Interesting article on defense waste

**DJ Ms. White** · 11-25-13, 08:49 AM

GUYZ. I HAZ GREAT IDEA. THROW OBJECTS AT MARINES. THEY WON'T FIGHT BACK, AND THERE WILL BE NO REPERCUSSIONS.

**SmokenScion** · 11-25-13, 02:17 PM

Do we really need a 13 year supply of $5,000 toilet seats?

**Ranger10** · 11-25-13, 06:45 PM

Originally Posted by Gumby

Sweeping measures don't work. There are some changes I would like to see. First, Congress has to pass a budget. We waste a lot of money because continuing resolutions don't allow for long term planning. Second, stop punishing organizations that save money and rewarding organizations that waste money. The current system does just that. If you come up under budget, expect your budget to get slashed. If you come over budget expect your budget to be raised. Third it would not hurt to flatten the whole thing. We have way too much middle management. Getting rid of government employees that are not doing their job or that their jobs don't need doing is much harder than it should be. Remove the dead weight. And finally, we need to get it through our skulls that going with the lowest bidder is not always going to save money. I have seen it cost a lot more in the long run on many occasions. Go with the best bid, not the cheapest.

Sent from my S3 using Tapatalk

I agree with all of this. By "sweeping", I meant, "take a hard look at where we spend money, at every level, and figure out how to be more efficient", not an arbitrary series of cuts. But it takes a different framework to make that happen. You illustrated a lot of what I think that framework would look like with this response.

Concerning the "budget", what do you think about rolling over the amount NOT spent from one year to the next? In essence, lets say Defense gets X billion dollars. If it doesn't spend it all during one cycle, it gets the same budget the next year, plus whatever wasn't used the previous one. Admittedly, I don't know enough about how the government moves cash around behind the scenes. I'll let those of you who have a better understanding critique the idea. But I can understand why the system of slashing budgets that don't spend all the money lead to rampant spending on things only designed to make the budget balloon from year to year. Seems like such a waste.

**Red_Lizard2** · 11-25-13, 09:30 PM

Originally Posted by SmokenScion

Do we really need a 13 year supply of $5,000 toilet seats?

Maybe they should start canceling taco tuesday.

**Red_Lizard2** · 11-25-13, 09:38 PM

In terms of budgets, grappled with that quite a bit on what could be a fix. At the moment the only thing I can think of might be good is having each agency/branch provide a list of what it wants, needs, etc. for the fiscal year and basing budgets off of that (with some oversight, not just letting USDA get gold plated hummers because they need them). That way it keeps, what I think is, the purpose of adjusting the budget based off last years spending (eg, they didn't spend 1 million, thus they don't need 1 million this year either) while also hopefully reducing waste some. Of course it would also require them being held to actually keep within budget, not spend 20 billion on a fuck-up and have it be written off as "oops." Which is apparently already part of the problem (no accountability).

Granted good luck getting accountability standards put on DOD and the military, the public backlash would probably be at stupid levels (my opinion), since it is defense. Anything else, I think no-one would care, defense though? Ehhh I get the feeling people would start throwing a fit, even if it makes perfect sense.

Also, obviously, I don't know how much of this already happens, so could already be in place even *shrug*

**Gumby** · 11-25-13, 10:15 PM

Another problem is Congress. The DoD does send them a list of what they want. But sometimes they get more. For example, a few years back, Congress budgeted 10 new C-17s. The Air Force had asked for one. But they are built in someone's district and additional ones were part of the deal for his vote on another issue. That's really wasteful and is not the fault of anyone in the DoD.

Sent from my S3 using Tapatalk

**iLLusioN** · 11-25-13, 10:40 PM

Originally Posted by Red_Lizard2

In terms of budgets, grappled with that quite a bit on what could be a fix. At the moment the only thing I can think of might be good is having each agency/branch provide a list of what it wants, needs, etc. for the fiscal year and basing budgets off of that (with some oversight, not just letting USDA get gold plated hummers because they need them). That way it keeps, what I think is, the purpose of adjusting the budget based off last years spending (eg, they didn't spend 1 million, thus they don't need 1 million this year either) while also hopefully reducing waste some.

That is already done. Each unit within each branch sends up to the top what they need which is supposed to be used to project for the next year. Then there's what they call "unfunded" requests, which is usually things breaking or big projects(which are supposed to be rolled into the expected budget but always seem to not make it there). Each branch gets those totals and sends it up to the JCS. They get to send that up to the Office of the Secretary of Defense...who then presents it to congress. Obviously each branch still fights for alot of special projects and there's a shit load of political bullshit that goes on up there. But the process is there...it just doesn't get used properly. There are alot of reasons why...a very big one being that (at least in the AF) the squadron level it is pretty common for leadership to encourage people to fill the budget up even if they don't really need things just so that they have it next year in case they do.That is when you see things that just don't make any fucking sense. 500 rolls of electrical tape for a 20 man shop. Brand new test equipment to replace equipment that is more than serviceable if they were to properly maintain it. $400 toilet seats, $1000 office chairs, etc.

**Ranger10** · 11-26-13, 02:57 AM

Isn't a lot of that overspending a way to create slush funds for clandestine accounts? I guess the point is that if you itemized your budget, and put a big black X with a number attached to it, that would signal how much units like say, Seal Team Six gets in a given year. I would consider that classified information and the best way to hide that would be to pay $500 for a hammer, and $2,000 for a toilet seat.

Also, if there were terms limits for senator, then a lot of this crony stuff would stop. But I digress...

**iLLusioN** · 11-26-13, 05:58 AM

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Isn't a lot of that overspending a way to create slush funds for clandestine accounts? I guess the point is that if you itemized your budget, and put a big black X with a number attached to it, that would signal how much units like say, Seal Team Six gets in a given year. I would consider that classified information and the best way to hide that would be to pay $500 for a hammer, and $2,000 for a toilet seat.

Also, if there were terms limits for senator, then a lot of this crony stuff would stop. But I digress...

That is true...but most of the time that stuff gets slid into contract funds. You also have to remember that a shitload of that clandestine activity technically falls under intelligence which also has its own budget that is separate from the military. I agree on term limits. I don't think we'll ever see it since the people that have to enact that are the ones affected by it. Another thing that many don't realize is that almost anyone O-6 or above in the military is essentially a politician...so there's still a ton of good ole' boy and cronyism within the ranks as well.