Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-jwnkl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T00:50:53.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Riding Waves or Making Waves? The Services and the U.S. Defense Budget, 1981–1993

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

James H. Lebovic
James H. Lebovic
Affiliation:
George Washington University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Bureaucratic politics is the favored explanation of those addressing the perversities of defense budgeting. But it is arguably devoid of politics, given its dependence on either aggregate top-down or horizontal models. I seek to redirect analysis. I disaggregate defense spending (by service and weapon type) and study budget sensitivity to program pressures in the buildups and builddowns of the Reagan-Bush eras. Applying a two-equation model to time-series cross-sectional data, the analysis shows weapon budgets increasing with program diversification and a commitment to defense spending. In turn, it shows programs diversifying to accomodate service objectives: when turning to missions, the services increased program varieties while concentrating program resources.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 88 , Issue 4 , December 1994 , pp. 839 - 852
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Armacost, Michael H. 1969. The Politics of Weapons Innovation: The Thor-Jupiter Controversy. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Bendor, Jonathan, and Hammond, Thomas H.. 1992. “Rethinking Allison's Models.” American Political Science Review 86:301–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berry, William D., and Lowery, David. 1990. “An Alternative Approach to Understanding Budgetary Trade-offs.” American Journal of Political Science 34:671–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Asa A. IV. 1984. “Interservice Rivalry and Military Reform.” In The Defense Reform Debate, ed. Clark, A. A. IV, Chiarelli, P. W., McKitrick, J. S., and Reed, J. W.. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Evangelista, Matthew. 1988. Innovation and the Arms Race: How the United States and the Soviet Union Develop New Military Technologies. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Halperin, Morton H. 1974. Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy. Washington: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Hampson, Fen. 1989. Unguided Missiles: How America Buys Its Weapons. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Albert O. 1945. National Power and the Structure of Foreign Trade. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Huntington, Samuel P. 1961. The Common Defense: Strategic Programs in National Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Kotz, Nick. 1988. Wild Blue Yonder: Money, Politics, and the B-1 Bomber. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lindsay, James M. 1990. “Parochialism, Policy, and Constituency Constraints: Congressional Voting on Strategic Weapon Systems.” American Journal of Political Science 34:936–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNaugher, Thomas L. 1989. New Weapons, Old Politics: America's Military Procurement Muddle. Washington: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Majeski, Stephen J. 1983. “Mathematical Models of the U.S. Military Expenditure Decision-making Process.” American Journal of Politimi Science 27:485–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marra, Robin F. 1985. “A Cybernetic Model of the U.S. Defense Expenditure Policymaking Process.” International Studies Quarterly 29:357–84.Google Scholar
Mayer, Kenneth R. 1991. The Political Economy of Defense Contrading. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Michaely, Michael. 1984. Trade, Income Levels, and Dependence. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Mintz, Alex. 1988. The Politics of Resource Allocation in the U.S. Department of Defense: International Crises and Domestic Constraints. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
Mintz, Alex. 1989. “Guns Versus Butter: A Disaggregated Analysis.” American Political Science Review 83:1285–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrocco, John D. 1992. “U.S. Must Redefine Threat, Needs in Post-Soviet Era.” Aviation Week and Space Technology (January 13):34.Google Scholar
Nincic, Miroslav, and Cusack, Thomas R.. 1979. “The Political Economy of U.S. Military Spending.” Journal of Peace Research 16:101–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, Charles W. Jr., 1978. “A Reactive Linkage Model of the U.S. Defense Expenditure Policy Process.” American Political Science Review 72:941–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, Charles W. Jr.,, and Marra, Robin F.. 1986. “U.S. Defense Spending and the Soviet Estimate.” American Political Science Review 80:819–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Puritano, Vincent. 1985. “Resource Allocation in the Pentagon.” In Reorganizing America's Defense, ed. Art, R. J., Davis, V., and Huntington, S. P.. Washington: Pergamon-Brassey's.Google Scholar
Stimson, James A. 1985. “Regression in Space and Time: A Statistical Essay.” American Journal of Political Science 29:914–47.Google Scholar
Su, Tsai-tsu, Kamlet, Mark S., and Mowery, David T.. 1993. “Modeling U.S. Budgetary and Fiscal Policy Outcomes: A Disaggregated, Systemwide Perspective.” American Journal of Political Science 37:213–45.Google Scholar
Taagepera, Rein. 1979. “Inequality, Concentration, Imbalance.” Political Methodology 6:275–91.Google Scholar
United States General Accounting Office. 1992. Weapons Acquisition: A Rare Opportunity for Lasting Change. GAO/NSIAD-93–15. Washington: GAO.Google Scholar
Welch, David A. 1992. “The Organizational Process and Bureaucratic Politics Paradigms: Retrospect and Prospect.” International Security 17:112–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.