Wasteful Spending

Unless you've been living under a rock, you probably heard about the U.S. government shutdown in this month.  Well, the good news is that the government has re-opened, but the bad news is that none of the problems are solved.  While some may point to the Affordable Care Act as reason for the government's closure, the fact of the matter is that congress could not come to an agreement on the budget for fiscal year 2014.

As evidenced by the government shutdown, it's pretty clear that balancing the budget is the only thing on everyones' mind.  Whether is the conservative push to cut spending or the liberal argument for increasing taxes, we all realize that something has got to change.  The federal government allocates about one fifth of it's budget to defense.  In 2014, that means the Department of Defense (DoD) gets $526 billion.

If you haven't noticed by now, I'm not one that favors extremes.  More often than not, there isn't a clear right or wrong way to go about something.  Nothing is black and white; there is always some gray area.  Having said that, I always think there is room to both cut spending and raise taxes.  Why can't more people admit that?  You're either for or against the political party you affiliate with and you're seen as a traitor if you see validity in the other party's arguments.  Similarly, if one suggests that the military trim the fat in its budget they're seen as unpatriotic.

If you've ever spent a day in or around the military, you know the military has it's fair share of fat to trim. Whether it's with personnel cuts or the individual budgets of each unit, there is excess everywhere you look.  One could make an argument for the budget being poorly allocated, but regardless the wrong people have too large a sum allotted in their directions.  Rather than citing specific areas that should have their budgets reduced, the topic I am most concerned with is the wasteful attitude that is pervasive throughout the military at almost all levels.  Below are just a few examples:

This first example is just one of wastefulness and selfishness on an individual level.

Today at work, I overheard two officers discussing a luncheon that is required of some to attend this coming Friday.  Being that a few of my co-workers are on temporary orders (TAD/TDY) to my unit, they rate per diem along with a few other allowances during their stay.  As you would expect, sometimes our jobs dictate that we bypass lunch for the sake of completing work.  In those cases, the officers on TAD/TDY can claim a "missed meal" and be given a set amount of money in return missing said meal.  In this particular case, these officers will be at work, but because it is a luncheon they won't be missing their meal.  I'm not sure what to call it other than not having integrity, but the first thing that came to mind when these guys realized they would  have to pay for their mandatory meal was that they could claim this as a missed meal and be paid for this function as a result. (Note: these guys are not Marine officers).  I doubt my effort to dissuade them will have any effect.

Next and equally as appalling is an example that takes place at a higher level, one where commanding officers display their wasteful and selfish attitudes to junior servicemen.

As the end of the fiscal year approaches you can expect to see one of two things in battalions, squadrons, or detachments across the globe.  Everyone will either be drying their hands on there uniforms, because the unit does not have enough money to buy paper-towels for the bathrooms, let alone hand-soap.  Or you'll see troves of TVs, pool tables, or laptops being bought because there is extra money leftover from the current fiscal year.  I'd say the majority of the commands I have been apart of in the past are more often guilty of the latter rather than the former.  The go-to excuse for the latter of these is always, "if we don't spend this now, we'll have a smaller budget next year."  If this is true of my limited experience in the Corps, I can only imagine how many other units have extra cash at the end of the year.  And I'm in the Marine Corps, we're supposed to have the smallest budgets, I can't even imagine how much of the Army's budget could actually be cut before it started to effect day to day operations.

As a caveat I'll add that I am not naive nor jaded enough to think that there aren't units out there hurting for larger budgets.  I know that just about every infantry company would kill to have a few more live fire ranges, but there are far to many non-mission essential organizations out there with far too much unnecessary spending going on.  There has a be a better way for holding both individuals and commands accountable for wasteful spending.  Right now, we have the fraud, waste, and abuse programs, but I haven't heard much happen as a result.  Among my peers, I've heard mention of making financial responsibility or personal finances subject to evaluation for fitness reports.

Figuring out the best way to tackle this problem should be at the forefront of our discussion.  There is waste and selfishness everywhere. It is propagated by our leaders and instilled in our very beings.  We want to make sure that we get the most out of whatever is available.  It's because I witness waste, selfishness, or in some cases poor management on a daily basis that I can confidently identify the military as a source for cutting spending.  I'm not underestimating our responsibility to defend our country.  I am not undervaluing the sacrifices made by our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines, but just like everyone else, I can recognize waste when I see it.  It's far past time that we hold those guilty of waste accountable and it starts with the individual, regardless of rank, condemning the action when it's spotted.

--
W&P

Click here to view the FY 2014: Budget of the U.S. Government

Drones, UAVs, RPAs, etc...

Using jargon in the workplace is one thing, but using jargon in social circles is a social faux pas that professionals should not commit.  So why is it that the U.S. Air Force thinks society is going to start using technical jargon when it comes to drones?

Stephen Whisler "Blue Drones in the Morning" (2013)
Click here for more of Whisler's work

Regardless of which social circles you prefer, it's hard to make it through a week without hearing about the future being defined by unmanned aerial systems, remotely piloted aircraft, or the more dreaded word: drones.  Everyone both inside and outside of the military are talking about drones and their potential.  In fact, just last week a conference was held in New York City just off NYU's campus called the Drone & Aerial Robotics Conference. This particular conference hosted a wide array of professionals from many fields to discuss the future laws and policies of aerial robots.  The conference itself was a hit and goes to show how frequently we as society are going to hear about drones in our futures.

So anyways, what do we call them?  Aerial robots, remotely piloted aircraft, or flying toasters?  My vote is to call them what the largest amount of people seem to know them as: drones.

One of the arguments posed by the the Air Force in respect to the coining of "remotely piloted aircraft" is that the aircraft is by definition not a drone.

I'm not a linguist, however, it's generally understood that language is a constantly evolving form of communication.  Words are constantly added to the dictionary just as their meanings are perpetually shifting.  Today the word drone means something different than it might have meant in the past; nowadays, the word drone is defined as a remotely piloted aircraft or an unmanned aerial vehicle.  How much sense would it make to describe a noun by its long drawn out definition as opposed to calling it by what it is most commonly known as.  Even if it is for the sake of brevity alone, drones should be called drones.

Calling drones by anything other than drones hasn't caught on yet, and I don't think it's going to.  Give it up, Air Force.

--
W&P

Swenson and Meyer

After reading Dan Lamothe's article in the Marine Corps Times regarding the "rift" between Army Captain Will Swenson and Marine Sergeant Dakota Meyer, I have to admit I'm extremely disappointed.  When it comes to events for which Medal of Honor (MoH) citations are written, one would like to think that there wouldn't be any drama or controversy.  Unfortunately, it seems as though some difference has arisen in light of Swenson's MoH.

Captain Will Swenson and Sergeant Dakota Meyer (Photo from Marine Corps Times)

I don't want to make this about the Army versus the Marine Corps or anything trivial.  However, I would like express my disappointment in the manner by which Capt. Swenson has decided to go public with the disputation he has concerning Meyer's MoH.

One of the areas that has been called into questions concerning Meyer's citation is the accuracy of some of the details.  As an officer in the Army, one would assume that Swenson has personally written citations for various awards for soldiers under his charge.  With that experience, he probably had several of those awards declined.  During Operations Enduring and Iraqi Freedom, the military has awarded significantly fewer MoHs than in previous eras.  Due to an inflated perception surrounding what warrants a MoH bureaucratic obstacles now surround awarding such prestigious medals that may not have existed in the past.

In the case of Meyer, it is not surprising to discover that some details may have been exaggerated.  What is surprising is that someone would find fault in a MoH recipient for accepting the public attention that would come with accepting such an award.  The awards system is broken.  In many cases awards which individuals do not rate are awarded and in other cases awards are withheld from servicemen who do.

Rather than publicly bringing his opinions to light in a manner that is discrediting to Meyer, I would expect a captain to to use his position to address the real problem here: the awards system.  Meyer has not behaved in anyway that is dishonorable, nor is he taking advantage of his MoH to seek the status of a celebrity.  He is simply behaving the way anyone would expect a twenty-something year old to behave.  In fact, I believe he is handling the responsibility quite well.  One would expect an older Army officer to go about his post-service years much differently than a younger Marine enlisted-man.  Regardless of how one chooses to live their lives after combat, I don't think anyone could say they are wrong.  However, I'm very disappointed that because the two have decided to live their lives differently that one would choose to handle it in this manner.

If anyone is expected to take the high ground in a matter such as this, you'd expect it to be the more experienced and educated officer.  With that said, I'm very impressed with the manner Meyer has handled this.  Hopefully, this debacle doesn't progress much further in the direction it seems to be heading.  Both men are deserving of the award they've been granted and I hope nothing arises that will take away from that.

--
W&P

Reconsidering Commissaries

What is the point of domestic commissaries?  Their customers and employees alike seem to be primarily composed of retirees or their family members.  Between Wal-mart and supermarket mega-chains like H-E-B, isn't the demand for groceries already being met?

Over the last several years I've began to question the need for domestic commissaries.  Having been to several across the the continental United States, I have been consistently disappointed with the lack of savings and inconvenience of their use.  I will admit that I have never been to a commissary in Hawaii or Alaska.  I could easily imagine that commissaries may offset the cost of living in areas like those, much like commissaries abroad.  Realizing this, my qualm is specific to commissaries in CONUS.

I've always had a negative view of commissaries, so naturally I've always used public grocery stores instead. It wasn't until I aged a little and began viewing problems analytically that I noticed the problem of the commissary could be fixed.  A few weeks ago this article, "Plan to shut military supermarkets shows difficulty of cutting defense spending" by Rajiv Chandrasekaran re-awoke my opposition to using the commissary.  Then conveniently the U.S. government shut down and suddenly there were no commissaries.

Well, the government did shutdown and congress is still arguing about the budget and Affordable Care Act, but the commissaries have managed to re-open.  In Chandrasekaran's article it was suggested that Wal-mart could offer discounts to military personnel, allowing the government to close commissaries in CONUS.  As the commissaries closed for a few days last week, Sam's Club and Costco both stepped up to offer temporary memberships to military personnel as long as commissaries remained closed.  Sure both stores probably saw an influx in sales and benefitted, but it was a great opportunity to show that using privatized grocery stores is a realistic solution the the problem of the commissary.

I don't normally shop at Wal-mart, Sam's Club, Costco, or the commissary, but if it came down to it I would be much more likely to shop at Wal-mart than the commissary.  Maybe it's time that we actually take action in areas we've identified financially inefficient rather than simply talking about them.

--
W&P

Retaining Quality JOs

Back in July of 2012, I began paying special attention to Thomas E. Ricks' blog, The Best Defense, on Foreign Policy Magazine's website.  If you haven't heard of Ricks he wrote on the U.S. military for the Washington Post from 2000 to 2008.  He is also the author of Making the Corps, Fiasco, and The Generals.  The post that caught my attention was titled, "We're getting out of the Marines because we wanted to be part of an elite force".  There were several reasons that this particular post caught my eye.  First, the title implied that Marines aren't elite.  As you might expect, this hurt my feelings/pride a little.  The second reason this caught my eye was because I too was weighing whether or not I should remain in the Marines or pursue a career outside of the Corps.

I really enjoy being a Marine.  In nearly every decision I make, I am very methodical about doing a cost/benefit analysis and coming to a determination that makes the most sense.  Time after time, I find myself coming to the conclusion that being a Marine is best for me as well as my family.  It's never very long before I find myself considering my options.

Photo by Sgt. Sarah Flocco

If you've been following the thread of blog posts by Ricks about this topic, you've seen countless JOs write in with their take on why the Marine Corps and U.S. military in general has a problem retaining talent.  Tonight, I identified another reason why I believe some Marines resign or allow their contracts to expire.  

One thing I have consistently noticed over the years is that quality Marines are constantly in demand.  Whether it is the Sergeant with a toolbox filled with a plethora of technical knowledge concerning his field or the officer who holds one of the critical MOS, it seems like good Marines constantly miss out on PME opportunities or training that would help advance their career.  This is never intentional, but as senior Marines move on the unit becomes dependent on those left with the experience and the qualifications resulting in the unit not being able to do without a particular person.  One way to avoid this is by ensuring the junior enlisted and new officers are being trained and getting qualified immediately upon checking into a new command.

As you can see, this could quickly turn into a downward spiral where new Marines aren't qualified to do a job forcing the command to become dependent on only a few.  Rather than being able to harness to the potential shown by the senior Marines, the Marines instead start counting down the days towards their end to active service (EAS) date. 

I'd like to hope that someone would tell me if they felt as though I was doing this to their careers.  Likewise, I'd like to hope that my leaders would be receptive to me if I found myself in this situation.  Other than ensuring all your men and women are trained, are there any other ways to avoid this?

--

W&P

Zombies!

In light of renting World War Z at the nearest Redbox tonight, I got to thinking about a book I read a few years ago: Theories of International Politics and Zombies by Daniel W. Drezner.

The first time I heard about this book I was under the impression that it used the ideas we associate with zombies to explain the fundamentals of international theories.  I was expecting the author to make a comparison between a realist's worldview and zombies mindlessly behaving in a manner that is only self-serving.  It turned out to be much different than that, but entertaining nonetheless.  

If you have the chance to read it, I'd definitely recommend it!  

--
W&P

Keeping up-to-date

Thomas Jefferson once said, “The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers.”

As you may already know, newspapers can be problematic.  Their either too biased, misinformed, or they simply lack stories concerning the areas which some niches are specifically interested in.  I understand that this is not the spirit of Jefferson's statement, but it does highlight the newspapers as being a source of misinformation.

A year or so ago, I discovered an email service provided by Foreign Policy Magazine that sends me what is called the Morning Brief every weekday.  The Morning Brief is posted under the blog Passport which is ran by Foreign Policy's editors.  This is a fantastic consistent and quick source of international news and one of my favorite features of this website.  This email is typically composed of an analysis of the one of the biggest foreign policy stories from the day before followed by the three biggest headlines from the five major region of the world.

Above is a screen shot of one of the more recent postings of the Morning Brief.  As you can see within each headline is a link to an article giving more detail about each given story.

If you don't already receive a similar news update, I would highly recommend subscribing to this.  I find that this email has really helped develop my awareness about what is going on in the world, especially in regions that I am not normally interested in.  On days when I am short on time, this allows me to at least skim over the headlines, even if I can't dive into an article.

That's how I stay up-to-date with world news.  How do you do it?

--
W&P