This is historical material “frozen in time”. The website is no longer updated and links to external websites and some internal pages may not work.

Explain why it was better to spend (FY13) $16B on Intl. Assistance and Peace Keeping OPS than $2.5B to prevent furlough

Created by K.P. on July 12, 2013

I believe there to be a disconnect in what the current elected and appointed administration believes is important in the interest of National Security and what their constituents believe.

In the interest of transparency, I request the Cost Benefit Analysis and/or Course of Action Analysis used to make the decision to fund (FY13) $16B in International Security Assistance and Peace Keeping Operations, in lieu of the (FY13) $2.1B to fully fund federal civilians.

What cost, schedule and performance risks, broken down by work area, were accepted and how will these risks be mitigated as sequestration continues and the budget is forcibly reduced?

Budget & Taxes
Homeland Security & Defense
Foreign Policy
Return to top