AFA members, Congressional staff members, civic leaders, DOCA members, Last week we had a speaker at AFA who made the point that the US was now a Pacific nation. He cited a number of reasons … among them was the level of trade we had with Asia-Pacific nations. Trade does indeed provide an indication of our national interests … so I thought I’d see what the data tell us. [The best site for bilateral trade data seemed to be the US Census Bureau. I chose to use 2010 data. See: http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/ ]. Our bilateral trade with PAC RIM countries was $980B in 2010 … as opposed to our trade with the European Union = $559B. However, our closest trading partners are – by far – Canada ($526B) and Mexico ($393B). China is third with $276B; followed by Japan ($181B). I was surprised to find that our trade with Thailand is about the same as our trade with Russia ($32B). And our trade with Taiwan ($52B) was more than our trade with India ($49B). And our trade with Singapore ($46B) was more than our trade with Italy ($43B). I’m not sure what these data show … but it is clear that the Asia Pacific area has increased in importance to the US. Secondly, last month the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Buck McKeon (R-CA), warned against drastic cuts to defense spending. His HASC Republican staff warned, in a memo to the Chairman, of the effects of impending cuts. You can find their memo on our website at: http://www.afa.org/EdOp/2011/9262011_budget.pdf Finally, I ran across a short piece by Peter Huessy, President of GeoStrategic Analysis and Senior National Security Fellow, the American Foreign Policy Council. In the piece entitled “Tempting Tyrants,” Mr. Huessy makes the point that we have never been attacked because we were too strong. His examples lead one to understand that a strong military deters others who might consider challenging us. You can find the piece at: http://www.afa.org/EdOp/2011/Tempting_Tyrants.pdf For your consideration Mike Michael M. Dunn President/CEO Air Force Association |
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Note from AFA President -- Asia-Pacific, Defense Spending, Huessy
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
October Series of AFA Breakfast Series Welcomes Dr. Kevin T. Geiss
The Air Force Association is pleased to announce Dr. Kevin T. Geiss, a member of the Senior Executive Service, as the guest speaker for the October session of the AFA Air Force Breakfast Program. This session will be held on Wednesday, October 26, 2011, from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., at the Crystal City Marriott in Arlington, Virginia.
Dr. Kevin T. Geiss is the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Energy for the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Installations, Environment and Logistics, in Washington, D.C. Dr. Geiss is responsible for providing oversight and direction for all matters pertaining to the formulation, review, and execution of plans, policies, programs, and budgets for the effective and efficient use of energy to support the global Air Force mission.Prior to this position, Dr. Geiss was the Program Director for Energy Security for the Department of the Army, where he was responsible for the development and implementation of the Army Energy Security strategy through coordination across all Army Headquarters staff and Secretariat offices.
He has also previously served as both a Senior Policy Analyst and the Assistant Director for National Defense in the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) in the Executive Office of the President.
The AFA Air Force Breakfast Program is a monthly series that provides a venue for senior Air Force and Department of Defense leaders to communicate directly with the public and the press. Past speakers include Secretary of the Air Force Michael B. Donley, Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. Norton A. Schwartz, Gen. Gary L. North, Commander of Pacific Air Forces, and Gen. Donald J. Hoffman, Commander of Air Force Materiel Command.
Registration for National High School Cyber Security Competition Closes in Less than a Week
With less than a week left before registration closes, CyberPatriot IV, the National High School Cyber Defense Competition, has more than 850 teams registered! This premier competition is attracting high school educators across the nation. Forty-seven states, Puerto Rico and U.S. Department of Defense Dependent Schools in England, Germany, Japan and Korea are represented in this year’s competition. Only Rhode Island, Vermont and Wyoming have yet to join the challenge.
CyberPatriot is a unique cyber security competition produced by the Air Force Association (AFA), a nonprofit organization headquartered near Washington, D.C. Its structure provides students hands-on learning while competing virtually against their peers and introduces many to the idea of cyber security as a profession.
Teams of two to five students, with an approved coach (usually a teacher), learn to defend computer networks from real-life computer threat scenarios. In the preliminaries, hundreds of teams compete online to solve vulnerabilities in simulated computer networks. The teams then compete again in a series of online rounds to determine the top 24 teams who earn all-expenses-paid trips to the National Finals Competition in Washington, D.C. in March 2012.
“CyberPatriot gives high school students an inside look at an exciting field while building skills highly relevant to a successful future, such as teamwork, leadership, and critical-thinking,” said Bernie Skoch, CyberPatriot Commissioner. “This competition provides an exciting environment for students, and at the same time, joins the nation in attempting to bolster interest in STEM education.”
CyberPatriot is a member of the U.S. Cyber Challenge (USCC), a national coalition of public-private sector entities collaborating to enhance the workforce with the next generation of cyber security professionals through skill development activities, mentoring, and resources, and the facilitation of scholarship, internship and employment opportunities.
CyberPatriot also offers support and technical expertise from industry leaders, including CyberPatriot’s presenting sponsor Northrop Grumman and founding partners SAIC and the CIAS at the University of Texas-San Antonio.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Note from the AFA President: Defense Spending, the 101 version
AFA members, Congressional staff members, civic leaders, DOCA members, there is much news on activities in Washington – especially about the budget. What strikes me is that to decipher much of it, one has to be almost an insider to understand the numbers. Here is the simple version:
President Obama has directed the Department of Defense to cut $450B+ over 10 years starting with its FY13 budget. [This will cut the base defense budget – and was part of the 2 Aug deficit reduction agreement with Congress.] It looks like the cut will be laid into the budget on a, more or less, flat line basis, e.g. $45B per year. The Air Force portion of that is not yet fully known, but if trends continue, it will be $11B - $13B per year – perhaps more. Once again, this does not include wartime spending – which is still off-budget.
The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is tasked to come up with $1.5 Trillion in cuts over 10 years. If it fails, then an automatic cut kicks in which will cut $1.2 Trillion in spending. Half of this must come from “national security” accounts – DOD, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Energy, and a bit from the State Department. I estimate DOD’s share would be about $450B+. This is in addition to the $450B+ in the paragraph above.
A few observations: First, the $1.5 Trillion to be cut is only a cut in the growth in spending. The federal budget is expected to grow – during the next 10 years – by about $12 Trillion by some estimates. Thus a cut in the growth in government of $1.5 Trillion is only a cut of 12%. At the end of 10 years, if nothing else is done, the US debt will still grow from about $15 Trillion to $25.5 Trillion.
Secondly, to take almost a trillion dollars out of defense spending in the next 10 years would call for draconian cuts. It would gut many programs; throw tens of thousands of troops out of work; cause major force reductions; and necessitate closing bases. Our allies would begin to question our commitments in both conventional and extended deterrence realms. And, according to some experts, result in a “new isolationism.” I do not need to remind this group that defending our nation is job one for any government. In fact, the Preamble to the Constitution says: “… provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare … “ – and not the other way around. And … base defense spending in the 2012 request amounts to 3.5% of GDP – almost a record post-WWII low. In the aggregate, the defense budget is clearly an affordable investment.
Finally, DOD base defense funding in the FY12 request was $553B. [The Senate Appropriations Committee has marked it to $513B.] The Administration request for HHS was $893B – 1/3 of a Trillion more. This gap is projected to double by 2014. It is interesting to note that HHS spending was $47B in 1977 – just one-twentieth of what it is today.
For your consideration.
President Obama has directed the Department of Defense to cut $450B+ over 10 years starting with its FY13 budget. [This will cut the base defense budget – and was part of the 2 Aug deficit reduction agreement with Congress.] It looks like the cut will be laid into the budget on a, more or less, flat line basis, e.g. $45B per year. The Air Force portion of that is not yet fully known, but if trends continue, it will be $11B - $13B per year – perhaps more. Once again, this does not include wartime spending – which is still off-budget.
The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is tasked to come up with $1.5 Trillion in cuts over 10 years. If it fails, then an automatic cut kicks in which will cut $1.2 Trillion in spending. Half of this must come from “national security” accounts – DOD, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Energy, and a bit from the State Department. I estimate DOD’s share would be about $450B+. This is in addition to the $450B+ in the paragraph above.
A few observations: First, the $1.5 Trillion to be cut is only a cut in the growth in spending. The federal budget is expected to grow – during the next 10 years – by about $12 Trillion by some estimates. Thus a cut in the growth in government of $1.5 Trillion is only a cut of 12%. At the end of 10 years, if nothing else is done, the US debt will still grow from about $15 Trillion to $25.5 Trillion.
Secondly, to take almost a trillion dollars out of defense spending in the next 10 years would call for draconian cuts. It would gut many programs; throw tens of thousands of troops out of work; cause major force reductions; and necessitate closing bases. Our allies would begin to question our commitments in both conventional and extended deterrence realms. And, according to some experts, result in a “new isolationism.” I do not need to remind this group that defending our nation is job one for any government. In fact, the Preamble to the Constitution says: “… provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare … “ – and not the other way around. And … base defense spending in the 2012 request amounts to 3.5% of GDP – almost a record post-WWII low. In the aggregate, the defense budget is clearly an affordable investment.
Finally, DOD base defense funding in the FY12 request was $553B. [The Senate Appropriations Committee has marked it to $513B.] The Administration request for HHS was $893B – 1/3 of a Trillion more. This gap is projected to double by 2014. It is interesting to note that HHS spending was $47B in 1977 – just one-twentieth of what it is today.
For your consideration.
Michael M. Dunn
President/CEO
Air Force Association
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
