In a titanically sinking economy, and with deficits raging all around, nobody wants to be the person who cries out, “cut them, not us.” When fiscal restraint, prudence or conservatism is called for and the stakes are as high as they appear to be, everybody ought to want to do his or her part to be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

But it does help to know what one is talking about.

And it is vital that Congressional committees and important think tanks are provided accurate assessments and information, rather than some of the self-serving falsehoods and misleading half-truths, or just plain “oops-we-didn't-know-that!” reports that have been put before these decision-makers and legislators recently.

A prime example of this is the Center for Strategic Budgetary Analysis' (CSBA) recent report to various congressional committees and the Defense Business Board (DBB).

NOT IN THE GROCERY
BUSINESS, SIR!
An increasingly short while ago, in fact, on Sept. 10, 2001, the day before the world changed, Donald Rumsfeld, then-Secretary of Defense, proclaimed, or rather “pro-questioned,” “Why am I in the grocery business?” The business in question was the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA) and Rummy had mistaken it for a grocery chain, and not what it is, a benefit that just happens to be a grocery business. Commissaries and exchanges also serve as hubs for the military community, gathering places, and as support mechanisms for military families — not to mention a vital component of military readiness, the latter being a commodity that is in increasing demand, and in need of all the support it can get.

The next day, which, to borrow a phrase from FDR, shall “live in infamy,” saw an overt act of war waged on the American people, and for the first time in many decades, on American soil. And the war hasn't stopped since — it might be forgotten to some, but it hasn't stopped. Rather, present foes may have been held at bay; but make no mistake, all they seek is the opportunity to strike again, when the back is turned. This enemy deals in decades, centuries and millennia, while our memories tend to self-erase within a generation. The temptation is to let the guard down, and in the process relax readiness and trim support for the soldier and his family.

CUTS and EFFICIENCIES
The good news is that draconian or counterproductive cuts to quality of life may not be the bullet loaded in the chamber. Efficiencies are likely to be a path that will yield more beneficial savings, as the government seeks ways to lop $100 billion from Defense overhead spending. The bad news is that not all efficiencies are created equal, and some are proven mirages, as shown in the story on pages 6 and 7.

The Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation is not far behind the CSBA in its antediluvian view of the resale benefits.

Year after year, decade after decade, quadrennium after quadrennium, the same reports and disproved theories are dusted off and cited when the budgetary critical mass hits the fan, and unfortunately, they can sometimes find audiences all too willing to believe the hype.

SOFT TARGET
The first target is typically the commissary system — the lifeblood of readiness. When she was COB chair, the Army's highest-ranking female soldier, Gen. Ann E. Dunwoody, USA, (G4), said in the April 2007 issue of E and C News, “Our national leaders have rightly identified the commissary as an important component of military readiness.” The general continued, “What is extraordinary is how DeCA continues to sharpen its business practices and today we have a world-class commissary system that operates at near peak efficiency — one that continues to increase the commissary's value to servicemembers and their families.”

Why the DBB would consciously condone pulling up this cornerstone of military readiness is almost baffling. Almost — if it were not for the fact that we fully understand the intensity verging on desperation with which savings are being sought, and the understandable pressure from the Secretary of Defense and the President to achieve them. The need to reduce overhead has reached a crisis point, but knee-jerk reactions based on old quadrennial and Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reports that have long been discredited are not the solution.

Ditto the consolidation or abandonment of the military exchange system. Pull it out of the ground and you lose downrange tactical field exchange support, vital supplies and important troop essentials.

From soda to gum to baby wipes (especially downrange), fast food and beyond to tactical gear and accessories, and even, yes, tobacco, several thousand downrange SKUs have made this war sustainable thus far, as have armor plating and flak jackets, for nine years and counting. Just ask a veteran front-line soldier if you don't believe. And conflict does not seem to be going away any time soon.

Exchange consolidation was recently the subject of a study that squandered millions of dollars of taxpayers' money, and yielded precious little in terms of efficiencies the exchange services hadn't already figured out how to accomplish themselves. Millions in supposed savings in the out years evaporated in the harsh light of close scrutiny. Consolidation was shown to be more expensive over decades than the current Navy, Marine Corps, and Army & Air Force exchange services and systems, which have become highly adept at working together, and also with DeCA, installation commands and MWR.

“After several years and millions of dollars, we seem to be no closer to making a decision on the best course for exchange consolidation,” stated then-House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Military Personnel Subcommittee Chairman John M. McHugh, who is now Secretary of the Army, in the March 15, 2005, Hearing on the Current Status of Military Commissaries, Exchanges and Morale, Welfare and Recreation (MWR) Activities. “Before we embark on any further effort to explore options, whether they are consolidation or sharing of functions, we should ensure that the business case appears promising before we proceed. If the business case is uncertain, it might be time to cut our losses and recognize that there are no great advantages to exchange consolidation.”

There are, however, some things that might remain to be accomplished — Information Technology (IT) comes to mind — but as any student of IT integration can tell you, it isn't that simple, and it can be extremely expensive. Generally, the maxim applies: “If it ain't broke, don''t fix it.” More flexible and less difficult-to-integrate software solutions will come in time, and at that point the time might be right to invest. In the meantime, those are dollars we don't have to waste on forcing solutions that will cause more harm and waste than good.