Defense Budgets and the Industry

Even though Secretary Gates has made it clear that he wants to protect his budgets for defense “investment” (procurement and research and development) the industry is already beginning to shiver at the prospect of defense reductions. Lockheed Martin (LMT) has offered a buy-out to around 600 senior personnel; Northrop Grumman (NOC) wants to put its shipbuilding assets on the market and there are rumors Boeing (BA) wants to make an offer for all of Northrop Grumman, which would create the largest defense company in the world.

The industry has had happy days for the past decade. Procurement funding has gone from $62.6 billion in FY 2001 to $129.7 billion, growth of 107% in current dollars and a whopping 74% in constant dollars, while DOD’s research and development funds have gone from $41.6 billion to 80.3 billion (93% current dollars and nearly 61% in constant dollars). This $210 billion market has been enormous for defense industrial and technology suppliers, as their share prices and revenues have soared.

But the warning signs are there. Secretary Gates has garnered kudos for terminating systems like the C-17 and the F-22, the Army’s Future Combat System vehicle, and the President’s new helicopter, and claims to have reaped more than $330 billion in budget savings by doing so. The claim is a bit bogus. The C-17 and the F-22 were never in the services’ long-range budget plans, so the Secretary gets credit for sticking to the plan, but not for savings from his planned budget. And the vehicle and helicopter were both replaced by new research and development projects to fill the requirement, so those savings should be netted out against the new additional costs.

That said, the industry is planning ahead, realizing that support for high defense budgets is waning and deficit/debt control is rising on the political agenda. Next year will be a crucial test year for that transition, and the industry rightly wants to get ahead of the curve. I commented on this for Marketplace last week.

Disclaimer: This page contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, we may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!

About Gordon Adams 5 Articles

Affiliation: International Institute for Strategic Studies

Gordon Adams has been a defense and foreign policy analyst and budget specialist for more than thirty years. Educated at Stanford and Columbia University (Ph.D. in political science), he founded one of Washington’s most respected defense budget think tanks – the Defense Budget Project – in 1983. In 1992 he began a five year stint as Associate Director for National Security and International Affairs at the Office of Management and Budget. He was responsible for all defense, intelligence and foreign policy budgets as the senior White House official for national security budgeting. Since leaving the White House, he has been Deputy Director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, and has taught national security planning and budgeting at George Washington University and, now, at the School of International Service, American University. He is also a Distinguished Fellow at the Stimson Center, where he directs the Budgeting for Foreign Affairs and Defense program.

As one of the few Washington policy wonks who speaks both defense and foreign policy budgeting, Dr. Adams is regularly called on to testify before Congress. He is also a frequent voice in the media on both subjects, appearing regularly in or writing for such publications as Politico, the New York Times, and The Hill. He also writes an occasional column for the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, and blogs for National Journal,, Huffington Post, and His most recent book, Buying National Security: How America Plans and Pays for Its Global Role and Safety at Home (co-authored with Cindy Williams; Routledge 2010) is a unique study of national security budgeting, covering foreign policy, defense, intelligence, and homeland security from both the executive branch and congressional perspective.

Visit: Capital Gains and Games

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.