The goal of balancing fiscal responsibility with efficiency when it comes to Defense spending has always been an important issue. In fact, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance has done extensive work on this matter and it is always encouraging to see other free-market organizations join in the effort to identify smart ways where money can be saved in defense spending, without jeopardizing important programs essential to national security. Last week, a joint report put together by NTU and the R Street Institute was released entitled “Defending America, Defending Taxpayers: How Pentagon Spending Can Better Reflect Conservative Values” which focuses on the number of ways that the Pentagon’s massive budget can be cut, saving nearly $1.9 trillion dollars with 100 specific cuts to reflect smart defense policy, while at the same time being beneficial to taxpayers noting that the, “‘universe’ of programs and processes in need of reform at the Pentagon is more than large enough to allow for compliance with so-called sequestration while maintaining the strongest and most capable military the world has ever known.” There are many recommendations that the report’s authors, Pete Sepp and Andrew Moylan, indentify and though they are all achievable it is not likely we will be able to see them all implemented, but what is important is that the report gives specific ways that the Pentagon can become more efficient, without deviating from their role as an agency vested with providing national security. Savings in the report include: $878.5 billion through 30 recommendations by overhauling deficient processes and management structures, including a reduction in DoD printing costs, consolidation of foreign language contracts, combining support services at joint bases, and a full audit of Pentagon finances; $618.6 billion through 20 recommendations with personnel, compensation, and benefit reforms ranging from less spending on military bands to capping the troop presence in Europe; from health care benefit restructuring to adjusting the "high-three" retirement formula; and $385.8 billion through 50 recommendations by eliminating wasteful, unnecessary, or low-priority weapons systems, such as the SM-3 Block II-B missile (eliminated in favor of less expensive options), the F-35 fighter (replaced with other jets), refurbishment of M-1 tanks (delayed), and the Virginia class submarine (reduced in procurement).
