Sequestration: The Disarming of the United States of America

[American Patriot]

Obama's busy. Golfing probably.

White House puts off congressional picnic

David Jackson, USA TODAY 9:18 a.m. EDT June 11, 2013

(Photo: Susan Walsh, AP)

This probably won't help an already tense relationship between President Obama and Congress.


The White House will not be hosting its annual congressional picnic, at least not this month.



Obama's staff sent lawmakers a notice that "the White House Congressional Picnic for Members of Congress and their families will not take place in June this year. We are hopeful that we will be able to reschedule this event for September."

White House officials said the decision is not the result of sequester budget cuts, but of the president's schedule; Obama has trips this month to Europe and Africa.
From The Hill newspaper:


"The White House Congressional Picnic historically has taken place in mid-to-late June, when lawmakers' children are out of school and families have more flexibility to make the trek to D.C.



"Recently, however, some complained that they had not yet heard from the White House — and that making a last-minute plane reservation to the nation's capital is pricey.



"The White House this year has made efforts to reach out to Congress in order to move an ambitious agenda, but the handling of this event hasn't enhanced the so-called charm offensive.



"'What could have been an occasion for smoothing personal relations could end up making them worse," Claremont-McKenna professor Jack Pitney said, noting the event has served as a way for members and families to cross party lines and get to know each other."

[Ryan Ruck]

A-10, B-1 Vertical Cuts On the Table

June 18, 2013

The Air Force may have to eliminate an entire fleet of a particular kind of aircraft—possibly all A-10s or B-1Bs—in order to live within reduced budgets if sequestration persists into Fiscal 2014 and beyond, Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh said June 17. “It’s cheaper to cut fleets than it is to cut a few from a fleet: a lot cheaper,” Welsh said at an AFA-sponsored Air Force breakfast event in Arlington, Va. “So, it’s a way to recapitalize and modernize,” he added. Although Welsh cautioned that “we’re looking at everything” and “there is no coming together on a final decision…yet,” he told reporters that the logic underlying the last big round of aircraft divestitures still holds. The A-10, he said, is a “single mission airplane” and, pressed for cash, the Air Force must hold onto “multi-mission” aircraft—read F-16—as its first priority. Service officials have noted that retiring all A-10s would solve two financial problems. One is the expense and complexity of maintaining and operating two very different variants within the A-10 fleet: those with and without new wings, and with or without upgraded systems. The retirement also would allow avoidance of the cost of rewinging most A-10s. Welsh said the decisions on what to retire will be made “in partnership with Congress, the National Guard Bureau, with the Air Force Reserve….Right now, we are not limiting options at all.” Last week he said USAF may have to retire as many as 700 more aircraft.

[Ryan Ruck]

I heard yesterday on the radio a number of military bases, to include Camp Lejeune, are having to cancel their fireworks displays due to the, you guessed it, sequestration! Can't go having fireworks displays for the families of troops who have had to pack up and move to a place away from the homes they knew. That's a waste of money!

I'm sure the couple thousand dollars we save from each of those will make a noticeable impact.




Oh and

[American Patriot]

They cancelled here too, at Carson.

Though they plan to hold them in August or somewhere down the road.

[Ryan Ruck]

Obama Warns Disabled Veterans Prolonged Sequester Could Put Their Benefits In Jeopardy

August 10, 2013

President Obama took his case for ending the sequester to hundreds of disabled veterans Saturday, saying he protected their benefits from the “reckless” cuts to the federal budget but suggesting next year might be different.

“It’s hurting our military. I made it clear that your veteran’s benefits are exempt from this year’s sequester,” the president said to the applause of hundreds at the Disabled American Veterans' convention in Orlando, Fla. “But I want to tell you going forward the best way to protect the VA care you have earned is to get rid of this sequester altogether.”

The president but the blame squarely on Congress, which returns in about four weeks to work on a new federal budget and increasing the federal debt limit.

“We’ve got these reckless, across-the-board budget cuts called the sequester that are hitting a lot of folks hard,” Obama said. “Congress needs to come together and agree on a responsible plan that reduces our deficit and keeps our promises to our veterans and keeps our promises to future generations.”

The cuts went into effect in March after Congress and the White House failed to agree on a more balanced plan to cut government spending.

Some Republicans have meanwhile said the president shares in the responsibility, considering he signed the 2011 Budget Control Act that raised the debt ceiling and led to sequester.

The president also told the veterans the government is making progress in reducing the backlog of disability claims but acknowledged the slow pace.

"It hasn’t gone as fast as I’ve wanted,” he said.

The staggering backlog of disability claims for compensation for illness and injury caused by military service has been a main concern for veterans.

The number of claims waiting to be processed ballooned under Obama, largely because the administration made it easier for Vietnam veterans who were exposed to the Agent Orange defoliant to get benefits.

The backlog recently has begun to shrink due to steps by the Department of Veterans Affairs, including requiring claims processors to work overtime and transitioning to a new computer system to help speed the judgment of claims. About 780,000 claims are pending. Currently, about 500,000 are considered backlogged, down from about 611,000 in March.

A claim is deemed backlogged if it has been in the system for 125 days, or roughly four months.

Cutting the backlog was part of a five-point plan the president unveiled that also included better health care for veterans and more funding for prosthetics for disabled veterans.

The president also discussed research into traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder and suicide among veterans and troops, as well as efforts to help veterans earn college degrees or get the credentials needed to compete for high-skilled jobs.

Beyond the backlogged claims, Republican lawmakers have begun to hammer the department on the issue of patient safety. A congressional hearing in Atlanta this past week focused on poor patient care linked to four deaths. Another hearing is scheduled for next month in Pittsburgh, where five veterans died as a result of a Legionnaire's disease outbreak in 2011-12.

Rep. Jeff Miller, R-Fla., chairman of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, said he hoped Obama would use his appearance at the convention to make a personal commitment to solving both issues.

[American Patriot]

They are already having issues.

http://woundedtimes.blogspot.com/201...AACQAAAMC8AwA=

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...t-walter-reed/

But they damn sure can pay to have gay couples meet up...

http://www.towleroad.com/2013/08/pen...-can-marr.html

Paid leave so they can travel to states to 'get married'.

They didn't offer me "free leave". I had to beg for it to get married. I was told "If the Air Force wanted you to have a wife, they'd have issued you one...." and rude shit like that.

Absolute bullshit.

[vector7]

Defense Secretary Hagel Gives Go-Ahead To Army's Planned Aviation Restructure to disarm the National Guards Scout Weapons Teams
Posted: January 10, 2014 Follow InsideDefense.com on Twitter



Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has approved an Army plan to restructure its aviation forces that includes divesting all OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopters and taking all AH-64 Apache helicopters out of the National Guard to fill the active component's armed aerial scout mission requirement, according to a defense official.

The official said the defense secretary has adopted the Army's plan in the form it was briefed on Capitol Hill, to key industry players and to Inside the Army last month. The approval of the aviation restructure was driven by internal Pentagon guidance given to the Army earlier this week.

A resource management decision that will further detail the implementation of the plan, which will inform the fiscal year 2015 budget request, has yet to be distributed. Orders from the Army staff to move the plan forward are expected in March or April, the official added.

Another defense official confirmed the plan has leadership support, but noted the budget is only considered final when the President releases it.

Office of the Secretary of Defense spokeswoman Maureen Schumann told ITA today she did not have any information to release on any decisions from the defense secretary on the proposal, while Army spokesman Lt. Col. Don Peters said the "Aviation Restructure Initiative is still an Army proposal," and referred further questions to OSD.

ITA first reported last month that the Army was proposing to restructure its aviation fleets to deal with declining budgets and expected force reductions. The service's FY-15 through -19 program objective memorandum was set to "salami slice" the Army aviation's budget, according to a service official, leading the Army to develop an alternate plan to better manage its aviation assets and structure the branch in a way that makes sense for its future role.

Army officials said in early December that the service's proposed restructure is designed to simplify the types of platforms within the fleet and divest the oldest, least-capable aircraft.

In addition to retiring the Kiowa fleet and using Apaches to fill the armed scout mission, the Army plans to retire its entire training fleet of TH-67s and replace those with LUH-72A Lakota helicopters.

In return for losing all of its Apaches and some Kiowas and Lakotas -- a total of 215 aircraft -- the Guard will receive 111 L-model Black Hawks, according to a National Guard Association document obtained by ITA. The Guard's total loss amounts to 104 aircraft.

The National Guard Association and Guard advocates on Capitol Hill are questioning the Army's proposed aviation restructure, especially its move to take Apaches out of the Guard.

John Goheen, NGAUS communication director, said last week that taking the attack helicopters away from the Guard amounts to "squandering" valuable experience and capability. "Putting all the aircraft on that active side means that is all you've got," he said. "You have nothing in reserve.

Where is the cost savings here? And quite honestly these proposals never take into consideration the value and experience, nor do they take into consideration the turbulence of these types of moves."

Goheen said the Army plan seemed to have been formulated in a hasty manner without the Guard's input, but Army spokesman Peters disagreed. "The Army has been completely transparent with the National Guard, which participated in the process, throughout the development of the Aviation Transformation effort and we will continue to be," he said.

The Army National Guard Readiness Center is putting together a counter-proposal that "is not ready yet," Goheen said last week, adding that he did not know the details behind it. He said he expected the plan to be ready soon for consideration by OSD.

"The Adjutants General are looking at the proposal," National Guard Bureau Chief Gen. Frank Grass told ITA following a Jan. 9 National Press Club luncheon. "We are getting some feedback; we had a meeting yesterday. We are not at a solution yet, but we are continuing to negotiate."

Grass said the Guard has been working "extremely closely" with the Army to find the right mix. The reserve components should be complementary to the active component, he said when asked whether the Guard needed Apache helicopters as part of its operations. "We've got a lot of experience right now in our Apache units and as the Army draws down we would like to be able to offer those pilots coming off active duty opportunities in the Guard and keep that experience level. What it takes to train an Apache pilot is a lot of time and lot of money. We could take that into the Guard and help save a lot of training and recruiting money," Grass added.

Also on the table in discussions is finding a way to structure the active and reserve components "where you bring the active and Guard to serve together because I think there is huge value there for the future," Grass stated.

"We've got a long way to go, we continue to work it and work it hard and the dialogue is every week. But in the big scheme, we have this budget issue we've got to deal with," he added.

Meanwhile, the Army is continuing to execute a program that is facing cancellation under the service's aviation restructure plan. Retiring the Vietnam-era Kiowa fleet would mean the cancellation of the OH-58's Cockpit and Sensor Upgrade Program, still in its early stages and not slated to reach low-rate initial production until July 2015. CASUP is meant to keep the Kiowa flying until a life-extension program can be initiated or a new replacement procured.

The Army has tried to replace the Kiowa Warrior three times, most recently holding official flight demonstrations of industry offerings from Boeing, Bell, EADS, AgustaWestland and MD Helicopter in the summer and fall of 2012. The Army also looked at data on Sikorksy's yet-to-be-built, next-generation coaxial helicopter, called Raider, that is expected to make its first flight by the end of the 2014.

"KW CASUP continues to execute in accordance with the restructured program schedule approved in August 2013. The first production qualification aircraft build is scheduled to complete in March 2014, and will then enter acceptance test procedures," Army spokeswoman Sofia Bledsoe wrote in a Jan. 9 statement to ITA.

The FY-14 budget and the next POM "are not certain at this time," she said. "In light of this uncertainty, the program is operating prudently by obligating the minimum resources necessary to maintain the program schedule."

The program "will continue to execute the developmental efforts as scheduled until a formal decision is made with respect to the Aviation Force Restructure," Bledsoe wrote. "Current development efforts include supporting the Flight Test Program and PQ aircraft builds for the Limited User Test and Milestone C." -- Jen Judson

[vector7]

General: Strategic Military Satellites Vulnerable to Attack in Future Space War

Military studying new system of smaller, survivable satellites

Follow @FreeBeacon


Gen. William Shelton, Commander, U.S. Air Force Space Command / AP

BY: Bill Gertz Follow @BillGertz
January 8, 2014 4:59 am

U.S. strategic military satellites are vulnerable to attack in a future space war and the Pentagon is considering a major shift to smaller satellites in response, the commander of the Air Force Space Command said Tuesday.

Gen. William Shelton said in a speech that China currently has a missile that can destroy U.S. satellites and warned that the threat of both space weapons and high-speed orbiting debris is growing.

The threat of attack to large communications and intelligence satellites is prompting a major study on whether to diversify the current satellite arsenal of scores of orbiters.

The four-star general also said he is wary of the United States joining an international code of conduct for space, an initiative promoted by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The code likely would constrain the United States’ freedom of action in the increasingly contested realm of space, he said during remarks at George Washington University.

Over the past several decades, satellites have revolutionized war fighting and caused a shift in the character of military forces from large ground armies to forces that emphasize agility and speed.

Shelton said the United States’ highest priority military satellites are those that provide survivable communications and missile warning. Current systems cost about $1 billion each.

If any of these critical satellites are attacked and destroyed in a conflict or crisis, the loss “would create a huge hole in our capability” to conduct modern, high-tech warfare, Shelton said.

“Space has become contested in all orbits, where we face a host of man-made threats that may deny, degrade, or disrupt our capabilities,” Shelton said, noting electronic jamming, laser attacks and “direct attack weapons,” which are all systems being developed by China’s military.

Jamming satellites is “a cheap and effective way of blocking our signals from space” and lasers “can blind our imaging systems, and in the future, they could prove destructive to our satellites,” he said.

“Direct attack weapons, like the Chinese anti-satellite system, can destroy our space systems,” Shelton said.
China’s successful landing of a robot rover on the moon last month revealed “an aggressive Chinese space program,” Shelton said...

China Conducts First Test of New Ultra-High Speed Missile Vehicle

Test is part of a new arms race for super fast weaponry

BY: Bill Gertz
January 13, 2014 4:59 am

China’s military last week conducted the first flight test of a new ultra-high speed missile vehicle aimed at delivering warheads through U.S. missile defenses, Pentagon officials said.

The test of the new hypersonic glide vehicle was carried out Jan. 9 and the experimental weapon is being dubbed the WU-14 by the Pentagon, said officials who spoke on condition of anonymity...

Budget Bill Hits Military Satellite Programs

By Mike Gruss | Jan. 14, 2014

Several other military space programs — chief among them the Air Force’s Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program (Delta 4 Heavy, above) — were spared cuts but will have to make due with much smaller increases than the White House requested for 2014. Credit: United Launch Alliance photo

WASHINGTON — Five U.S. military satellite programs stand to lose a combined $376 million compared to last year under the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill now before Congress. Several other military space programs — chief among them the Air Force’s Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) program — were spared cuts but will have to make due with much smaller increases than the White House requested for 2014.

The House is expected to vote on the 2014 omnibus bill Jan. 15, the expiration date of a stopgap spending measure Congress passed in October to end a 16-day government shutdown. To prevent another spending lapse, the House plans to take up a three-day continuing resolution Jan. 14 that would give the Senate until Jan. 18 to pass the omnibus.

The nearly 1,600-page spending measure, unveiled by Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) and House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) Jan. 13, includes $1.5 billion for the Air Force’s EELV program, which launches the vast majority of U.S. national security satellites. While that is $30 million more than the program received for 2013, it is $367 million less than the service requested for 2014.

The bill also divides the EELV budget into an $809 million budget line covering the hardware and services associated with individual launches and a $678 million line for infrastructure and various other activities. Senate appropriators called for the change last year, saying the move better reflects the Air Force’s EELV contracting arrangement with United Launch Alliance of Denver, and is designed to increase visibility into the program’s finances. The EELV program’s rising costs have drawn heavy congressional scrutiny in recent years, and the Pentagon has acknowledged that the program’s complicated contracting arrangements — one contract for launch services, one for infrastructure and other activities — has made it difficult to identify potential cost savings.

The bill also recommends spending $327 million on space situational awareness, an $80 million increase from last year but some $91 million less than the White House requested for 2014. Lawmakers said a one-year delay for an unnamed space situational awareness-related project, most likely the Air Force’s next-generation Space Fence, would save the service $85 million in 2014.

Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and Training of Moorestown, N.J., and Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems of Tewksbury, Mass., have developed competing designs and prototypes for the new Space Fence, which would be capable of tracking greater numbers of smaller objects than current U.S. space surveillance assets.

Gen. William Shelton, commander of Air Force Space Command, has said he is hoping the Pentagon awards a contract this April.

Among the other major military space programs funded under the omnibus:

•The Air Force’s missile warning satellite constellation, the Space Based Infrared System, stands to receive $873 million — $45 million less than the program’s 2013 budget and $90 million less than the request.

•GPS 3, the Air Force’s next-generation positioning, navigation and timing satellite program, would get $652 million — roughly $130 million less than last year and $47 million below the request. Work on the GPS 3 ground system, meanwhile, would get $327.8 million, which is about $7 million more than last year but about $55 million less than the White House says the project needs.

•The military’s rapid-response space office, known as the Operationally Responsive Space Office, would get $10 million. The Air Force is seeking to dismantle the office and transfer its activities to Air Force Space and Missile Systems Center in Los Angeles. The office is funded by the Air Force but directed by the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

[American Patriot]

yuk.... gonna suck for people out here where I live. They will make cuts. On the GPS stuff.

[vector7]

Defense Secretary Hagel Gives Go-Ahead To Army's Planned Aviation Restructure to disarm the National Guards Scout Weapons Teams
Posted: January 10, 2014 Follow InsideDefense.com on Twitter



Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel has approved an Army plan to restructure its aviation forces that includes divesting all OH-58 Kiowa Warrior helicopters and taking all AH-64 Apache helicopters out of the National Guard to fill the active component's armed aerial scout mission requirement, according to a defense official.
~snip~

In addition to retiring the Kiowa fleet and using Apaches to fill the armed scout mission, the Army plans to retire its entire training fleet of TH-67s and replace those with LUH-72A Lakota helicopters.

In return for losing all of its Apaches and some Kiowas and Lakotas -- a total of 215 aircraft -- the Guard will receive 111 L-model Black Hawks, according to a National Guard Association document obtained by ITA. The Guard's total loss amounts to 104 aircraft.

The National Guard Association and Guard advocates on Capitol Hill are questioning the Army's proposed aviation restructure, especially its move to take Apaches out of the Guard.

John Goheen, NGAUS communication director, said last week that taking the attack helicopters away from the Guard amounts to "squandering" valuable experience and capability. "Putting all the aircraft on that active side means that is all you've got," he said. "You have nothing in reserve.

Where is the cost savings here? And quite honestly these proposals never take into consideration the value and experience, nor do they take into consideration the turbulence of these types of moves."

Goheen said the Army plan seemed to have been formulated in a hasty manner without the Guard's input, but Army spokesman Peters disagreed. "The Army has been completely transparent with the National Guard, which participated in the process, throughout the development of the Aviation Transformation effort and we will continue to be," he said.

The Army National Guard Readiness Center is putting together a counter-proposal that "is not ready yet," Goheen said last week, adding that he did not know the details behind it. He said he expected the plan to be ready soon for consideration by OSD.

"The Adjutants General are looking at the proposal," National Guard Bureau Chief Gen. Frank Grass told ITA following a Jan. 9 National Press Club luncheon. "We are getting some feedback; we had a meeting yesterday. We are not at a solution yet, but we are continuing to negotiate."

Grass said the Guard has been working "extremely closely" with the Army to find the right mix. The reserve components should be complementary to the active component, he said when asked whether the Guard needed Apache helicopters as part of its operations. "We've got a lot of experience right now in our Apache units and as the Army draws down we would like to be able to offer those pilots coming off active duty opportunities in the Guard and keep that experience level. What it takes to train an Apache pilot is a lot of time and lot of money. We could take that into the Guard and help save a lot of training and recruiting money," Grass added.

Also on the table in discussions is finding a way to structure the active and reserve components "where you bring the active and Guard to serve together because I think there is huge value there for the future," Grass stated.

"We've got a long way to go, we continue to work it and work it hard and the dialogue is every week. But in the big scheme, we have this budget issue we've got to deal with," he added.

Meanwhile, the Army is continuing to execute a program that is facing cancellation under the service's aviation restructure plan. Retiring the Vietnam-era Kiowa fleet would mean the cancellation of the OH-58's Cockpit and Sensor Upgrade Program, still in its early stages and not slated to reach low-rate initial production until July 2015. CASUP is meant to keep the Kiowa flying until a life-extension program can be initiated or a new replacement procured.

The Army has tried to replace the Kiowa Warrior three times, most recently holding official flight demonstrations of industry offerings from Boeing, Bell, EADS, AgustaWestland and MD Helicopter in the summer and fall of 2012. The Army also looked at data on Sikorksy's yet-to-be-built, next-generation coaxial helicopter, called Raider, that is expected to make its first flight by the end of the 2014.

"KW CASUP continues to execute in accordance with the restructured program schedule approved in August 2013. The first production qualification aircraft build is scheduled to complete in March 2014, and will then enter acceptance test procedures," Army spokeswoman Sofia Bledsoe wrote in a Jan. 9 statement to ITA.

The FY-14 budget and the next POM "are not certain at this time," she said. "In light of this uncertainty, the program is operating prudently by obligating the minimum resources necessary to maintain the program schedule."

Why would the Obama Administration be disarming the States National Guard Units Scout Weapons Teams?

American Republic replaced by “Council of Governors”?

By Judi McLeod Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Quietly—even stealthily—in the opening days of the New Year, President Barack Obama has set up a “Council of Governors”.

Like the 30-plus czars running America with neither the people’s nor the congress’s blessings, the Council of Governors is already a done deal.

“Is this a first step towards Martial Law, or a tie to the InterPol, RAND National Police Force stuff we’ve been hearing about,” asked a Texas patriot who tipped off Canada Free Press (CFP) after finding news of the new Council of Governors on Twitter. “Is this a sort of Homeland Security Politburo?

“I do know it’s another sleuth order executed without any announcement, OR EXPLANATION to the People.”

Patriots know by now that the promised Obama “transparency” is a fog.

Checking the Net on the Council of Governors, CFP found other than a few blogs only UPI.com had the story as of this morning:

“President Barack Obama Monday established a panel of state governors to collaborate with Washington on a variety of potential emergencies, the White House said.” (UPI.com, Jan. 11, 2010 at 11:54 p.m.).

“Obama signed an executive order establishing a panel to be known as the Council of Governors, which will be made up of 10 state governors, to be selected by the president to serve two-year terms.

Members will review matters involving the National Guard; homeland defense; civil support; and synchronization and integration of state and federal military activities in the United States, the White House said in a statement.

“The statement said the White House would seek input from governors and governors’ association (sic) in deciding which governors to appoint to the council, which will have no more than five governors from the same party.

“The secretaries of defense and homeland security will also sit on the council, as will presidential assistants for homeland security and counter-terrorism, intergovernmental affairs, the U.S. Northern Command commander, the commander of the East Coast Guard, and the chief of the National Guard Bureau.

“The panel was set up under a provision of the Fiscal Year 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, the White House said.”

There was no timestamp on the latest Emergency Order from Whitehouse.gov, which readers can see below.

The Obama administration seems to be conducting the business of America under cover of the dark.

EXECUTIVE ORDER
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COUNCIL OF GOVERNORS
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America,including section 1822 of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-181), and in order to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and State governments to protect our Nation and its people and property, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Council of Governors.
(a) There is established a Council of Governors (Council).The Council shall consist of 10 State Governors appointed by the President (Members), of whom no more than five shall be of the same political party. The term of service for each Member appointed to serve on the Council shall be 2 years, but a Member may be reappointed for additional terms.

(b) The President shall designate two Members, who shall not be members of the same political party, to serve as Co-Chairs of the Council.

Sec. 2. Functions. The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council to exchange views, information, or advice with the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security; the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counter-terrorism; the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement; the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas’ Security Affairs; the Commander,United States Northern Command; the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast Guard; and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive departments or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security.Such views, information, or advice shall concern:

(a) matters involving the National Guard of the various States;

(b) homeland defense;

(c) civil support;

(d) synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States; and

(e) other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland defense, and civil support activities.

Sec. 3. Administration.
(a) The Secretary of Defense shall designate an Executive Director to coordinate the work of the Council.

(b) Members shall serve without compensation for their work on the Council. However, Members shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law.

(c) Upon the joint request of the Co-Chairs of the Council, the Secretary of Defense shall, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, provide the Council with administrative support,assignment or detail of personnel, and information as may be necessary for the performance of the Council’s functions.

(d) The Council may establish subcommittees of the Council. These subcommittees shall consist exclusively of Members of the Council and any designated employees of a Member with authority to act on the Member’s behalf, as appropriate to aid the Council in carrying out its functions under this order.

(e) The Council may establish a charter that is consistent with the terms of this order to refine further its purpose,scope, and objectives and to allocate duties, as appropriate,among members.

Sec. 4. Definitions. As used in this order:
(a) the term “State” has the meaning provided in paragraph (15) of section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002(6 U.S.C. 101(15)); and

(b) the term “Governor” has the meaning provided in paragraph (5) of section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122(5)).

Sec. 5. General Provisions.
(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

- (1) the authority granted by law to a department, agency, or the head thereof; or

- (2) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary,administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA
THE WHITE HOUSE,January 11, 2010.

[vector7]

The Navy Is Dropping Down to Just Two Deployed Carriers

Fair use
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/fb63ed05551a

The Navy Is Dropping Down to Just Two Deployed Carriers
Fifty-percent reduction is mostly budget-driven

David Axe



The U.S. Navy is about to cut in half the number of aircraft carriers it keeps ready for combat. Starting in 2015, just two American flattops will be on station at any given time, down from three or four today.

The change is spelled out in a presentation by Adm. Bill Gortney, head of Fleet Forces Command. The U.S. Naval Institute published the presentation on its Website on Jan. 24.

The new “Optimized Fleet Response Plan” represents an effort to standardize training, maintenance and overseas cruise schedules for the Navy’s 283 front-line warships, in particular the 10 nuclear-powered carriers.

The OFRP is also meant to save money and keep the Navy functioning under budget cuts mandated by the sequestration law. But to be clear, even after the change the Navy will still deploy more, bigger and better ships than any other maritime force in the world.

Warships will adopt a 36-month calendar. In each three-year cycle, a ship will sail on patrol once for eight months. “All required maintenance, training, evaluations and a single eight-month deployment will be efficiently scheduled,” Gortney claimed.

That means less than a quarter of the combat fleet—possibly fewer than 70 ships—will be deployed at any given time, down from 81 today. The Navy keeps around two-thirds of its combat power in the Pacific, equal to around 45 deployed ships under the OFRP.

Fewer frontline ships will be on patrol under the new plan, but those ships—and their crews—should be in better condition, having spent more time at home for training and refit, Gortney claimed. “The Optimized Fleet Response Plan has been developed to enhance the stability and predictability for our sailors.”

Sailing less often also helps the Navy shift funding into ship maintenance, a traditionally under-funded but vital activity that ensures vessels can serve for their entire 30-to-50-year planned lifespan.

But the undeniable fact is that there will be fewer Navy ships near potential hot spots starting next year. Based on historical patterns, it’s likely the Navy will keep one aircraft carrier in the Western Pacific near China and another in the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf to watch over Iran.

U.S. flattops will be routinely absent from the rest of the world’s oceans, although the Navy will also be able to deploy two assault ships carrying helicopters and Harrier or Joint Strike Fighter jump jets—mini-carriers, in a sense.

Moreover, the OFRP standardizes and enlarges carrier strike groups, concentrating the smaller deployed fleet into fewer but bigger formations. “These CSGs will be composed of seven to eight, vice current three to four, surface combatants,” Gortney explained.

The concentration will be achieved in part by shifting ballistic-missile-defense ships—cruisers and destroyers fitted with missiles and radars for shooting down enemy rockets—away from independent patrols. Instead, many of the BMD ships will sail alongside the carriers.

The addition of missile-defense ships to the carrier groups could help the flattops defend themselves against Chinese-made DF-21D “carrier-killer” rockets in the event of a major war.

But Gortney stressed that some missile-defense patrols will need to be independent—most likely, those conducted by the Navy’s new four-ship destroyer squad in Rota, Spain. Those four ships are meant to patrol the Mediterranean, where American aircraft carriers will rarely venture.

The handful of destroyers carrying Scan Eagle drones and Fire Scout robot helicopters could also be exempted from carrier-group duty, Gortney added. These vessels frequently sail alone along the East African coast in order to gather intelligence for Special Operations Forces secretly working ashore.

The new plan will mean fewer but more powerful Navy deployments, but does not mean an end to routine, small-scale humanitarian and goodwill cruises. Rather, those “softer” naval missions are increasingly the purview of the quasi-civilian Military Sealift Command, which operates more than 100 lightly-armed specialist ships alongside the frontline Navy.

The Navy recently bought MSC 10 small, speedy catamaran transports and four Mobile Landing Platform “sea base” ships specifically so that those cheaper vessels could handle soft missions. Sealift Command ships might become a more common sight across the globe at the same time that aircraft carriers become rarer.

[American Patriot]

We have a saying when the command structure, or a group of co-workers (all of whom are responsible for a system) all walk into a meeting, or get on the bus together.

That saying goes,"Just one hand grenade...." and the rest is left unstated.

For the uninitiated or those who aren't familiar - it means "When you have all your eggs in one basket, and you drop them, you're fucked."

One carrier off each ocean.... Let me see, our ability to "project power" becomes limited. One tactical nuke will destroy a carrier and most of their fleet.

Do that in the Atlantic and you lose the East Coast.

Do it on the west Coast and we've lost nothing but California, Oregon, Washington and Alaska.... nothing too big I suppose, liberals, marxists, assholes, hollyweirdos... who cares.

Seriously, do the fucks in charge NOT see the reduction in forces as a weakening of the overall structure of America?

Actually, I am sure they do. This is treasonous.

[Ryan Ruck]

Hey now, we've got Obamaphones and EBT cards to pay for.

Ain't nobody got time for aircraft carriers.

[American Patriot]

Guess not.

Might as well give up, turn in my guns and be a good little fucking commie socialist. It's what they want anyway, ain't it?

[vector7]

They are knowingly dismantling America's defenses while monitoring Russia and China quickly rearming with growing allies gravitating toward them in every region.

They want America destroyed, just look at their foreign policy over the last 5 years.

[MinutemanCO]

They are knowingly dismantling America's defenses while monitoring Russia and China quickly rearming with growing allies gravitating toward them in every region.

They want America destroyed, just look at their foreign policy over the last 5 years.

Agreed. It's just a matter of time.

[Ryan Ruck]

Unfunded F-16 Upgrades Put Jet's Combat Value in Doubt

Taiwan, Singapore Were Banking on Now-defunded Program

February 2, 2014

As officials in Taiwan’s Ministry of National Defense (MND) were busying themselves for Chinese New Year celebrations last week, they received potentially devastating news for the Pacific nation’s air defense plans.

The US Air Force plans to defund the combat avionics programmed extension suite (CAPES) program, as budget constraints could force the service to move remaining money from CAPES to the F-16 service-life extension program (SLEP), according to sources.

While a lower profile program in the US, CAPES has huge implications for Taiwan. The program would upgrade 300 US F-16s and 146 Taiwanese F-16s with top-line avionics. While more US F-16s would receive the upgrade, the Taiwan piece represents a larger percentage of its overall fighter fleet. And without the program, Taiwan could be stuck with an aging fleet of F-16s as it continues to worry over China’s intentions.

Its largest feature would be the integration of the Northrop Grumman scalable agile beam radar (SABR) with Lockheed Martin as prime contractor.

If CAPES remains unfunded, Taiwan has several options. The first is to go forward and pay the additional costs of the program under CAPES with no financial assistance from the US. While exact costs aren’t clear, such a move seems unlikely, as Taiwan’s military is going through severe cuts and struggling to pay off previous US arms deals.

The second option is drop out of CAPES and go with South Korea’s F-16 upgrade solution with Raytheon’s advanced combat radar with BAE Systems as prime contractor. South Korea is upgrading 134 KF-16C/Ds.

The third option is to continue pressuring the US to release new F-16C/D fighters or F-35s.

“I would think this would increase the pressure on the US to approve new F-16s for Taiwan, but that option is fast disappearing if it hasn’t already,” said Ed Ross, former principal director, Security Cooperation Operations, US Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA). “All that would leave for Taiwan would be F-35s and, frankly, I don’t believe the US will ever approve F-35s for Taiwan.”

Ross said the technology is too sensitive, “and there is a growing fear in Washington of US technology falling into Chinese hands one way or the other.”

Ross said better relations between Beijing and Taipei has had unintended consequences, “one of which is the reduction in high-tech arms sales to Taiwan.”

Getting SABR into Taiwan’s aging fleet of F-16A/Bmodels would provide a large jump in capabilities. Since 2006, the US has repeatedly denied Taiwan’s request to buy 66 F-16C/D fighters due to political pressure from China. Instead, the US successfully pushed the CAPES option, despite Taiwan’s objections to being stuck with paying for non-recurring engineering costs on the integration of SABR.

Taiwan was sold on the CAPES program after the US emphasized the importance of having compatible systems during a war with China. In 2011, Taiwan signed up for the $5.3 billion program for its remaining 146 F-16A/B fighters purchased in the 1990s.

Fu Mei, director of the Taiwan Security Analysis Center, said the importance of the crisis is lost on MND officials, who are clearing their desks in preparation for week-long celebrations that will usher in the Year of the Horse.

MND officials denied the report that the program is defunded, while a US Air Force spokeswoman declined to comment on budget details ahead of its release on March 4.

“My guess is that the [Air Force] will do its best to come up with a solution, but Taiwan may not be able or willing to afford it,” Ross said.

“I expect, at best, this will cause a major delay in the program,” he said. “Worst-case scenario, the F-16 upgrade program gets canceled or indefinitely delayed and Taiwan is left with an aging fleet of A/Bs.

“With no new F-16C/Ds approved for Taiwan, its Air Force is up a creek with not much of a paddle; and I’m not sure there is anyone in the Obama administration that gives much of a damn,” said Ross, president of the consultancy EWRoss International.

One potential cost-sharing option could still come into play. On Jan. 14, DSCA informed Congress of a possible upgrade of 60 Singapore F-16C/Ds for $2.43 billion. The program would include 70 active electronically scanned array radars.

However, given the potential CAPES budget cut, Singapore might delay a decision on whether it goes with the CAPES framework or choose South Korea’s F-16 upgrade program. If the F-16 upgrade plan falls apart, Singapore could go forward more quickly with the procurement of the F-35.

If Singapore chooses to go forward with the CAPES solution without the US as a participant, it would have to share costs related to non-recurring engineering issues with Taiwan. However, this is expected to be expensive even if both Singapore and Taiwan share these costs.

Mei said the US Air Force is “counting on Singapore signing the letter-of-acceptance for their F-16 upgrade, along with the CAPES/SABR solution path, before the FY2015 budget officially comes out.”

“That way, they could claim there is some critical mass to support the development of the upgrade technology,” he said. “However, Singapore has only a relatively small number of aircraft, not enough to replace the 300 [the US Air Force] had planned under CAPES.”

Asked whether regional partners have expressed concern over the US budget situation and the impact on joint operations, Gen. Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle, the US Commander for Pacific Air Forces, said “Yeah, they definitely have.”

“Last year, we had to cancel some exercises. That was incredibly concerning amongst our friends, partners and allies,” Carlisle said in a Jan. 30 interview. “If there is any angst down here it’s [about] the budget situation we’re facing, the rebalance to the Pacific and, given the fiscal constraints that the US has, if we’re going to be able to follow through on that. I think all of our partners acknowledge that we’re trying to do that.

“But on the same hand, I think there is some concern in many nations how well we’re going to be able to do that given the fiscal constraints.”

While Carlisle would not confirm the CAPES cut specifically, he did indicate that updating the F-16s remains important.

“We would hope in this case that if it in fact comes out of the budget, it’s a slip to the program for a period of time, not more than that,” Carlisle said. “Clearly, the F-16s are going to be around for a long time, and we need to upgrade the capabilities of that airframe.”

The CAPES budget cut is symbolic in many ways of the choices the US Air Force has had to make between modernizing old aircraft and recapitalizating new platforms.

Gen. Michael Hostage, the head of US Air Combat Command, outlined the tradeoff in a Jan. 27 interview. Asked what he would do with a larger budget, Hostage highlighted modernization efforts for F-15s and F-16s.

“Honestly, I wish I had enough money to both refurbish my legacy fleet and continue to keep the replenishment on track because what I would like to have is the 1,763 F-35 fleet and then whatever residual legacy fleet I still have would still be tactically capable and be aerodynamically capable,” said Hostage, who was speaking generally and would not confirm budget specifics. “In other words, there is SLEP and CAPE.”

“If I could only do one, [SLEP] is the one I would do because I would still have something to fly, it is just going to be tactically nonviable sooner because I did not do the CAPE,” Hostage said. “If I do the CAPE only and do not do the SLEP, then it becomes unsafe to fly long before it becomes tactically nonviable.

“So, if I am going to do one or the other, I would do SLEP first. I can fly with lesser capability, but I have just become that much more dependent even sooner on a strong fifth [generation] fleet.”

[Ryan Ruck]

LRS-B, Next Boomer May Force Weapons Cuts

September 4, 2014

It won’t happen tomorrow, but the Pentagon may have to start eating its young to pay for two of the most expensive weapons in US history: the Air Force’s Long Range Strike bomber and the Navy’s replacement for the Ohio class nuclear missile submarine.

That’s the estimation of Todd Harrison, the top budget expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment. His conclusions are based on a new detailed report, Analysis of the FY 2015 Budget Request being released as you read this.

FINAL Weapon Systems Factbook


Why? While the budget picture appears sustainable for the next few years, LRS-B and Ohio Replacement will begin to cost so much as the programs ramp up — along with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter — that Harrison concludes there just won’t be enough money to pay for it all.

“If you look at fiscal 2020 as a snapshot in time (one year after the end of the FYDP [Future Years Defense Plan]), the Air Force will need $7 billion for the F-35A, $3.4 billion for the KC-46A [tanker], $2.9 billion for EELV [rockets], and $2.2 billion for C-130J [cargo planes]. I’m projecting they will need about $3.5 billion for LRS-B that year. The question becomes,” Harrison says, “can they do all of those major programs at the same time?”

The same is true for the Navy in 2020. They will need about $3.4 billion for Ford-Class aircraft carriers, $6 billion for Marine F-35Bs and Navy F-35Cs, $1.4 billion for the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS), Harrison projects, “and an unspecified amount for SSNs [attack submarines] and DDGs [destroyers] (their SAR projections don’t account for procurements beyond the FYDP, even though the shipbuilding plans says they will keep buying something). My estimate shows they will likely need more than $4 billion that year for Ohio Replacement.”

He analyzed whether they can fund all of those programs at the same time.

“In both cases, I think the answer is no — they will not be able to afford all of the programs currently planned if the topline DoD budget is capped at the BCA level or the PB level.”

The Navy has already admitted it cannot fund its shipbuilding plans because of the costs of the Ohio Replacement in its latest 30-year shipbuilding plan: “The DON can only afford the SSBN procurement costs with significant increases in our top-line or by having the SSBN funded from sources that do not result in any reductions to the DON’s resourcing level.”

The Air Force and Navy would need to cut back on some combination of force levels, acquisitions, and readiness to make enough budget headroom for these programs, Harrison estimates. Since both services have already substantially cut their force levels and lowered readiness, Harrison believe they will have to cut other major acquisition programs to fund LRS-B and Ohio Replacement.

Now the so-called out-years are notoriously difficult to predict, especially in this era of sequestration, Continuing Resolutions and general congressional messiness, but Harrison is making his estimates based on DoD’s own figures and reasonable extrapolations.

Just my armchair general opinion but I think LRSB can be put on hold for a while. Fact is we've got B-2s which are little used and should be in good shape and we do still have B-1s, assuming they haven't stupidly been ragged out providing CAS in Afghanistan and Iraq because we don't have a tactical bomber like the F-111.

The Ohio boomers are getting a bit long in the tooth though and we should certainly be looking at a replacement for them.

The LCS mentioned above is a boondoggle that badly needs cut.

[Ryan Ruck]

Downsized US Army To Pass On 533 Shunned OH-58, TH-67 Helicopters

July 8, 2015

The US Army has already found a home for 119 of the 652 Bell OH-58 Kiowa and TH-67 Creek helicopters that have been displaced under the service’s aviation restructure initiative, according to a recent report provided to Congress.

Of those airframes, 60 TH-67s are being loaned to US Department of Justice to support its operations in Colombia through US Southern Command. Another 20 of the FAA-certified trainers are being moved internally to the Army’s combat training centre and five are moving to the Navy’s test pilot school.

The Army is keeping five Kiowas as prototype test aircraft and another 24 for parts reclamation. The remainder of the 119 aircraft are “pending attrition”, leaving a total of 307 OH-58Ds, 130 OH-58A/Cs and 96 TH-67s available for reuse or transfer as of 4 May – when the report was sent to lawmakers. An Army spokesman confirmed the details of the document 8 July.



The aircraft are available due to the Army’s controversial aviation shake-up, which retires the OH-58 armed scout helicopter and replaces the TH-67 with the dual-engined Airbus UH-72 Lakota as a cost-cutting measure, expected to save $12 billion up front and a further $1 billion annually in avoided operating and support costs.

Transfer of the TH-67s, based on the Bell 206B-3 JetRanger, is expected to be fairly easy since the aircraft are FAA-certified and available to the civil aviation community.

Moving the OH-58 presents more of a challenge, since the aircraft are not civil-certified and can only be used domestically by government agencies for non-commercial purposes. Transferring the 307 D-models will be even more difficult, since the aircraft has a fully integrated surveillance and targeting system and is “incapable of safe flight operations following the removal or demilitarisation of equipment without significant engineering design change and modifications”.

Those aircraft can be sold internationally as combat helicopters through the US government’s foreign military sales process. Eight countries have expressed interest in buying the OH-58Ds and the forecast demand between 2015 and 2019 is for 41 aircraft, the report says.



The report also addresses concerns that flooding the market with excess defence stock will hurt manufacturers.

“The impact to the domestic rotary wing industrial base due to Army’s divestment of the OH-58 and TH-67 is assessed as low,” the report concludes, adding that only one of six manufacturers (that is not a defence supplier) could lose up to 9.8% of its annual revenue. “It does not represent a significant threat to the domestic rotary wing industrial base because the total revenue of the remaining five, which includes two DOD suppliers, is not significantly disrupted.”

To back up its assessment, the report notes that the forecast market demand for light, single-engine helicopters between 2015 and 2019 is 125 aircraft for law enforcement and government agencies and 3,258 for the civil market. The Army expects to displace 34% of demand among state and federal government agencies in that time period with the A- and C-model OH-58s and TH-67. The TH-67 could displace up to 2.9% of the civil market.



The aviation restructure, if fully implemented, would remove all Boeing AH-64 Apache attack helicopters from the reserve and national guard units and move them to the active force to fill the armed aerial scout role. In exchange, more than 100 Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawks would go to the reserve force.

The move is opposed by the US National Guard Bureau and come in Congress, since removing the OH-58 and TH-67 from service is expected to eliminate 10,700 positions in the Army – according to the US Government Accountability Office.

The service is downsizing due to shrinking budgets and a reduced combat role since the height of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. This week, it was reported that the Army’s active force will downsize to 450,000 personnel by budget year 2017.

[Ryan Ruck]

US Navy Looking At Bringing Retired Carrier USS Kitty Hawk Out Of Mothballs

Bringing back its last operational conventionally powered supercarrier would help the Navy make its 12 carrier fleet goal a reality.

June 8, 2017

As the US Navy struggles to figure out how it can reach its new goal of a 355 ship fleet—up from 275 ships today—as quickly as possible, it has been looking towards extending the life of the ships it already has in service. Now the service is also examining the possibility of selectively pulling ships out of mothballs, refurbishing them, and sending them back to the fleet. One ship in particular may have a better shot than others at sailing the high seas once again—the USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63)—America's last operational conventionally fueled supercarrier.

The head of the Navy's Sea Systems Command, Vice Admiral Thomas Moore, stated that while most ships in the inactive fleet are in too sorry a state to be worth reviving, the USS Kitty Hawk may not be: "Of the carriers that are in inactive force, probably Kitty Hawk is the one that you could think about. But we studied that when we decommissioned Enterprise, and the carriers are pretty old."



Certainly pulling a carrier directly back into service would go a long way to bridging America's "carrier gap" and would make President's Trump's demand for a 12 supercarrier fleet much more obtainable. Currently the Navy has 10 operational supercarriers, and with the USS Gerald Ford's (CVN-78)entry into service date murky at best, that number may not increase for years to come.

Even just the possibility of Kitty Hawk returning to the fleet is likely music to the ears of those in Mayport, Florida, who have been begging the US Navy to return a supercarrier to the naval station there. The facility was never upgraded to support nuclear propulsion, so after the USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67) was retired in 2007, it has been without a resident supercarrier, which hurt the local economy and also has strategic implications as well. The Kitty Hawk would be an ideal candidate to call the base home without the need for major infrastructure investments.

Some of the other ships that would seem to be likely candidates for revival will probably be passed over—specifically the first five Ticonderoga class cruisers that sit quiet on the Delaware River. These ships didn't feature Mark 41 vertical launch systems, instead being equipped with twin-arm Mark 26 missile launchers and their associated magazines. But still, many have regarded their rickety reserve status a huge waste of latent surface warfare potential. Moore thinks otherwise, and probably for good reason.

The ships are vastly outdated compared to their active counterparts, and would take serious money to get them even close to their fleet counterparts standard. Not just that, but they have been cannibalized for spare parts in recent years. Moore says: "Most of those ships, from a combat systems perspective, are pretty obsolete...We probably wouldn’t bring them back and they’ve kind of been spare-parts lockers the last couple of years."


The sorry state of the (CG-47) at naval yards in Philadelphia

Regenerating old ships is all about balancing the cost of bringing them back into service based on what mission sets they could provide, how degraded a capability compared to their modern counterparts is acceptable, and how long they could remain in service once the money has been invested in them.

Aside from the Kitty Hawk, the best candidates for regeneration are the ships that could take on lower-end tasks, and thus not require the huge amount of technological investment as their more advanced cousins require. Primarily this includes the Navy's mothballed logistical ships and especially its Oliver Hazard Perry class frigates. The tough Oliver Hazard Perry class ships were retired too soon by many accounts—a symptom of their fiscal neglect more than anything else—and were ripe for a major upgrade like many of the second-hand models operated by allied Navies around the globe have received. Some of these enhancements include the installation of Mark 41 vertical launch systems and upgrades to the ship's sensors and combat systems.


Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate USS Thatch patrols the Persian Gulf in 2009

"We’ll go look at the FFGs, see if there is utility there... We’ll look at the combat logistics force, see if there’s utility there... So, there is limited opportunity in the inactive fleet but we’ll look at it ship-by-ship."

It is very likely President Trump would support such a plan, in fact we predicted exactly this type of asset regeneration program would occur under his administration. Trump also has a personal history with being very comfortable with operating aging but upgraded vehicles. He even hinted at the possibility of bringing back the Iowa class battleship during his campaign, although that is extremely unlikely to ever happen regardless of the political will involved.