The budget refers to the use of financial resources for human activities. In the military, the Pentagon ensures that the public revenue is used for national defense purposes. According to the US Constitution, the executive, judiciary, and the legislative branches of the government have the mandate to oversee the Pentagon’s budget plan. These bodies determine the appropriation of funds to the military. While the legislative reviews the budget, the executive appropriates the funds. There are two significant stages of the budget process: formulation and execution; different budget process procedures can either enhance or undermine the Pentagon’s strategy.
Foundational Elements of the Budget Process
Pentagon’s budget process comprises of different foundational elements and powers. The US Constitution ensures that there is a separation of powers between the government's executive, legislature, and judiciary branches of the government. Conventionally, the budget process starts at the executive branch of government (Jones et al., 2011). At this stage, the executive develops the budget plan. The legislative branch of the government reviews, reformulates, amends, and enacts the proposed budget. After the legislative branch of the government has approved the budget, the executive branch, under the leadership of the President, who serves as the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, signs the budget bill into law (Jones et al., 2011). At the federal level, the President can veto the budget bills that they do not approve, but eventually, they must sign a compromise bill. However, at the state level, governors have “item veto” authority that grants them the authority to alter the bill differently based on the veto power nature. For instance, the State of California gives the governor the power to stop an ineffective program's funding, even if the legislature had approved the budget bill (Jones et al., 2011). The Department of Defense (DoD) has to demonstrate the relationship between the proposed budget and citizens' protection. Thus, the Pentagon has to consult with Congress and the Department of State to ensure that the budget bill covers the crucial aspects of the US military (Office of the under Secretary of Defense, 2018). The coalition between the DoD and the Congress increases the budget bill's bargaining power presented before the executive branch.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Although the US Constitution asserts that the budgetary power rests under the checks and balances system, Congress has an added advantage. Under Article 1, Section 9, clause 7, the US Constitution points out that nobody can withdraw money from the treasury unless the law allows it; there must be statements and accounts of receipts and public revenue (Jones et al., 2011). This section implies that it is the Congress and not the executive that can add money to the DoD’s budget. Besides, the US Constitution grants Congress the “power of the purse.” Under Article 1 Section 8, the Constitution states that Congress can settle debts on behalf of the Pentagon (Jones et al., 2011). Congress can either refuse or propose the required supplies for the DoD. Also, Congress has the Constitutional right to supervise how the military administers its programs as part of its budgetary responsibility. It authorizes programs and reviews them through the appropriation process. At times, Congress challenges the changes that the President makes to the budget bill. Therefore, Congress appears to have more budgetary power compared to the president.
The Pentagon’s budget process has different foundational elements. One of them is the planning process. It involves estimating the US foreign policy’s consequences and analyzing the available resources and personnel required during threat management and deterrence (Jones et al., 2011). Although a budget must have figures of every item, it is the documentation that gives it the right precision. The written statements in the budget provide the Congress and the President a chance to alter the provisions of the budget. Hence, one can consider the capacity for modification as one of the budget process's foundational elements. During execution of the budget bill, the legislative and executive branches of the government can change the fund transfers, emergency bills, and supplemental additions for new funding (Jones et al., 2011). Between the formulation and execution of the budget, there are different processes. Under budget formulation, there are three steps: preparation of estimates, negotiation, and enactment (Jones et al., 2011). During the preparation of estimates, the executive branch of the government highlights the needs of the DoD. The executive branch then negotiates with the legislature to ensure that the budget statements serve the Americans' interests. During the enactment, the legislative branch will form conference committees to analyze the budget bill while the executive can lobby, sign, or veto the bill (Jones et al., 2011). The budget execution stage involves appropriations of funds to military agencies and departments, monitoring spending, end year accounting to appropriations, and financial audit. These procedures ensure that the Pentagon’s budget covers the DoD requirements and follows the criteria of the law.
The Merits and Defects of the Process
Admittedly, Pentagon’s budget process both advantages and disadvantages based on the procedures and bodies involved. One of the merits is the assurance that the budget serves the needs of the Americans. The checks and balances system applied in the budget process prevents the legislative or the executive from serving to their selfish interests and manipulating the Pentagon. For example, the executive branch of the government can check Congress’ ability to increase its individual components by controlling its powers while legislative controls the executive’s desire for increasing expenditures (Holcombe, 2018). The budget process has to through the Congress committee before implementation. These procedures ensure that the veto players can examine the Americans’ and the Pentagon’s interests. Besides, the prolonged budget process ensures that there is a consensus in the decision-making process. During budget formulation, the Pentagon and Congress discuss the requirements of the military. For example, in the financial 2020, Pentagon proposed that its budget would be $700 billion, but the Secretary of Defense insisted that the government should raise it to $738 billion (Korb, 2020). Congress intervened, and both parties agreed to have a small increase for the year 2020. Such discussions ensure that the involved parties are satisfied with the process. Also, the budget process settles the differences between the legislative and executive branches. During the formulation process, the appropriation and authorization committees send their reviews of the Pentagon’s expenditure, and after Congress approves, the President signs the bill into law (Jones et al., 2011). These processes ensure that every vital detail of the budget is addressed. Another merit of this process is transparency and accountability. During the budget execution, agents such as General Accounting Officer and Inspector scrutinize the public money's disbursement to prevent illegal spending and personal gains (Jones et al., 2011). Financial audits examine honesty and the correct use of public funds.
Nevertheless, the Pentagon’s budget process has its defects. It requires adequate time and resources to plan the Pentagon’s budget. Some of the parties involved include the state and local governments, citizens, political action committees, public corporations, and employee unions (Jones et al., 2011). Bringing these groups together could waste time and result in increased usage of the government’s resources. Besides, the budget process is subject to political decisions and interests (Koscinski, 2019). The US Constitution grants Congress the power to review the president’s recommendations on the Pentagon’s budget. In most cases, the opinions presented by Congress appeal to political beliefs. For example, if the Congress Committee comprises members who believe that the US’s foreign policy should focus on intervening in other countries' affairs, they will propose increased military funding. Hence, it is difficult to tell whether Congress is serving its interests or the Americans' needs. Another defect of the Pentagon’s budget process is the increased bureaucracy. During the formulation and execution of the military budget, the executive and the legislative branches determine funds' appropriation. These bodies overlook the Pentagon’s input in the budget process. In recent years, the Pentagon has had challenges when planning for its budget due to the uncertainty of the budget process (Myre, 2018). Admittedly, the lengthy legal procedures evident in the budget process make it difficult for the Pentagon to comprehensively analyze its requirements and receive both the legislative and executive branches' support.
The Ways Politics and Process Undermine Strategy
The process and politics of budget undermine strategy. Notably, the power struggle between the legislative and executive branches adversely affects the effectiveness of the Pentagon. For example, when President Trump increased military spending in 2019, critics argued that the move would weaken national security since he overlooked healthcare (Korb, 2018). Within that period, the US realized a federal deficit, making it challenging for the country to deal with a possible shutdown. Although President Trump believed that the increased military funding would benefit US citizens, political beliefs motivated his moves. President Trump stated that the government had already spent a lot on the Democrats, and thus, he promised to increase military funding (Myre, 2018). Such decisions create uncertainties in Pentagon since the body has to appease both Congress and the President. Representative Barbara Lee argued that Trump’s administration made a mistake in increasing military funding since America is currently facing a health crisis due to the COVID-19 (Brown, 2020). President Trump believes in strengthening the military to improve America’s national security and involvement in international affairs. However, some Congress members believe that the military budget should be reevaluated to serve the Americans' needs. It is becoming difficult to separate politics from the budget process. Democrats and Republicans support the budget bill if they feel like it appeals to their political ideologies. For instance, Trump’s administration has enhanced the military’s preparedness since the president has approved more than $100 billion allocated to the Pentagon (Brown, 2020). This funding has translated to increased national defense, especially at the southern border and production of the F-35 program. However, if a leader who believes in prioritizing public health and education becomes the next president, they could reverse these developments. By reducing the Pentagon’s budget, the body may lack the resources to protect the Americans from external threats. Besides, the constant reliance on legislative and executive branches undermines the Pentagon’s strategy. The majority of the state and federal government representatives are unaware of the Pentagon’s requirements, but they evaluate its budget (Myre, 2018). Over the years, Pentagon has been requesting increased funding due to the changes in technology and emerging threats. During President Bush’s era, Pentagon received adequate funding. However, President Obama’s administration reduced the Pentagon’s expenditure. This change reversed the progress and plans that the Pentagon had initiated. Besides, the people who support or reject the budget have little experience in the military. Thus, they may not understand the impact of slight budgetary changes.
Overall, Pentagon’s budget process goes through vital steps, including formulation and execution, to ensure that the state and federal government’s needs are met. The budgetary power is based on checks and balances that involve power-sharing between the government's legislative and executive branches. In most cases, the Pentagon consults Congress when presenting its proposal. Congress will then review the submissions while the president can veto or approve the budget bill. This process ensures that there are transparency and accountability. At times, this process undermines the authority of the Pentagon since it is subject to political beliefs. Nonetheless, if well-implemented, the budget process can benefit the Americans and the Pentagon.
References
Brown, Z. (2020 August 12). The politics of Pentagon spending: Can the US military budget be cut? The National Interest. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/skeptics/politics-pentagon-spending-can-us-military-budget-be-cut-166698
Holcombe, R. G. (2018). Checks and balances: Enforcing constitutional constraints. Economies , 6 (4), 57. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/economies6040057
Jones, L. R., Candreva, P. J., & DeVore, M. R. (2011). Financing national defense: Policy and process . Information Age Publishing.
Korb, L.J. (2020, May 6). The Pentagon fiscal year 2021 budget more than meets US national security needs. American Center for Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/security/reports/2020/05/06/484620/pentagons-fiscal-year-2021-budget-meets-u-s-national-security-needs/
Koscinski, D. G. (2019). Biennial budgeting as a model for deficit reduction in the federal budget proces s [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. John Hopkins University.
Myre, G. (2018, March 26). How the Pentagon plans to spend that extra $61 billion . National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2018/03/26/596129462/how-the-pentagon-plans-to-spend-that-extra-61-billion
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) Chief Financial Officer. Defense budget overview . Department of Defense. https://dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/FY2019-Budget-Request-Overview-Book.pdf
