President Biden dithered signing the FY2023 NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act). Nonetheless, the new bill puts the authorization language in place for spending $847 billion on defense. The top line is $45 billion, or 13%, more than the administration requested. Both the House and Senate authorizers believed the Pentagon’s request was insufficient to deal with emerging threats from both China and Russia.
The Senate Armed Services Committee summary of the legislation explained:
“…[T]he NDAA authorizes funding levels and provides authorities for the U.S. military and other critical defense priorities, ensuring our troops have the training, equipment, and resources they need to carry out their missions…the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, focuses on the most vital national security priorities for the United States, including strategic competition with China and Russia….”
There are four provisions in particular worth noting in this spending package.
FY2023 NDAA Army End Strength Cuts
The first thing taxpayers should be aware of is the reduction in US Army end strength, which is the total number of active-duty soldiers. The authorized number in FY2022 was 485,000. However, in the latest NDAA, the US Army end-strength authorized is 452,000, a reduction of 33,000, or nearly 7% from the FY2022 NDAA, and a 5% decline from the Army’s FY2023 request of 473,000.
Once the ground forces lose end strength, quickly regaining the numbers of combat-ready soldiers, if needed, is an insurmountable task. “The cut locks the Army into a downward spiral that will ultimately jeopardize US national security,” retired US Army Lieutenant General Thomas Spoehr explained in his Breaking Defense op-ed. With the difficulty the US Army, as well as the other services, is having recruiting qualified troops, Congress may have simply accepted the inevitable. As Spoehr concludes, “Maybe we should not be surprised. Last June, the Army’s Vice Chief of Staff, Gen. Joseph Martin, predicted at a Congressional hearing that due to extreme recruiting challenges, the Army might be down to as few as 450,000 soldiers by the end of fiscal 2023.”
More Money, More Gear
The second thing to pay attention to is that the authorization language significantly increased the emphasis on weapons procurement. As a result, total procurement for the Department of Defense increased from the FY2023 President’s Budget request of $144.2 billion to $163.1 billion, or 13%. The big winner in the procurement accounts was US Navy shipbuilding and conversion. The Navy saw an increase of 17%, or approximately $4.7 billion, over what it requested. The increase in funding includes $2.2 billion for a third DDG-51 Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. The Biden Defense Department had asked for only two.
A third provision of the latest authorization bill sends a clear message to the Biden administration. Congress disagrees with the Pentagon’s decision to reduce America’s nuclear arsenal without some better alternative. “The bill would push back against the Biden administration’s plans to halt a sea-launched nuclear cruise missile program. And it would limit retirements of B83 atomic bombs,” John M. Donnelly reported in Roll Call. As Liberty Nation reported in November, “Retiring the B8-1 received significant pushback from members of Congress, and canceling SLCM-N, many believe, weakens the nuclear Triad options. Congress will have input on these policy decisions.” As we see, the FY2023 NDAA makes Congress’ view clear.
Congress Wants to Know More About Replacing Non-Tactical Vehicles
(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
Lastly, besides the repudiation of Biden’s demand that all military members be vaccinated against COVID-19, language in the NDAA Section 328 places a limitation on the Pentagon’s plans to go green. “Replacement of Non-Tactical Vehicle Fleet of Department of Defense with Electric Vehicles, Advanced-Biofuel-Powered Vehicles, or Hydrogen-Powered Vehicles,” cannot go forward until the secretary of defense submits a report to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees. The report must explain the total costs to the taxpayers of replacing current internal combustion-powered vehicles with alternative-powered vehicles. The authorization committees are not convinced the Pentagon’s plan to replace 170,000 non-tactical vehicles with electric or hybrid vehicles has been thought out regarding total life-cycle costs.
The FY2023 NDAA goes a long way toward making sure the Pentagon has its priorities correct, but Army recruiting remains a problem. Striking a balance among spending requirements is a challenge. There are trade-offs to be made. For example, modernization must be weighed against maintaining current capabilities and sustaining legacy weapon systems. It seems the authorizers have tried to do that.
The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliation.
