits just more than 3 percent of its gross domestic product to defense.
But transforming defense has little to do with how much we spend. More significant than those spending increases has been a notable shift in our priorities -- away from an emphasis on size, mass and concentration toward more readily deployable and agile forces that use the latest information technology to operate with greater reach, speed and precision.
The president's 2006 budget continues this trend. It funds, for example, a next generation Navy destroyer -- designed to be manned by a crew of about 100 sailors (as opposed to 300 sailors on current destroyers) that will be able to move into coastal waters and strike targets deep inland. In addition, not all of these shifts require building new platforms. A 20-year old Ohio-class Trident ballistic missile submarine -- originally conceived as a nuclear deterrent -- has been adapted to carry up to 66 Special Forces troops and be capable of launching both cruise missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles. Such a vessel will be put to sea and be prepared to conduct operations this year.
The president's budget also provides for close to $1.7 billion for the next generation of unmanned aerial vehicles like the Predator and Global Hawk, which have proved invaluable in operations against terrorists. These aircraft will be bigger, faster and far more lethal in their ability to locate and destroy targets with speed and precision. These advances are made possible by aggressive research and development efforts, which are funded in the new budget with $10.5 billion for science and technology.
Despite the increases in military combat power in each of the services, operations in Afghanistan and Iraq continue to place high demands on the Army to deploy troops with the right skills for today's unconventional missions.
In response, and under emergency authorities granted by the Congress, the active Army has grown by thousands of soldiers and, by the end of this fiscal year, will be up 30,000 -- not including activated Guard and Reserve forces -- from four years ago.
This increase in numbers is accompanied, however, by an even greater increase in lethality and capability. The Army is redesigning itself away from large, heavy, Cold War-style divisions to more rapidly deployable and lethal "modular" brigade combat teams. Therefore, an increase in the size of the active Army by less than 10 percent is being matched by an increase in the number of deployable brigade combat teams by approximately 30 percent.
The Special Operations Forces, which have played a critical role in Iraq and Afghanistan, will grow further in this budget by 1,400 personnel and four Navy SEAL platoons. The president's budget also funds new incentives packages to retain the most experienced Special Forces troops.
Operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere across the globe highlight the tremendous capability of U.S. forces and the promise shown by speed, lethality and flexibility made possible by new technologies and tactics. As the president begins his second term, we recommit ourselves to questioning old assumptions and outlining new strategies to prepare our forces for the conflict of this century. Ultimately, though, our country's security comes down to the courage and resilience of the men and women in uniform, who have performed so heroically and who have sacrificed so much. It is on their behalf that we must continue the drive to transform, and the president's 2006 budget is an important step along that path.
DONALD RUMSFELD is the United States secretary of defense.
As you may know, DoD Day is scheduled for March 9th. I hope you are going to be able to get your researchers in town.
A couple changes recently. Getting space has been difficult. OSU has been extremely helpful. At the last meeting there was discussion of possibly having tents and university demos outside. I don't think that is going to work. Plan B right now looks like the UAV demo with AIAA and a demo from one of the services. We're still working on finalizing the details, but we hope to be close to tieing things up soon. Unfortunatley becuase of logistical details it does not look like members are going to be able to bring demos in this year.
The plan to have the demo from 11ish to 1:30ish still stands. It will also still be outside somewhere.
I'll have more details when they become available.
I apologize for being a bit behind on blogging lately. As you can imagine with the budget roll out things have been hectic over here. I apologize for not having more information up. I'm going to put a couple things up here and then will attempt to blog more often.
First, AAU put together an excellent summary. I recomend it. Thanks Toby.
Science Today had an excellent article (subscription required I think) on the SMART/DoD Ed program online today. I would reccomend reading it. I was a bit concerned about UWisc Professor Michael Corradini's comments that the "employment agreement might scare away some of the best candidates. 'Students believe strongly in freedom, and typically don't respond well to such contracts,'" referring to the SMART requirement that scholarship recipients work for DoD. You would think that their strong belief in freedom would be precisely the reason they would support military S&T. (yes I know he meant it in a different context) Obviously its not unreasonable to imagine that if DoD is picking up the tab for a very expensive college education, that they request you support their mission. Frankly though, I don't believe America's best and brightest are going to be scared off by the employment contract. I'm not sure what lack of freedom he is referring to though? DoD Labs are some of the finest research facilities in the world and turn our excellent research. Maybe he's concerned about researchers being tied to one institution for an extended period, but I'm not sure how that is so much different then getting on tenure track at a university somewhere. Anyway, my guess is the reporter was probably just looking for the "other side."
DARPA's new strategic plan is out. Its a big file. Email me if you'd like a copy.
Well as you've probably seen from the S&T budget document, DoD S&T is not what we were hoping for. Of the various budget activities (Army Basic, Army Applied, Navy Basic, etc.) all of them take a reduction from FY05 appropriated. Most of them take a reduction from the FY05 President's appropriated level. Overall basic research at DoD takes a 12% hit from FY05 app. and a 1% hit from the 05 request. Not a good trend.
Additionally the level of DoD spending dedicated to S&T dropped from 2.6% last year to 2.5% this year. In DoD's defense most of that can be accounted for by the fact that TOA increased by app. $20B while S&T stayed roughly flat. Basic accounts for 12.5% of S&T this year as opposed to 11.3% of last year's appropriations and 12.6 % of last year's request.
On the bright side, DoD is putting some significant dollars next to dealing with the S&T workforce issue. The Department has requested $10 M for a science and math workforce program. It will in all likelihood resemble significan't the SMART program initiated by Congress last year. Last year SMART was funded at $2.5 Million.
Funding statements, requests and other advocacy materials to come.
Peter Harsha at CRA has a great post on S&T classification issues at DARPA on his blog. I would encourage you to read it.