The Best Defense

A brief but sorry history of defense reform.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have promised widespread reforms to smoke out waste and abuse at the Pentagon. Sounds fantastic—except that Washington has been churning out blue-ribbon commissions, special task forces, and tough new laws ever since the Pentagon was created.

1949: Landmark Hoover Commission exposes rampant waste at the Pentagon.

1961: President Dwight D. Eisenhower warns of growing might of the “military industrial complex” in last speech as commander in chief. (Aides talked him out of saying “military industrial congressional complex.”)

1970: DOD bigwig David Packard and Fitzhugh Commission pledge to fix contracting process, offer groundbreaking suggestion to “fly before you buy.” Armed Services establish testing offices to make sure that weapons they buy actually work; offices later found to be ineffective because industry was allowed to help design tests.

1980s: Congress requires competitive bidding, accurate cost assessments, and accounting oversight. Defense lobby spends next two decades watering down reforms.

1981: DOD No. 2 Frank Carlucci introduces 32 initiatives to produce more accurate price estimates and increase competition; fails.

1982: Nunn-McCurdy Amendment orders termination of programs whose costs have grown by more than 25 percent over original estimates. However, Congress routinely makes exceptions at the secretary of defense’s request. Today nearly half the DOD’s big weapons programs are in breach of the law.

1986: David Packard heads a new commission, discovers nothing has changed since Fitzhugh Commission 16 years earlier. After measures based on his recommendations to “streamline” acquisitions are introduced, cost overruns on Air Force and development contracts more than triple.

1990s: Series of innovative procurement “reforms” causes acquisitions staff at DOD to be slashed by 50 percent by 2000; much of the work is outsourced.

2002: Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld strips away crucial oversight of missile defense program.

2003: The Army puts Future Combat Systems under “lead systems integrator” contract—meaning the firms that design and build systems also oversee contracting. FCS will go more than 60 percent over budget before being canceled in June.

April 2009: Gates says he’ll stop outsourcing oversight and will add 20,000 acquisition staffers by 2015. Senators Carl Levin and John McCain then pass Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009—promising legislation shot full of holes before it reaches Obama’s desk. Law establishes an office of independent cost assessment; interim director is ex-Raytheon lobbyist William Lynn, who strenuously opposed the office’s creation.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate