SECRETARY OF HAGEL MEETS WITH TROOPS AT FORT BRAGG

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
Hagel Meets With Troops at Fort Bragg, Discusses Budget
By Claudette Roulo
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, July 15, 2013 - In an uncertain and dangerous world, American service members are helping to build a better future for all mankind, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said today during a town hall meeting at Fort Bragg, N.C.

"We are truly defining a future for our country and helping others define their futures around the world," Hagel told troops, civilians and family members at the event.

Service members do more than just put on a uniform, and civilians do more than just show up to work, the secretary said. Everyone connected to the Defense Department is part of something bigger than themselves -- bigger than even the nation, Hagel added.

"I think occasionally we all can drift a bit and define ourselves, define our work, and define our missions in a more narrow channel," the defense secretary said. "But we are helping build a new world, a better world, a fairer world, a freer world, [and] we can't do it alone."

The world looks to the United States not because it's bigger, better or prosperous, Hagel said, but because of what the nation represents.

"That's a heavy burden to carry," he said, one that can't be carried alone. Over the years, through many difficult lessons, the United States has learned =it must rely on partnerships and relationships to solve some of the world's biggest problems, Hagel said.

Tolerance, respect and dignity still anchor the human condition, the secretary said. "That's what we try to address every day and what we try to protect every day, and hopefully give people opportunities to live that kind of life."

This effort is not without its challenges, the defense secretary said.

The nation is unwinding from the longest war it has ever been in, but it still has responsibilities and commitments around the world, Hagel said. The question -- not for the first time in the nation's history -- is how to balance these competing needs with the department's more direct responsibilities for the nation's fiscal health, he said.

"This time is probably more dramatic for some of the reasons I've already mentioned, but also if these dramatic [defense spending] reductions continue on the course they're on through the current budget cap sequestration," Hagel said. "This is forcing us to take deeper, steeper, and more abrupt reductions than we've ever had to do."

Hagel said his role as defense secretary is to prepare the department for the future based on today's realities, and that includes the possibility that sequestration will continue. "I could not stand back as secretary of defense and try to lead this institution based on -- 'Well, I hope we'll get a change' [or] 'Well, I think maybe something will change,'" he said.

"You can't lead based on hope and thinking and maybes," the secretary continued. "You have a responsibility of leading ... with the reality of what's in front of you, and you do the best you can to repair your institution. In the end, that's the definition of each of our lives."

That reality forced the department to prioritize, Hagel said, adding that he had to make some difficult choices. And while budget isn't directing national security strategy, he said, it's an important part.

"You can have all the strategy you want," the defense secretary said, "but you better be able to assure the president of the United States, commander in-chief, and the people of this country and your families that, in fact, we can implement that strategy -- that, in fact, the president has the options when he calls [the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff] or me, and we call [commanders] and say, 'Can we do it? Do we have the capacity to do it?'"

One vehicle for addressing budget limitations, the recently announced force structure changes, is predicated on preserving combat power and readiness, Hagel said. The military's only responsibility is the defense of the nation, he added, and everything else has to fit within that framework.

"That's not always an easy assemblage of pieces to have to come together to assure that one responsibility, especially during a time of ... significant reductions in our budget," the defense secretary said. Preserving current readiness is coming at a cost to future readiness, "but I have to preserve as much as I can preserve with the resources I have," he said. If sequestration continues into fiscal year 2014, an additional $52 billion in cuts will occur across the department, Hagel added.

As he sought additional ways to protect readiness, furloughs for the Defense Department's civilian employees were the last thing he wanted to do, Hagel said, but he told the Fort Bragg audience he had no other options. Congress was unwilling to authorize the reprogramming of funds that would have prevented the need to furlough about 650,000 defense civilian employees, he explained.

"I could not take down that readiness line any further than where we were," he said. "We've essentially cut [and] frozen everything we can in order to maintain those numbers."

This may be the most difficult time to be serving the nation, Hagel said, "but we have no choice but to get through it, and we will get through it."

Though some of the services were in better fiscal shape than others going into the sequestration period, Hagel said, he was determined for the department to stay unified. "It's the whole point of the joint command," he said. "I couldn't as secretary of defense get into a situation where I was going to allow each service to make their own decisions on this. ... I thought that everybody had to come into this together and go out together.


"If [for] no other reason," he continued, "I did that because I just think it's the fair way to do it, as fair as you can be in this business."

When people are treated unfairly, the secretary said, it does damage to the institution.

"This is bigger than the Defense Department. It's people. We as individuals -- as human beings -- each want to be treated fairly, with some dignity and some respect," Hagel said. "And if you think you're not treated fairly, there will be a residue of a problem there. And I thought it would be a mistake for me to make a decision [to] allow each of the services to figure out, 'Well, I've got more money in my budget, and maybe he squandered his budget, and so therefore, I should be in a higher position because of my budget.'"

Hagel said a great deal of credit belongs to the service chiefs for maintaining departmental unity and not allowing budget constraints to drive the services into "tribal warfare."

Despite the department's efforts, the fiscal future remains uncertain, the defense secretary said. Following a departmentwide Strategic Choices and Management Review, Hagel said, the department has mapped out three options: the president's proposed budget for fiscal year 2014, full sequestration and some compromise in between.

"But I think it's fair to say if we're going to be living with an additional $52 billion cut, there [is] going to continue to be bad news with every aspect of our budget," the defense secretary said.

Though he doesn't yet know what Congress will do about the fiscal year 2014 budget request, Hagel said, he has a responsibility to work closely with the president, Congress and the people of the United States. "That's the way our Constitution is built, and we work best when we're working together," he added.

"We're going to work through this," the defense secretary said. "In the end, we are defining a new force structure, a new institution, not unlike after Vietnam, not unlike after every conflict, not unlike every sequence of the historic cycle of world affairs."

SEQUESTRATION AND 'PLAN B'

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
Hagel Details Defense 'Plan B' if Sequestration Continues
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, July 10, 2013 - If sequestration continues into fiscal year 2014, the Defense Department will be forced to consider involuntary reductions-in-force for the civilian workforce, draconian cuts to military personnel accounts and a virtual halt to military modernization, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said in a letter to Senate leaders today.

The senators had requested detailed information on how continued sequestration could affect the military.

In the letter, Hagel detailed the "Plan B" the department must confront if Congress does not pass legislation that averts sequestration in fiscal 2014. If the process continues, DOD will be forced to cut $52 billion more from the budget that year.

Hagel stressed in the letter that he fully supports President Barack Obama's fiscal 2014 budget request and noted that if sequestration remains in effect, "the size, readiness and technological superiority of our military will be reduced, placing at much greater risk the country's ability to meet our current national security commitments."

Congress gave DOD some flexibility to handle the cuts need for fiscal 2013, but more than 650,000 DOD civilians must still be furloughed without pay for 11 days. However, the cuts in 2014 are too great even for flexibility within accounts to handle.

DOD hopes to avoid furloughs in 2014, the defense secretary said, but if sequestration remains in effect, "DOD will have to consider involuntary reductions-in-force to reduce civilian personnel costs."

Readiness has already been diminished this year, Hagel said, and it will continue to decline if sequestration continues in 2014. Hiring freezes will also continue and facilities maintenance funds will further erode, he added.

If the sequestration mechanism is applied to military personnel funding, "DOD could accommodate the required reductions only by putting into place an extremely severe package of military personnel actions including halting all accessions, ending all permanent-change-of-station moves, stopping discretionary bonuses and freezing all promotions," Hagel wrote.

He called on Congress to work with the department to avoid sequestration in fiscal 2014 and to approve the president's defense budget request.

The president's budget request slows military pay raises and raises fees for some military retiree's health care. It also looks to retire older Air Force and Navy assets and calls for a new base realignment and closure program.

"If the cuts continue, the department will have to make sharp cuts with far-reaching consequences, including limiting combat power, reducing readiness and undermining the national security interests of the United States," Hagel said.

CHAIRMAN JOINT CHIEFS TELLS DOD LEADERSHIP TO MEET SEQUESTRATION CHALLENGES

FROM:  U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 
Dempsey Calls on DOD Leaders to Mitigate Sequester Effects
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, July 10, 2013 - Sequestration is causing problems in the Defense Department, but military and civilian employees are working together to get through this period, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said yesterday.

In a videotaped message to the department posted on his Facebook page, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey said that solid leadership at all levels is crucial to meeting the challenges sequestration imposes. Sequestration is set to add $500 billion in budget cuts to the department over 10 years on top of $487 billion in cuts already planned.

He spoke as furloughs kicked in for about 700,000 civilian DOD employees. About 85 percent of them are being furloughed one day a week through the end of the fiscal year, a total of 11 days.

"About 90 days ago, I sent a short video out to the field as the reality of sequestration came upon us - the day it was signed into law," he said. "I asked you at that time to help us lead our way through this period of uncertainty, and you have.

"I also want to come to you today because it's the day after some of our civilian teammates began furloughs, an outcome that I find both discouraging and disappointing. But again, I look around and I see that you are leading your way through this.

"My commitment to you is that we'll do the same here in the Pentagon," he continued.

Sequestration's effects are delayed, but they are starting to become apparent-- especially in readiness, Dempsey said.

"Those effects will deepen, and they will be difficult to overcome," the chairman said. "Once again though, it will take solid leadership and communications as we try to understand what we can accomplish and what we cannot."

Sequestration is illogical, but it is the law, Dempsey said, and the department will, of course, follow it. "We will do the best we can with it," he said. "We'll articulate the consequences and we'll work our way, hopefully, toward a better outcome."

FURLOUGHS AND DEFENSE

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Department Will Muscle Through Furlough Period

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, July 8, 2013 - As DOD enters the furlough period, the department will concentrate on the core mission of defending the United States and its interests, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said today.


"That's where our center of gravity is during this furlough period," Little said.

Because of sequestration, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel made the difficult decision to furlough about 85 percent of DOD civilian employees one day a week through the end of the fiscal year, a total of 11 days, the press secretary said. "My assumption is the vast majority of that population is on furlough at least one day this week," Little said.

Little estimated the action will save the department $1.8 billion by the end of September.

Some missions in the department will be impacted, he said. "We're very clear with our own staff that there will be some impact, and we expect other offices to have similar impacts," the press secretary said.

What happens in fiscal 2014 remains up in the air, Little said in response to a reporter's question about the possibility of future layoffs. "We're getting ahead of ourselves talking about layoffs at this stage," he said. "Right now we're in the furlough period and no decisions have been reached about what may happen going forward."

Much of what will happen depends on the government's ability to move beyond sequestration, Little said. "[Hagel] has been clear that he would like for there to be a deal on sequestration, so we can lift this burden off of all our employees in the department," Little said.

Sequestration "was an unfortunate mechanism designed to avoid unfortunate consequences. We're seeing some of those consequences already in regards to military training and readiness," the press secretary said.

"It's unfortunate we're in this period but we're going to muscle through it best we can," he added.

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL SAYS CONTRACTORS WILL BE HIT BY FURLOUGHS

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Contractors Will Share Burdens of Furloughs, Hagel Says
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 11, 2013 - The Defense Department is reviewing all of its contracts, and DOD contractors will share the burden of spending cuts, including the furloughs facing the department's civilian workforce, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told senators today.


Hagel testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee's defense Subcommittee this morning.

"Contractors are part of any institution," he said. "We need them -- certain skills, certain expertise."

DOD Comptroller Robert F. Hale, who accompanied Hagel, told the committee that about 700,000 defense contractors work throughout the department. And they are in for some changes, he added.

"The furlough process does include contractors," Hagel told the Senate panel. "It includes companies, it includes acquisitions, it includes contracts."

The department is taking a $37 billion sequestration spending cut in fiscal year 2013, which ends Sept. 30. "The majority of that is going to come out of contractors -- about $2 billion will come out of furloughs," Hale said. That means a drop in the number of contractors in the department.

"I don't know yet how much, because the year isn't over, but I think there will be a sharp drop," the comptroller said.

The senators asked about contractors because of newspaper reports about alleged National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden receiving a $200,000 annual salary. Contractors generally receive more in salary than DOD civilian employees, Hale said.

"Whether or not a contractor or a civilian is cheaper or better really depends on the circumstances," he explained. "There are some cases where we simply don't have the skills in the Department of Defense that we need, or it's a short-term job and it wouldn't make any sense to grow them."

If it is a long-term job, he added, it makes more sense to hire a civil servant.

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE HAGEL SAYS BUDGET CALLS FOR MORE BASE CLOSINGS

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Hagel Details Budget Request, Calls for More Base Closures
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, June 11, 2013 - Sequestration and the need for another base closure and realignment commission headlined Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel's testimony before the Senate Appropriations Committee's defense subcommittee today.


Hagel and Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, defended the president's request for $526.6 billion for the Defense Department's fiscal year 2014 budget and an additional $79.4 billion for overseas contingency operations.

"This budget enables the department to support troops still at war in Afghanistan, protect readiness, modernize the military's aging weapons inventory in keeping with the president's strategic guidance and sustain the high quality of the all-volunteer force," Hagel said. "This budget also continues the department's approach of the last couple of years of targeting growing costs in areas of support, overhead, acquisition and pay and benefits."

But the specter of sequestration hangs over this budget. DOD is absorbing $37 billion in fiscal 2013 spending cuts, which has necessitated furloughs of 700,000 civilian employees for up to 11 days.

DOD also has cut facilities maintenance, instituted hiring freezes, cut overhead and reduced important, but lower-priority, programs, the secretary told the senators, noting that the department has submitted a request to Congress to allow Pentagon officials to shift $9.6 billion in funding.

"We ask this subcommittee's assistance in providing rapid review and approval of this critical reprogramming request," Hagel said.

The spending cuts have forced the services to reduce training and maintenance of nondeployed operating forces, Hagel said.

"The Army has stopped rotations at its key combat training centers for all but deploying units, more than a dozen combat coded Air Force squadrons either already have or will soon stop flying and the Navy has curtailed deployments," the secretary said.

The fiscal 2014 budget request is based on $487 billion in spending reductions over 10 years mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011 -- it does not include the effects of sequestration, Hagel told the panel, and if sequestration continues, it will mean a further $500 billion on top of the already agreed-to cuts.

"The president's [fiscal] 2014 budget replaces sequestration and gives the department the time and flexibility to plan and implement spending reductions wisely and responsibly," he said.

Under this request, Hagel added, DOD has identified $34 billion in new savings, including weapons program restructuring and terminations that achieve $8.2 billion in savings, slowdowns in military construction, and reductions in other programs.

The budget request's military compensation package "preserves DOD's world-class pay and benefits while putting our military on a more sustainable path for the future," Hagel said. "It includes changes to the TRICARE program to bring the beneficiary's cost share closer to the levels envisioned when the program was implemented."

Hagel called on the committee to support DOD's need to eliminate excess infrastructure. The budget request calls for one base realignment and closure round in 2015.

"BRAC is an imperfect process, and there are up-front costs, but in the long term, there are significant savings," the secretary said. He noted that previous BRAC rounds now save $12 billion a year.

"Although there are clearly opportunities to achieve significant savings by improving efficiency, consolidations and reducing overhead, the scale of the current spending reductions will also require cuts and changes to military operations," he said.

The budget request isn't all about cuts, Hagel noted. The defense strategic guidance issued in 2012 identified areas that must be increased. These include implementing the military rebalance to the Asia-Pacific region, maintaining America's nuclear stockpile, increasing cyber capabilities and sustaining the growth of special operations forces.

"Finally, this budget seeks to preserve a combat-ready force and sustain the high-quality all-volunteer force," he said.

The budget is the best effort to inject some certainty into the fiscal environment, Hagel told the Senate panel, noting that changes in top-line spending would require changes to the budget plan.

"Consequently, I directed a strategic choices and management review in order to assess the potential impact of further reductions and plan for those continued reductions," the secretary said.

Hagel assured the senators that the Defense Department will continue to find new ways to operate more affordably, efficiently and effectively.

"However, as I've stated, continued cuts on the scale and timeline of sequestration will require significant reductions in core military capabilities and the scope of our activities around the world," he said.

Hard choices remain, the secretary said, and continued partnership with Congress is essential.

"In the past, many modest reforms to personnel and benefits, along with efforts to reduce infrastructure and restructure acquisition programs, were met with fierce political resistance and not implemented," Hagel said. "We are now in a different fiscal environment. New realities are forcing us to more fully confront these tough and painful choices, and to make the reforms necessary to put this department on a path to sustain our military strength for the 21st century and meet new and complicated threats."

PENTAGON ACQUISITION OFFICIAL SAYS SEQUESTRATION LIKELY TO CONTINUE NEXT YEAR

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Kendall: Sequestration Likely to Continue into 2014
By Nick Simeone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, June 3, 2013 - Sequestration spending cuts could continue into 2014, and the impact of the deep cuts will fall disproportionately on small business, the Pentagon's top acquisition official told a Navy industry forum today.

"It's a reasonable possibility that we will go into 2014 with sequestration still underway," said Frank Kendall, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics. "A lot of things we planned on doing we won't be able to do."

Last month, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel told Defense Department employees he could not guarantee that the budget situation would ease next year.

Kendall's comments to the 2013 Navy Opportunity Forum in Arlington, Va., come three months into a budget sequester that is taking $41 billion out of the Pentagon budget this fiscal year, leading to cuts across the military in everything from operations and deployments to training and readiness. Furloughs are set to begin in July for about 85 percent of the Defense Department's 767,000 civilian employees.

In the sequestration environment, Kendall said, the department needs to be more proactive in taking care of the small businesses that contract with the military.

"The cuts we are going to experience potentially will fall on small businesses," more than on large military contractors, he said, adding that cuts in research and development worry him as well. "Potential adversaries are modernizing at a rate which makes me nervous," he told the group, which included representatives of companies that produce advanced technologies funded by Navy programs.

Kendall said the department is about to conclude its strategic choices and management review, which Hagel ordered to provide department leaders with options given the current budget environment as well as the prospect of future spending cuts.

"What would we have to do at the department if we had to take $50 billion a year out over the long term? That would be pretty devastating," Kendall said, mentioning one such scenario being considered by the review.

DEFENSE COMPTROLLER TELLS SENATE THAT BUDGET CUTS ARE "DEVASTATING"

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Hale: Sequestration Devastates U.S. Military Readiness
By Cheryl Pellerin
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, May 10, 2013 - During a Senate hearing yesterday on President Barack Obama's $9.5 billion military construction budget request for fiscal year 2014, Defense Department Comptroller Robert F. Hale said the severe and abrupt budget cuts imposed by sequestration are devastating the U.S. armed forces.

Hale and John Conger, acting deputy undersecretary of defense for installations and environment, testified on military construction and family housing before the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on military construction, veterans affairs and related agencies.

The officials described for the panel the impact of sequestration on military construction, facilities sustainment and restoration, and on the services in the current year.

"While sequestration and related problems do not affect most military construction projects, they are devastating military readiness," Hale told the senators, adding, "I just can't believe what we're doing to the military right now."

Summarizing the defense budget as a whole, Hale said, "We're requesting $526.6 billion in discretionary budget authority. It's about the same as our 2013 request but about 8 percent higher than we're executing right now in 2013 under sequestration."

Beyond 2014, he said, "If we're able to carry out the president's plan, we anticipate increases of about 2 percent a year, roughly enough to keep up with inflation."

The overall budget request represents the amount the president and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel believe is needed to support national security interests in a time of very complex challenges, Hale noted.

"Our request does not take into account a possible $52 billion reduction if sequester becomes an annual event," the comptroller said, "but the president has submitted a budget with a balanced deficit reduction plan of $1.8 trillion over 10 years -- more than enough to meet the targets of the Budget Control Act."

Hale added, "We strongly hope that Congress will pass this plan or another plan that the president will sign, and then repeal sequestration."

For fiscal 2014 the department is seeking $9.5 billion for military construction, an amount that's roughly equal to the president's request of $9.6 billion in fiscal 2013, and $11 billion for family housing, he said.

On the military construction side, DOD is seeking $3.3 billion for operational training facilities, as well as $0.9 billion for modernizing medical facilities, 17 dependent school projects and many others; and $1.5 billion for the family-housing program to provide quality, affordable housing for military families.

In terms of sequestration's effects on military construction, the comptroller said, most accounts won't experience sequester-related cuts in 2013 because of special crediting provisions in the current law that apply when Congress enacts major cuts in an appropriation.

"The law says, 'Cuts are big enough, there's no further sequestration,' Hale explained.

But facilities sustainment and restoration and modernization projects already have been cut severely in fiscal 2013, Hale said, adding, "We're essentially down to pretty much safety-of-life and -property projects for the rest of the year."

In his remarks to the panel, Conger underscored the negative effects of sequestration on facilities' sustainment and restoration accounts.

Because operation and maintenance dollars are more discretionary and thus more flexible, he said, facilities' sustainment was cut more deeply to make up the difference.

"In FY '13 we are deferring all but the most critical repairs. We're deferring routine maintenance. We're holding off on major purchases and accepting risk by looking for building equipment to hold out longer," the deputy undersecretary added.

Frankly, he said, "we can accommodate this for a short period of time but facilities will break if we short-change these accounts for multiple years. Building systems will begin to fail. The cost to repair broken systems is much higher than that to maintain them, just like changing the oil in your car" prevents expensive auto repairs or system failures.

Keep in mind, he added, "that this 'car' is actually a real-property portfolio of more than 500,000 facilities and a plant-replacement value of more than $800 billion. If we don't invest in keeping it up, it will deteriorate and we will end up with a steady increase in failing or unusable facilities."

Hale said the department is still researching specific impacts of sequestration on military construction, but for those that so far are affected, "mainly Navy and defense-wide, we believe we can absorb most of the sequestration reductions with available ... savings. We don't intend to reduce the scope of any construction projects. At least [right] now we don't believe that will be necessary."

The department also plans to minimize the number of projects deferred or cancelled as a result of sequestration, Hale told the panel, but "we will have to do a larger-than-normal number of reprogrammings, which will add to our work load and also to yours."

The proposed DOD base budget was built on several guiding principles, Hale said, in particular the need to continue to serve as good stewards of taxpayer dollars.

In that effort, he added, proposed initiatives range from health care and energy efficiency to weapon terminations, and include a new round of base realignment and closure, called BRAC.

"To cut long-term costs we need to consolidate infrastructure and reduce it. The only effective way to do that is for Congress to authorize a new round of base realignment and closure, so we asked for a round in 2015," the comptroller said.

"BRAC does save money ... We're saving $12 billion a year from the past BRAC rounds," he said, adding, "I hate to think what I'd be doing right now as comptroller of the Department of Defense if, especially in this environment, I had to find another $12 billion of savings in the fiscal '14 budget."

The department needs congressional support, Hale said, "so we can make further cuts in infrastructure in 2015 and hold down the dollars the American taxpayers have to give us to meet their national security needs."

In addition to being good stewards of public funds, he added, "We ... are seeking to strengthen our alignment to the president's defense strategy that was announced last year. We also seek a ready force and try to put emphasis on people. But frankly, sequestration is seriously undermining both of those goals."

FARM PAYMENTS ARE COMMING IN SPITE OF SEQUESTRATION

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

USDA Announces Farm Payments Scheduled to Resume
MILC, SURE, and NAP will restart on May 8
WASHINGTON, May 8, 2013 — The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) Administrator Juan M. Garcia announced today that farm payments, which had been temporarily suspended due to sequestration, are scheduled to resume today, May 8. This includes payments for the 2011 Supplemental Revenue Assistance Payments Program (SURE), the Noninsured Crop Assistance Program (NAP) and the Milk Income Loss Contract Program (MILC).


"I’m pleased to announce that farmers and ranchers can expect to begin receiving their payments beginning today, May 8," said Garcia. "We appreciate the producers’ patience during the delay. We’re working diligently to get these payments out as quickly as possible."


On March 4, 2013, FSA began a temporary suspension of FSA program payments in order to assess the impact of sequestration and determine the least-disruptive process possible for carrying out required cuts. The Department will use the Secretary’s limited authority to transfer funds to avoid reducing these program payments.


Producers should be advised that program sign-up periods currently underway have the following enrollment deadlines: 2013 Average Crop Revenue Election (ACRE) Program – June 3rd; 2011 SURE – June 7; and the 2013 Direct and Counter-Cyclical Program – August 2nd. Producers should contact their local Farm Service Agency office as soon as possible for appointments to enroll in these programs before the deadlines.


USDA has made a concerted effort to deliver results for the American people, even as USDA implements sequestration – the across-the-board budget reductions mandated under terms of the Budget Control Act. USDA has already undertaken historic efforts since 2009 to save more than $828 million in taxpayer funds through targeted, common-sense budget reductions. These reductions have put USDA in a better position to carry out its mission, while implementing sequester budget reductions in a fair manner that causes as little disruption as possible.

DOD RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND BUDGET UNCERTAINTY

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Research, Engineering Team Adjusts to Fiscal Uncertainty
By Amaani Lyle
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 19, 2013 - Defense Department scientists and researchers will adjust to fiscal uncertainty by scrapping duplicative research and increasing prototyping, a senior Pentagon official told Congress yesterday.

Alan R. Shaffer, acting assistant secretary of defense for research and engineering, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that DOD plans to consolidate programs and develop new capabilities by keeping design teams on tap during equipment purchase lulls.

"[Scientists and researchers] will be doing prototyping in things like very advanced electronic warfare systems and ... cyber capabilities," Shaffer said. "It's where we have to address new and emerging capabilities."

About $45 million allocated for the applied technology program in the Pentagon's fiscal year 2014 budget request is not a new set of money, Shaffer said. Rather, he told the senators, it derives from a consolidation of programs such as cyber, communications, electronic warfare and materiel.

"I took five or six of my old programs and collapsed them into a single program element to be able to fund good ideas competitively across the department in the cross-cutting areas that everybody has [science and technology] programs in," he explained.

Shaffer said Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Frank Kendall has asked him and his team to reassess late-development prototyping and demonstration.
When considering advanced technology, the real "secret sauce" is design team engineers who will create the new trades and possibilities, he added.

"So we will do some prototyping to make sure that we keep the national intellectual capital viable for when we need the next set of systems," Shaffer said. "It's a new way of thinking about how we're going to get more 'bang for the buck' by funding ... internally, competitively proposed projects in those certain cross-cutting areas."

THE NATIONAL GUARD AND THE SEQUESTRATION AFFECT

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Possible Furloughs Could Affect Guard Members Nationwide
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Jim Greenhill
National Guard Bureau


ARLINGTON, Va., Feb. 21, 2013 - National Guard members nationwide -- especially military technicians -- could be affected by the Defense Department's furlough without pay of civilian employees that could begin in late April unless Congress overrides a "sequestration" provision in budget law that would mandate deep spending cuts beginning March 1.

Many of the Defense Department's 800,000 civilian employees perform critical functions such as maintenance, intelligence, logistics, contracting and health care. Officials have expressed concern that furloughs would substantially harm the Defense Department's ability to reset and restore the force's full-spectrum combat capability after more than a decade of hard fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The unpaid furloughs likely would be one day per week for the last 22 weeks of the fiscal year, from late April through September -- effectively a 20 percent pay cut for Defense Department civilians that would yield an expected $5 billion in spending reduction.

More than half of the National Guard's full-time members may be furloughed, resulting in maintenance backlogs for all states and curtailment of critical training, especially aviation crew training, that potentially cripples one of the essential 10 capabilities that governors and first responders rely upon in disaster situations, National Guard officials said.

Readiness of nearly 13,000 National Guard soldiers and airmen who mitigate the effects of chemical, biological and nuclear terrorist attacks or industrial accidents in the United States would see exercises and training either delayed or canceled by reductions in operations and maintenance funding, officials said.

The furlough is just one of the potential impacts of a looming sequestration deadline now less than 10 days away, and officials also have expressed concern over the prospect of the government operating under a yearlong continuing resolution in lieu of a budget.

"In the event of sequestration, we will do everything we can to be able to continue to perform our core mission of providing for the security of the United States, but there is no mistaking that the rigid nature of the cuts forced upon this department, and their scale, will result in a serious erosion of readiness across the force," Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said in a message to the Defense Department workforce yesterday.

Army Gen. Frank J. Grass, the chief of the National Guard Bureau and a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has called sequestration potentially "devastating" to the Defense Department and the National Guard.

"The greatest threat the National Guard faces today is continued uncertainty over the budget and the risk of even greater sequestration cuts," Grass said. "Sequestration would have a devastating impact on our readiness, modernization and workforce."

The National Guard is the only part of the Army and Air Force in which soldiers and airmen would be directly affected. In addition to civilian furloughs, Army and Air National Guard military technicians could be furloughed, temporary technicians could be terminated, and vacant positions could be frozen.

"We face the potential furlough of civilians and military technicians who provide day-to-day maintenance and training of soldiers and airmen in the states and territories," Grass said. "One potential readiness impact is a decrease in response time and capabilities to respond to fires, floods and defense support of civil authorities events in the homeland.

"On the Army National Guard side, we face the prospect of a rapid return to year-2000 readiness levels, consistent with a time when the National Guard was postured as a strategic reserve," Grass continued. "This would be a giant step backward to pre-Sept. 11, 2001, readiness levels at a time of global uncertainty."

Defense officials also have warned of potential second- and third-order effects and unintended consequences from sequestration.

"The National Guard has installations, wings and armories in more than 3,000 communities in every state and territory and the District of Columbia," Grass said. "Potential furloughs and cuts will gravely impact local economies."

Other immediate potential effects on the National Guard include:

-- Decreased equipment and personnel readiness as the 2013 flood, wildfire and hurricane seasons begin. One example: Army leaders have indicated equipment redeployed to the states from the warfight will be returned without depot-level repairs.

-- An almost 80 percent reduction in planned National Guard rotary-wing flying support to Customs and Border Protection for Southwest border security.

-- A halt in flying training hours -- and a corresponding steep decline in readiness -- in the Air National Guard in the next few weeks to sustain essential missions such as aerospace control alert.

-- Reduced maintenance of Army National Guard wheeled and tracked vehicles.

-- Overall decrease in aviation readiness for domestic emergencies.

-- Cancellation of 115,000 medical or dental exams that could render 39 percent of the Army National Guard medically unable to deploy over the coming months.

Longer-term effects anticipated by National Guard leaders include declining retention rates because of decreased training and deployment opportunities, declining equipment, and little or no opportunity for career progression.

"My highest priority is that we in the National Guard leadership do everything in our power to minimize the impact of this on our most important asset, our people," Grass said.

"A strong National Guard comes from a strong and ready active component," he added. "We have the opportunity to leverage and maintain this operational reserve and apply it more broadly to serve our national defense strategy. The value of the National Guard is well-documented."

But regardless of fiscal constraints, Grass said, the National Guard will continue to meet emerging challenges and safeguard the nation and its communities.

U.S. DEFENSE DEPARTMENT SAYS SEQUESTRATION FURLOUGHS BEGIN IN APRIL

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
If Sequestration Triggers, Furloughs Begin in Late April
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Feb. 20, 2013 - If sequestration is triggered next week, unpaid furloughs for civilian Defense Department employees will start in late April, Pentagon officials said here today.

Sequestration is a provision in budget law that will trigger major across-the-board spending cuts March 1 unless Congress agrees on an alternative.

DOD Comptroller Robert F. Hale told reporters at a Pentagon news conference that if sequestration happens, the department will cut virtually every program and investment, and that almost all civilian employees will feel the pain.

Jessica L. Wright, the acting undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness, said that sequestration and the continuing resolution -- a temporary funding measure for the federal government that's set to expire March 27 -- also will have a devastating on military personnel.

"But on our civilians, it will be catastrophic," she added.

"Everything is going to be affected, should sequestration go in effect," Wright said. "That's a guarantee. I think that everybody will be impacted by this action. And I think it's incumbent upon us to try to ease that where we can."

The department already has taken actions to alleviate some of the pressures. DOD has slowed spending, instituted a hiring freeze, ordered layoffs for temporary and term employees and cut back base operations and maintenance.

If sequestration hits, this pain will seem minor by comparison. Operations and maintenance funding is the only way to provide the $47 billion in required cuts for the remainder of the fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30.

Within a year, two-thirds of the Army combat brigade teams will be at unacceptable levels of readiness, Hale said. Most Air Force units not deployed will be at an unsatisfactory readiness level by the end of the year. Navy and Marine Corps readiness also suffer, Hale said.

The process of furloughing civilians began today, with Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta sending notification to Congress. "That starts a 45-day clock ticking, and until that clock has run out, we cannot proceed with furloughs," Hale explained.

If sequester happens, each employee will be notified. "That starts a 30-day clock -- waiting period -- before we can take any action," the comptroller said. "The bottom line is furloughs would not actually start for DOD employees until late April, and we certainly hope that ... in the interim, Congress will act to de-trigger sequestration."

The vast majority of DOD's almost 800,000 civilian employees will be furloughed, Wright said. DOD civilians in a war zone and political appointees who are confirmed by the Senate will not be furloughed. Nonappropriated fund employees and local national employees will not be affected.

Limited exceptions will be made for the purposes of safety of life and health, Wright said, such as firefighters and police. And if a military hospital has only one neonatal nurse, for example, that person could be exempted, she added.

While military personnel accounts are exempt from sequestration, there will be second- and third-order effects, Wright said. For example, hours at exchanges and commissaries could be affected, and family programs could be reduced or cut. It is unclear at this point how DOD Education Activity schools will be affected.

The spending cuts will affect military health care, as some 40 percent of the personnel working in the system are civilians. Elective surgeries could be delayed or eliminated, and costs cannot be shifted to the TRICARE military health plan, because that program also will be hit by cuts.

Affected employees would be furloughed for 22 discontinuous days -- 176 hours -- between implementation and the end of fiscal 2013, with no more than 16 furlough hours per pay period.

Fiscal 2013 is just the beginning of a decade of budgetary problems, Hale said.

"The Budget Control Act actually requires that the caps on discretionary funding beyond fiscal '13 be lowered for defense by $50 billion to $55 billion a year," he said. "If those come to pass, then we will have to look at a new defense strategy. That would be the first thing that we'd do."

The new strategy would accept more risk and also be based on having a smaller military.

For now, officials "devoutly would wish for some budget stability right now," Hale said. "And I think it would benefit the department and the nation."

U.S. MILITARY WARNS SEQUESTRATION COULD DELAY AFGHANISTAN REDEPLOYMENT

Photo Credit:  U.S. Army.

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Sequestration Could Delay Redeployment for Soldiers in Afghanistan
By C. Todd Lopez
Army News Service

WASHINGTON, Feb. 15, 2013 - The lack of an appropriations bill coupled with sequestration could eventually cause soldiers to be delayed in their redeployment home from Afghanistan, the Army's top officer said.

Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno, speaking today at the Brookings Institution here, explained that replacement forces to Afghanistan in 2014 could be affected by a shortage of training dollars and be forced to delay their deployment.

Sequestration will mean an additional $500 billion in defense cuts, and shifting funding for improvised-explosive-device detection and electronic warfare equipment from overseas contingency operations budgets to service operations and maintenance budgets will mean an additional $100 billion in cuts.

"Today, in my opinion, the greatest threat to our national security is the fiscal uncertainty resulting from the lack of predictability in the budget cycles," Odierno said. "Our country's inability to put its fiscal house in order compromises the future of the joint force, the Army, and ultimately will impact our ability to provide security to our nation."

The U.S. military is looking now at a possible $1.3 trillion in defense cuts overall, Odierno said. Compounding cuts to defense budgets is the lack of a confirmed budget for the services -- the military is operating now on a "continuing resolution," which is how Congress funds the government if it has not passed an appropriations bill. A continuing resolution makes military planning difficult.

Right now, Odierno said, the continuing resolution has created a "mismatch of funds" that doesn't leave enough in the operations and maintenance accounts. There's a $6 billion shortfall there compared to what the Army needs, and sequestration will add another $5.4 billion to that shortfall.

Operations and maintenance funding allows the Army to train, so a shortfall in those funds means that fewer soldiers will be able to train for Iraq and Afghanistan.

"We're funding, totally, Afghanistan. We're going to fund, totally, Korea, and sustain the readiness level in Korea," Odierno said. "What that means is the rest of the forces that are now back in the United States will not be able to train. They will be able to do very small-level, squad-level training. They will not be able to do platoon-level, company-level, battalion-level training back at their installations. They will not be able to go out to combat training centers, which is what provides them the final readiness certification at the battalion and brigade level."

The general said the forces that are slated next to go to Afghanistan are going to be ready to go, insofar as training and equipping is concerned.

"What my concern is, the ones who come after them, they will now be behind," he said.

What that means for the forces in Afghanistan in 2014 is that they might have to wait to redeploy while the follow-on forces are readied for their deployment.

Earlier this week Odierno told Congress as much, saying he offered two options to lawmakers on how to keep forces in Afghanistan.

"If I can't make them up quickly, I then have to send forces that aren't ready, or I have to extend forces that are already there," he said. "That'll be a decision I have to make as we get closer. We will continue to try to divert money so we do not have to extend people in Afghanistan."

The Army's share of defense cuts could mean the loss of civilian employees at Army depots where war-ravaged combat equipment is "reset" and made serviceable again for soldier training and deployment to combat zones.

Odierno said looming budget cuts will mean smaller depots and a drop in the civilian workforce. That translates directly into a backlog of equipment to be reset -- including the equipment that still needs to be reset from Iraq, and equipment coming out of Afghanistan right now.

The general said that due to those backlogs, it's expected that delivery of that reset equipment could be delayed by two to three years -- with some being delivered as late as 2016.

Unfortunately, not having that critical combat equipment available -- tanks and helicopters and infantry fighting vehicles, for instance -- means that soldiers who need to train on it won't be able to train. Additionally, that equipment won't be ready for deployment if the Army is called upon to fight again.

"We have not predicted very well when we will use forces," Odierno said. "When the [Berlin] Wall came down in Europe, people said, 'This is it, we don't need [the Army] anymore.' But then a year later, we are deploying to the deserts of Kuwait. Then we went into Somalia. Then somewhere in there we had Panama, and 'Just Cause.'

"You just don't know," he continued. "It is our responsibility to be prepared, that if the President decides he needs to use the military, that we are ready and prepared. And I am concerned whether we will be able to do that or not as we move to the future over the next couple of years."

Right now, Odierno said, the Army has a "fairly high level of readiness." But that will change soon, for both soldier readiness and equipment readiness. When the time comes, unexpectedly, for soldiers to deploy, he said, emergency funding will not be enough to provide soldiers the readiness they need to fight successfully.

"It slowly degrades," Odierno said of military readiness. "So over the next six or seven months, if you are not taking care of your equipment, if you are not training, you degrade that readiness. And you can't just recover that readiness by money -- it takes time."

Paying for people -- soldiers -- takes up about 48 percent of the Army's budget. Cuts to the budget means a reduction in the number of soldiers the Army will have in its ranks.

The Army already is reducing the number of soldiers in its ranks by about 88,000. Sequestration could bring the loss of an additional 100,000 soldiers across the active force and the reserve components, Odierno said. In all, about 190,000 soldiers will have to be cut -- though the general believes it will be more than that.

"My guess, in the end, it'll be over 200,000 soldiers we will have to take out of the active duty, Army National Guard, and U.S. Army Reserve," he said.

That cut will mean a loss of force structure, he said. It will cost the Army a 40-percent reduction in brigade combat teams, when it's all done.

A smaller Army means a loss of ability to influence and deter conflict, the general said.

If the Army gets too small, "you lose your ability to deter conflict," Odierno said.

"My concern is -- you have people who miscalculate," he said. "Almost every great war we've been into, or great regional conflict, has been based on a huge miscalculation by somebody. And what I worry about is we will cause people to miscalculate, which will then cause us to have to get involved."

Odierno said that without sequestration, the Army may drop below 490,000 soldiers -- something he said is doable, if managed correctly to avoid loss of skill and capability. If sequestration does happen, he said, he is concerned about not dropping below a specific number -- one he didn't say -- to avoid losing the ability to deter conflict, and to ensure the Army has the capability to do the things the President asks the Army to do.

That number, he said, might be smaller than 490,000.

"But some of the numbers I hear are too small. I do worry that the capability will be much less than we need," Odierno said. "I think there is a certain level of capability that I need to have, that I would propose to the President and the chairmen and others that we have to have in order to sustain our capabilities in order to respond globally."

Cutting the force that deep, Odierno said, will have to be done carefully and across all components of the Army. A proper balance must be made, he said, to preserve the unique capabilities that each component brings to the fight. In particular, he added, the active component maintains a higher level of readiness, while the reserve component brings a more diverse mix of experience and capability to the table.

Odierno said he doesn't want to force soldiers out of the service -- but at some point, some of that might happen.

For the first set of cuts, he said, done over a five-year period, it'll be mostly attrition.

"There will have to be some other methods," he said. "But it will be mostly -- about 75-80 percent by attrition."

Additional budget cuts, he said, would probably "increase the amount [of soldiers] we put out each year, but I would still like to leave it at a level where I can control it.

"If we can control it," he continued, "we keep the people we want to keep, we are able to help the people transitioning to a better transition -- and that enables us to keep the level of readiness we need to respond."

Odierno said his goal is to do the "large majority" of force cuts by attrition. But personnel boards that make other cuts might have to come into the mix at some point.

"There will have to be some boards that we conduct that we maybe ask people to retire earlier than they might want," he said. "And there might be some boards that tell us we need some officers and some senior noncommissioned officers to leave. But we will try to minimize that as much as we can."

PANETTA AND DEMPSEY WARN OF SEQUESTRATION CONSEQUENCES

DOD photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Chad J. McNeeley

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Dempsey, Panetta List Consequences of Sequestration
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Feb. 7, 2013 - Deep, across-the-board spending cuts scheduled to take effect March 1 will have real national security consequences, the Defense Department's top civilian and its senior military official said yesterday.

In a meeting with reporters, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta and Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, addressed the looming crisis. The cuts -- known as "sequestration" -- will take place unless Congress acts to override the provision built into budget law that would mean cutting $52 billion from the defense budget by Sept. 30.

"This is not something that should be done as a way to blame the other party for what happens," Panetta said. "This is going to hurt the United States and hurt our defense."

The mere threat of sequestration already is affecting operations. The Defense Department postponed the deployment of the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman and cruiser USS Gettysburg because of budget considerations.

"This won't be the last adjustment we will make to our global presence," Dempsey said. "It is our first, because the deployment is imminent." With the action, the department is trying to preserve readiness as long as possible, he explained.

"We're trying to stretch our readiness out by keeping this particular carrier in homeport in our global response force, so if something happens elsewhere in the world, we can respond to it," the chairman said. "Had we deployed it and 'consumed' that readiness, we could have created a situation where downstream we wouldn't have a carrier present in certain parts of the world at all."

The USS Truman was to have deployed to the Persian Gulf -- an area where the U.S. Navy has maintained two carrier battle groups. One carrier group will remain, "and we also have other options to augment our capabilities in the region," Dempsey said.

"But make no mistake about it," he added, "this is the first adjustment of what will be a series of adjustments across the services as we try to preserve our readiness for as long as possible."

Cancelling the deployment does change the equation in the Middle East, Dempsey told reporters.

"When you have carrier-based aircraft, you have complete autonomy and control over when you use them," he said. "When you use land-based aircraft, you often have to have host-nation permission to use them. So the increased risk is not in the number or type of capabilities -- it's in how responsive they can be with the autonomy that we might desire.

"Would I prefer to have two carriers in the Gulf, given the tension with Iran? Sure I would," the general continued. "But this allows us to meet the requirements in the Gulf and manage the risk and preserve readiness."

Concerns about readiness span all services. Dempsey said the department will spend all it takes to ensure the forces deployed or getting ready to deploy will have all they need.

"It's actually the time after [the next deployment] where it really gets difficult," he said. "We don't want to get into the position where we have to extend deployments or deploy someone who is not ready to deploy. We're not anywhere near there, but the near-term actions we are taking are intended to preserve and stretch readiness as long as possible so we don't face that eventuality."

The changes being made now also enable the department to reverse them if sequestration doesn't happen and the Defense Department gets a full appropriation, Panetta noted.

Dempsey said the military needs budget certainty, noting that the budget process has been laced with uncertainty for the past two years.

"We need time," he said. "Given 10 years to spread reductions, we can manage it. When you have to absorb ... $52 billion [in spending cuts] over six months, that's not enough time -- which is why you raid the accounts that are most vulnerable: the readiness accounts."

The budget process also needs flexibility, Dempsey said.

"We have to have the ability ... to reach into every part of the budget," he explained, "so no one part of the budget is overburdened or else the force gets out of balance."

AIR FORCE LEADERS COMPLAIN OF BUDGET PROCESSS

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Air Force Leaders Call for End to 'Budget Gymnastics'

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, Jan. 11, 2013 - The government's "ongoing budget gymnastics" are having an effect on service members, Air Force Secretary Michael B. Donley said here today.

Donley and Gen. Mark A. Welsh III, the Air Force chief of staff, said the looming "fiscal cliff" as well as conducting government business under repeated continuing budget resolutions create an atmosphere of unease among Air Force military and civilian personnel.

"Failure to enact a settled budget leads to repeated budget iterations, which, along with the overhanging threat of large and largely arbitrary cuts, creates wasteful churn," Donley said during a Pentagon news conference.

This churn could lead to many airmen voting with their feet and leaving the service, he said. "They see and understand what's going on in Washington," he added. "They're very well-connected. They're the most educated force we have ever had. And they stay connected to what's going on in our Air Force and what's going on in our military [and] what's happening in Washington. ... They are watching this and ... making their own judgments about the process."

The secretary said it is extremely inefficient and disruptive to operate a "$100-plus billion enterprise, which is the United States Air Force, on a budget a month or two at a time."

Welsh said that although re-enlistment remains solid for the service, the burden of deploying time and again since 1990 and working to keep "antique" aircraft such as the B-52 flying is wearing on airmen.

"They're not begging to get out the door," the general said. "Our retention rates are great. They're still proud of who they are and what they do. They express it every single day. But they want to know what's coming."

He said he has been working to keep airmen informed. "They're phenomenally engaged, and so we're trying very hard to keep them informed and improve the communication with them."

"Communication for us right now is absolutely essential internally if we're going to be successful down the road'" the general added. "And so we're working this pretty hard."

U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE PANETTA THANKS CONGRESS FOR SEQUESTRATION DELAY

FROM: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Panetta Thanks Congress, Hopes For End to Sequestration
By Army Sgt. 1st Class Tyrone C. Marshall Jr.
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Jan. 2, 2013 - Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta expressed his gratitude to U.S. lawmakers for delaying sequestration and voiced optimism for finding a permanent way to avoid an additional $500 billion in budget cuts.

"On behalf of the Department of Defense, I want to express our thanks to the Democratic and Republican members of Congress who voted to temporarily avert sequestration," Panetta said in a statement issued today. "Hopefully, this will allow additional time to develop a balanced deficit reduction plan that would permanently prevent these arbitrary cuts."

Congress passed legislation yesterday delaying the sequestration process by two months. Sequestration, included in the 2011 Budget Control Act, would have automatically cut $500 billion from defense spending over 10 years on top of $487 billion in spending reductions already identified over the same timeframe.

Had Congress not acted, the Defense Department, along with other federal agencies, would have been forced to take dramatic steps which would have "severely impacted" civilian personnel and disrupted DOD's mission, Panetta said.

"For more than a year, I have made clear that sequestration would have a devastating impact on the department," he said. "Over the past few weeks, as we were forced to begin preparing to implement this law, my concerns about its damaging effects have only grown.

"As an example, had Congress failed to act, I would have been required to send out a notice to our 800,000 civilian employees that they could be subject to furlough," Panetta added.

The defense secretary credited Congress with preventing the "worst possible outcome" by delaying sequestration for two months, but noted the threat of sequestration continues.

"Unfortunately, the cloud of sequestration remains," Panetta said. "The responsibility now is to eliminate it as a threat by enacting balanced deficit reduction. Congress cannot continue to just kick the can down the road."

The Defense Department is "doing its part" to help the country address these budget concerns by working to implement $487 billion in spending reductions in accordance with its new defense strategy, Panetta said.

"The specter of sequestration has cast a shadow over our efforts," he said. "We need to have stability in our future budgets. We need to have the resources to effectively execute our strategy, defend the nation, and meet our commitments to troops and their families after more than a decade of war."

The defense secretary lauded the DOD workforce for its service and sacrifice. He said federal government leaders and members of Congress have a "responsibility" to provide the necessary support for them to accomplish their missions.

"Every day, the men and women of this department put their lives on the line to protect us all here at home. Those of us in Washington have no greater responsibility than to give them what they need to succeed and to come home safely," Panetta said.

"My hope is that in the next two months, all of us in the leadership of the nation and the Congress can work together to provide that stability and to prevent sequestration once and for all," he said. "Our national security demands no less."

U.S. DOD WORKING TO AVOID SEQUESTRATION

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE

DOD Working to Halt Budget Sequestration, Little Says

By Jim Garamone

WASHINGTON, July 10, 2012 - The Defense Department is working to avoid the possibility of budget sequestration, a maneuver which would trigger massive, across the board cuts in defense spending, something Pentagon Press Secretary George Little described today as an "absurd" situation.

"We have daily discussions with the Office of Management and Budget on a range of budget issues, to include the prospect of sequestration," Little said. "We have not begun planning for sequestration, but we are in regular contact with our OMB colleagues about what needs to happen."

Sequestration is a mechanism built into last year's Budget Control Act that would trigger across the board cuts in federal spending – including an additional half-trillion-dollar cut in defense - if Congress and the White House cannot agree on a plan to reduce the federal deficit.

"The goal here, of course, is to avoid sequestration, period. That's what we want and we believe that's what the American people want," Little told reporters.

Sequestration would more than double the $487 billion in cuts the department is already making over the next 10 years.

The automatic cuts would require the department to scrap the defense strategy unveiled in January, Pentagon Spokesman Capt. John Kirby told reporters at the same press conference. Instead, Pentagon officials would "have to come up with something completely different. That something, whatever it is, would be based on, essentially, a force at risk of being hollowed," he said.

"We need to move beyond sequestration," Little said. "And we believe that members of Congress do want to get beyond it."

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta continues to look throughout the department for savings, Little said, and stressed that everything is on the table. But Defense officials have continually said that any cuts have to fit in to the overall defense strategy.

THE SHADOW FOR THE PENTAGON OF SEQUESTRATION

FROM:  AMERICAN FORCES PRESS SERVICE  

Panetta, Dempsey Say Pentagon Feels Sequestration's Shadow

By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, April 16, 2012 - The shadow of sequestration is being cast over the Defense Department, and members of Congress must act to dissipate it, Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said here today.

Panetta and Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, spoke about sequestration and the defense budget during a news conference at the Pentagon.

"Sequestration" refers to a mechanism based into the Budget Control Act that would trigger an additional $500 billion cut across the board for defense spending over the next decade if Congress doesn't find an alternative by January.

"I think ... the shadow of sequestration is there," Panetta said. While the Defense Department has received no guidance from the Office of Management and Budget to begin planning for sequestration, the threat of it is having an impact on the department and on the industries the department depends on, the secretary said.

"In the end, it's up to Congress," Panetta said. "In the coming weeks, they will begin considering the defense authorization and appropriations bills. Our hope is that Congress will carefully consider the new defense strategy and the budget decisions that resulted from that strategy."

Any changes the Congress contemplates will affect other sections of the budget, because it is a zero-sum game, the secretary noted. Because of the Budget Control Act, he added, any change in any one area of the budget and force structure will inevitably require offsetting changes elsewhere.

"That carries the real risk that ... if this is not done right, the result could be a hollow, unbalanced or weaker force," he said. "Our hope is that our strategy will not be picked apart piece by piece."

Panetta said he hopes Congress will be reasonable. "There isn't any member [of Congress] I've talked to that doesn't think that sequester is a disaster," he said. "There isn't any member who has said to me, 'Oh, it'll be great.'" All of them understand that it's the wrong way to go.

"And I just have to hope that ultimately, they will find the courage and leadership to be able to address that issue, detrigger sequester, deal with the other challenges that are out there and try to do it as soon as possible," he continued, "because frankly, the longer this drags on, the more of an impact it has in terms of the planning process and in terms of the budget process."

Dempsey said the department confronted the new fiscal reality last year and developed the new strategy. The fiscal 2013 budget request came from that new strategy, he said.

"It took us every bit of energy we had to get from there to the budget submission in February," the general said. "So I mean, I would anticipate that we would have to begin doing some planning in the mid to late summer if we have any chance at all of reacting to it should it trigger."

This is a critical moment for the United States, Panetta said, and while the nation must cut the military, this does not mean threats have disappeared.

"We need to rise to meet the challenges that are facing us in this dangerous and uncertain world, and we can't afford to have the Congress resort to bitter partisanship or parochialism at this critical time," Panetta said. "So the message we wanted to send Congress today is that there is very little margin for error with this package.

"That's the reality that all of us are living with," he added. "The strategy we developed will maintain, we believe, the strongest military in the world by every measure, and that's essential because of the nature of the security challenges that we're facing."