Walter Pincus
Walter Pincus
Fine Print

Sen. Tom Coburn cuts the fat at Pentagon in his ‘Department of Everything’ report

Staff/AFP/Getty Images - This December 26, 2011 file photo shows the Pentagon building in Washington, DC.

I want to generate support for Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) in his newest budget reduction effort targeting some of the low-hanging fruit at the Pentagon.

You don’t have to agree with all of Coburn’s recommendations in his new study, titled “Department of Everything,” in which, as he told reporters Thursday, he proposed cuts that could deliver $69 billion over 10 years by reducing or eliminating programs in areas “where the Pentagon works that have nothing to do with defense.”

Latest stories from Foreign

$7 billion in gear U.S. sent to war will not return

$7 billion in gear U.S. sent to war will not return

About 20 percent of the equipment sent to Afghanistan will be disposed of because it is not needed or too costly to ship back, and it’s too complicated to donate or sell.

Obama, in Berlin, calls for U.S., Russia to cut nuclear warheads

Obama, in Berlin, calls for U.S., Russia to cut nuclear warheads

His speech from the Brandenburg Gate recalls Cold War history, focuses on current challenges.

In Russia’s heartland, a crackdown on a Web site editor

In Russia’s heartland, a crackdown on a Web site editor

As she loses her room for maneuver and faces charges, the Urals region is left without an independent voice.

World Digest: June 19, 2013

Militants attack U.N. compound in Somalia and kill 13; Syrian troops, rebels battle near Shiite shrine.

Despite Karzai’s ire, U.S. confident that talks with Taliban will be held

Despite Karzai’s ire, U.S. confident that talks with Taliban will be held

The Afghan president, angry over a Taliban news conference, suspended separate security talks with the U.S.

Coburn lists some worthy targets. He points out the Defense Department runs 64 elementary and secondary schools at 16 military facilities where more than 19,000 students are taught by 2,000 teachers. That works out to a ratio of 9.5 students per teacher (plus overhead and management) while the average in public and private schools has been about 15 students, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.

The cost to taxpayers is more than $50,000 per student. “In contrast, the Department of Education has found the average annual cost per student in America is around $11,000,” according to the Coburn study.

This U.S.-based program, which in fiscal 2010 cost $468.8 billion, has historic roots in a time when American schools were segregated in fact, if not by law. Thus the schools in the system are in five Southern states, with one in the North. The study points out that “children of military members stationed in states with large military populations such as California and Texas attend local public schools, many of which are located on the base.”

Coburn also took a whack at top-heavy military leadership. “At the end of World War II, we had 12 million men under arms,” he told reporters. “We had 2,000 flag officers and generals. Today we have a thousand flag officers and generals and 1.2 million under arms.”

As Washington Post reporters Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Greg Jaffe wrote Sunday, four-star generals “enjoy an array of perquisites befitting a billionaire,” and even three-star generals get retirement pensions of more than $200,000 a year.

Returning to the “Cold War ratio of five general officers per 10,000 troops (as opposed to the seven the Pentagon has today) . . . could mean a reduction in 800 support personnel costing $100,000 per year . . . [and savings of] $800 million over ten years,” Coburn’s study says.

I’m in the senator’s camp.

He also wants to eliminate another one of my favorite excess Pentagon activities: the Defense Department’s Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs (CDMRP). That effort has spent $7 billion in Pentagon funds since 1992 doing research, originally on breast cancer but in recent times on 20 or more forms of cancer and other diseases. It began as a $25 million earmark for breast cancer research because of a cap on funds for the National Institutes of Health.

When Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) introduced his earmark in 1992, he said: “The Army is not doing this research. The Army is taking this money and they are contracting out to do the research. They can do it with the National Cancer Institute at NIH.” But the next year, thanks to grass-roots breast cancer lobbying groups, Congress earmarked $210 million for Defense to run its own peer-reviewed breast cancer research — programs, according to Coburn’s report, that “have never been requested in any presidential budget, and are outside the Pentagon’s traditional mission of battlefield medicine and research.”

Loading...

Comments

Add your comment
 
Read what others are saying About Badges