Guest post by William D. Hartung, Center for International Policy
In a recent op-ed article on the economics of Pentagon spending, House Armed Services Committee chair Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) cited the Pentagon’s forthcoming audit as a reason for the public to be reassured that the department would be a good steward of taxpayer dollars. He asserted that “the first full audit of the Department will occur this year, which will help uncover areas for financial improvement.”
Thornberry’s claim for the value of the Pentagon’s audit this year seems premature, to put it mildly. While it’s true that the department is throwing resources at the problem—1,200 outside accountants as part of a process that could cost $900 million this year alone—the likelihood that the Pentagon can get its tangled books in order in one year is extremely low.
Far from being reassuring, Thornberry’s categorical statement might be read simply as a way to help justify the huge increases in the Pentagon’s budget over the next two years, which will total $165 billion. The FY 2018 increase alone will be twice the budget of the State Department and larger than the Gross Domestic Product of more than 100 countries. Without careful follow-up and the establishment of interim benchmarks to make sure the Pentagon is indeed making progress, statements like Thornberry’s can be interpreted more as propaganda for more spending than as a commitment to closely scrutinize the audit process.
Thornberry’s stance is in sharp contrast to the position taken by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Sen. Mike Enzi, R-WY, who has written a letter to Secretary of Defense James Mattis in which he noted that “It is important for Congress to better understand how DOD is translating audit findings into changes in its business practices.” In other words, when it comes to the Pentagon audit, we shouldn’t count our chickens before they’re hatched. To do otherwise would not only be immature, but irresponsible as well.