Sequester At A Glance: The Impact on Maryland's Defense Community and National Security

Due to Congress’ failure to take action, the irrational, across-the-board spending cuts known as sequester went into effect last week. Over the next few weeks and months, unless Congress takes action to replace sequestration, our national security will see severe reductions in funding, threatening jobs and impacting programs domestically and abroad. These cuts threaten the mission of our three Southern Maryland military installations – Patuxent River, Webster Field, and Indian Head – as well as Joint Base Andrews. Together these installations have an over $8 billion economic impact on our state and support over 36,000 jobs.

According to a recent White House fact sheet on sequestration, military installations across our state could see thousands of employees furloughed and $114 million in spending cuts:

• Approximately 46,000 civilian Department of Defense employees could be furloughed, reducing gross pay by around $353.7 million.
• Army base operation funding could be cut by about $95 million.
• Funding for Air Force operations could be cut by about $10 million.
• The Navy could experience a $9 million cut in funding for demolition projects at Patuxent River and aircraft depot maintenance in Patuxent River could be canceled. Blue Angels shows at Patuxent River, Annapolis and Ocean City could be canceled, as well.

Local leaders in the defense contracting community have warned of the impact that sequestration is already having on their mission and on our local economy:

• Glen Ives, President of the Southern Maryland Navy Alliance: “This is the most serious, threatening situation we have faced in terms of our nation’s security readiness, the Navy’s mission here at Pax River, the future of government and industry jobs and the potential adverse impacts to our economy and community.” [The Enterprise, 2/8/13]

• Adelle Pierce, Industry Chair of the Naval Aviation Small Business Roundtable: “Sequestration represents a significant threat to the small business contracting community. Small business contractors do not have the ability to absorb the impacts of significant cuts in their business base and are losing jobs as result. The uncertainty surrounding the budget and the lack of clarity prevents our community from doing what it does best – working in partnership with our Navy customers to deliver the latest technology to meet the needs of the fleet. We urge Congress to work together to quickly come to a resolution on these important issues.”

• Dennis Chappell, President of the Indian Head Defense Alliance: “The damage is already done – our community is already feeling the impact of the sequester. The threat of it has already impacted the morale of employees and reduced productivity. There’s a lot of uncertainty with no contracts being awarded and people sitting on their hands – it’s pretty bad situation.”
• M.H. Jim Estepp, President of the Andrews Business & Community Alliance: “The uncertainty of sequestration on top of a struggling economy is causing anxiety and concern among businesses in our region, particularly among defense contractors and others involved in national security, and that can be only be eliminated with bipartisan statesmanship.”

In addition to the local impact, spending cuts across the Department of Defense’s operations could weaken our country’s military readiness:

• The Department of Defense will consider the furlough of up to 800,000 civilian employees (the entire workforce) for up to 22 days. This would result in a 20% reduction in pay for civilian employees. [Military Benefits, 2/21]
• The Army will release about 1,300 temporary and term employees and implement an Army-wide hiring freeze [Army Times, 2/25] and reduce training for 80 percent of U.S. ground forces, which will have grave consequences for troops currently serving in Afghanistan. [Army Times, 2/13]
• The Department of Defense is in the process of implementing a hiring freeze. Under normal circumstances, the Department hires 2,000 personnel per week, 44% of whom are veterans. [CNN, 2/4].
• The Pentagon has cancelled a carrier group’s deployment to the Middle East to save roughly $300 million, reducing the number of aircraft carriers it has in the Gulf from two to one. [RT, 3/3]
• Reduction in capacity equivalent to more than 1,000 federal agents by the FBI and other law enforcement entities.

“This loss of agents would significantly impact our ability to combat violent crime, pursue financial crimes, secure our borders, and protect national security.” [White House]

• Customs and Border Protection could reduce work hours by the equivalent of over 5,000 border patrol agents and 2,750 CBP officers.

“Funding and staffing reductions would increase wait times at airports, weaken security between land ports of entry, limit CBP’s ability to collect 4 revenue owed to the Federal government, and slow screening and entry for those traveling into the United States. At the major gateway airports, average wait times could increase by 30-50 percent.” [White House]

• The Department of Labor’s Veterans Transition Assistance Program, which serves over 150,000 veterans a year, could have to reduce operations.

These cuts translate “into a reduction in the capacity to serve tens of thousands of veterans in their efforts to find civilian employment.” [White House]

• Sequestration could delay approval of U.S. defense exports, according to experts. Under the furlough of civilian employees, many of the offices that process foreign military sales and requests will have fewer workers on a daily basis. Even if a sale is underway, the civilian furloughs could slow the sales. [Defense News, 3/2]
• Another $20 million would be cut from international peacekeeping missions and $35 million from efforts to “counter terror, prevent loose and dangerous weapons from falling into the wrong hands and supervise the safe destruction of conventional weapons.” [Defense News, 3/2]
• Foreign governments have expressed concerns about how sequestration would affect their military interaction with the Department of Defense and their security writ large. [Defense News, 3/2]

And our military leaders have voiced the dangerous impact these cuts could have on national security:

• Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: “These would be the steepest, deepest cuts at a time I would attest is more dangerous than it’s ever been.” [Washington Post, 2/12]
• Army Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond Odierno: “We simply cannot take the readiness of our force for granted. If we do not have the resources to train and equip the force, our soldiers, our young men and women, are the ones who will pay the price, potentially with their lives.” [POLITICO, 2/14]
• Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano: “[Department of Homeland Security cannot absorb the cuts without] significantly negatively affecting frontline operations and our nation’s previous investment in the homeland security enterprise.” [Washington Post, 2/14]
• Former senators Norm Coleman and Joe Lieberman, former defense secretary Bob Gates, Bill Kristol, and others: “Sequestration will result in unacceptable risk for U.S. national security. It will degrade our ability to defend our allies, deter aggression, and promote and protect American economic interests. It will erode the credibility of our treaty commitments abroad. It will be a self-inflicted wound to American strength and leadership in the world.” [2/11]
• Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta: “I have got to use this opportunity to express again my greatest concern as secretary, and frankly one of the greatest security risks we are now facing as a nation, that this budget uncertainty could prompt the most significant military readiness crisis in more than a decade,” [Voice of America, 2/7]
• Senator John McCain: “And if we don't believe our military leaders, then who in the world do we believe? And I think that what we are doing now to the men and women who are serving is unconscionable, because they deserve a predictable life in the military, and also, these federal employees who don't know whether they're going to be laid off or not..” [CNN’s “State of the Union,” 2/24]