<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How Did This Tank Get Cut From The Defense Bill??</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/38792/how-did-this-tank-get-cut-from-the-defense-bill/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/38792/how-did-this-tank-get-cut-from-the-defense-bill/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 12:02:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: donjo</title>
		<link>http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/38792/how-did-this-tank-get-cut-from-the-defense-bill/#comment-1288316</link>
		<dc:creator>donjo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Dec 2009 19:32:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=38792#comment-1288316</guid>
		<description>How it really works:

&quot;Dec. 18 2009 - 10:19 am

Defense Bill Raids Personnel Funds to Pay For Weapons

-snip-

In the defense bill, it usually works like this: Congress sticks in a few extra airplanes or ships as a handout to this or that member, usually in exchange for his vote somewhere else on some other issue. To pay for those earmarks, the favored targets for cutting are usually two parts of the defense bill: Personnel (i.e. military pay) and Operations and Maintenance (which includes such things as body armor, equipment, food, training, and fuel). Those of you who wondered over the years how it could be that soldiers in Iraq could somehow be left without body armor, well, here’s your explanation. They usually took the armor off those kids in order to pay off some congressman with an extra helicopter or two.

My old friend Winslow Wheeler, a former Senate aide who is now a well-known watchdog on defense spending, points out that this year is no different. There are over 1,700 earmarks in the defense bill that just passed, worth $4.2 billion, but those are

… just the earmarks they will admit to. Not counted in that tally are the 10 C-17s for $2.5 billion, nine F-18s for a half a billion dollars (in the war funding part of the bill), plus the added $465 million for the GE engine…

And where did the money to pay for all that come from? This is another annual trick. Usually if you add up all the earmarks, the total amount spent will roughly mirror the amount of the cuts in personnel and O&amp;M. Wheeler found the following:

$1.9 billion in gross reductions to the Military Personnel (pay) account based on the arbitrary justification that there was need for an “undistributed adjustment,” or in some cases “reimbursables.”
$2.1 billion in net reductions from the O&amp;M account in the base bill; $1.4 billion of that reduction was based on phony justifications (indirectly based on some flimsy GAO analysis never made public), such as “historic underexecution.” (If you want to review my analysis of this flimsy GAO analysis , see it at http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=4535.)
The House and Senate Appropriations Committees also raided the direct war fighting O&amp;M account in Title IX of the bill by $1.5 billion.
Total O&amp;M raids, thus, amount to $3.6 billion.
So, $3.6 billion in O&amp;M cuts added to $1.9 billion in personnel cuts = $5.5 billion.

And $4.2 billion in earmarks added to $3 billion for the F-18s and the C-17s, plus $465 million for the Joint Strike engines (which the administration claims it doesn’t want) = $7.66 billion.

It’s always amazed me that this stuff isn’t more of an issue with the right. We’re talking about robbing soldiers to pay defense executives. They pull this scam like clockwork every year and nobody ever says a word — weird stuff.

http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/12/....ay-for-weapons/  &quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How it really works:</p>
<p>&#8220;Dec. 18 2009 &#8211; 10:19 am</p>
<p>Defense Bill Raids Personnel Funds to Pay For Weapons</p>
<p>-snip-</p>
<p>In the defense bill, it usually works like this: Congress sticks in a few extra airplanes or ships as a handout to this or that member, usually in exchange for his vote somewhere else on some other issue. To pay for those earmarks, the favored targets for cutting are usually two parts of the defense bill: Personnel (i.e. military pay) and Operations and Maintenance (which includes such things as body armor, equipment, food, training, and fuel). Those of you who wondered over the years how it could be that soldiers in Iraq could somehow be left without body armor, well, here’s your explanation. They usually took the armor off those kids in order to pay off some congressman with an extra helicopter or two.</p>
<p>My old friend Winslow Wheeler, a former Senate aide who is now a well-known watchdog on defense spending, points out that this year is no different. There are over 1,700 earmarks in the defense bill that just passed, worth $4.2 billion, but those are</p>
<p>… just the earmarks they will admit to. Not counted in that tally are the 10 C-17s for $2.5 billion, nine F-18s for a half a billion dollars (in the war funding part of the bill), plus the added $465 million for the GE engine…</p>
<p>And where did the money to pay for all that come from? This is another annual trick. Usually if you add up all the earmarks, the total amount spent will roughly mirror the amount of the cuts in personnel and O&amp;M. Wheeler found the following:</p>
<p>$1.9 billion in gross reductions to the Military Personnel (pay) account based on the arbitrary justification that there was need for an “undistributed adjustment,” or in some cases “reimbursables.”<br />
$2.1 billion in net reductions from the O&amp;M account in the base bill; $1.4 billion of that reduction was based on phony justifications (indirectly based on some flimsy GAO analysis never made public), such as “historic underexecution.” (If you want to review my analysis of this flimsy GAO analysis , see it at <a href="http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=4535" rel="nofollow">http://www.cdi.org/friendlyversion/printversion.cfm?documentID=4535</a>.)<br />
The House and Senate Appropriations Committees also raided the direct war fighting O&amp;M account in Title IX of the bill by $1.5 billion.<br />
Total O&amp;M raids, thus, amount to $3.6 billion.<br />
So, $3.6 billion in O&amp;M cuts added to $1.9 billion in personnel cuts = $5.5 billion.</p>
<p>And $4.2 billion in earmarks added to $3 billion for the F-18s and the C-17s, plus $465 million for the Joint Strike engines (which the administration claims it doesn’t want) = $7.66 billion.</p>
<p>It’s always amazed me that this stuff isn’t more of an issue with the right. We’re talking about robbing soldiers to pay defense executives. They pull this scam like clockwork every year and nobody ever says a word — weird stuff.</p>
<p><a href="http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/12/....ay-for-weapons/" rel="nofollow">http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/12/&#8230;.ay-for-weapons/</a>  &#8220;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy</title>
		<link>http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/38792/how-did-this-tank-get-cut-from-the-defense-bill/#comment-1287829</link>
		<dc:creator>Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 02:35:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=38792#comment-1287829</guid>
		<description>Ahahahahaha!!  Good one, Ferd!

And excellent advice, too!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ahahahahaha!!  Good one, Ferd!</p>
<p>And excellent advice, too!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ferd Berfle</title>
		<link>http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/38792/how-did-this-tank-get-cut-from-the-defense-bill/#comment-1287818</link>
		<dc:creator>Ferd Berfle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 02:10:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=38792#comment-1287818</guid>
		<description>Well you know That One is holding out for a 50-foot armored unicorn. 

Beware of creeps bearing gifts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well you know That One is holding out for a 50-foot armored unicorn. </p>
<p>Beware of creeps bearing gifts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy</title>
		<link>http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/38792/how-did-this-tank-get-cut-from-the-defense-bill/#comment-1287817</link>
		<dc:creator>Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 02:09:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=38792#comment-1287817</guid>
		<description>Oh, my - unbelievable!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, my &#8211; unbelievable!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NomNomNom</title>
		<link>http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/38792/how-did-this-tank-get-cut-from-the-defense-bill/#comment-1287814</link>
		<dc:creator>NomNomNom</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 01:59:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=38792#comment-1287814</guid>
		<description>it was scaled back to the cyborg beetle drone:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/01/pentagons-cybor/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>it was scaled back to the cyborg beetle drone:<br />
<a href="http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/01/pentagons-cybor/" rel="nofollow">http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/01/pentagons-cybor/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy</title>
		<link>http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/38792/how-did-this-tank-get-cut-from-the-defense-bill/#comment-1287781</link>
		<dc:creator>Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:49:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=38792#comment-1287781</guid>
		<description>Gianni, you know, you&#039;re probably right!  

But ya gotta admit, that tank IS pretty cool!  :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gianni, you know, you&#8217;re probably right!  </p>
<p>But ya gotta admit, that tank IS pretty cool!  <img src='http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gianni</title>
		<link>http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/38792/how-did-this-tank-get-cut-from-the-defense-bill/#comment-1287771</link>
		<dc:creator>Gianni</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:06:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=38792#comment-1287771</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the laugh.  As wrongheaded as Obama and his cronies are and have been, it would not be surprising at all if they provided defense appropriations for something like this.  They are so out of step with the American public, nothing they do is surprising anymore.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the laugh.  As wrongheaded as Obama and his cronies are and have been, it would not be surprising at all if they provided defense appropriations for something like this.  They are so out of step with the American public, nothing they do is surprising anymore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

