{"id":62303,"date":"2020-04-03T16:31:20","date_gmt":"2020-04-03T16:31:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/uncategorized\/2020\/04\/03\/pentagon-denies-it-seeks-to-hide-future-budget-information\/"},"modified":"2026-08-08T00:30:07","modified_gmt":"2026-08-08T00:30:07","slug":"pentagon-denies-it-seeks-to-hide-future-budget-information","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/pentagon\/2020\/04\/03\/pentagon-denies-it-seeks-to-hide-future-budget-information\/","title":{"rendered":"Pentagon denies it seeks to hide future budget information"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

WASHINGTON \u2014 The Pentagon is pushing back on reports that it seeks to classify previously public information<\/a> about its future spending plans, with the department insisting that the transparency of this information that is public as part of the regular budget rollout process will not change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Future Years Defense Program provides spending projections<\/a> for how the Department of Defense plans to invest its money over the coming five-year period. While the numbers are not locked in and regularly change year by year, the projections can provide valuable information to the public and industry about what the department views as priorities and where programs might be going.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Information about a legislative proposal from the Pentagon seeking to classify FYDP data was published Monday<\/a> by Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists. Aftergood wrote that the proposal would \u201cmake it even harder for Congress and the public to refocus and reconstruct the defense budget.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is traditional for FYDP numbers to be included as part of the budget rollout, as well as be included in program-by-program breakdowns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, Pentagon spokesman Chris Sherwood said that the legislative language is not aimed at information that is currently made public during the normal budget process. Instead, it is focused on a requirement in the fiscal 2018 National Defense Authorization Act on what is provided to Congress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe 2018 NDAA required a formal unclassified version of the FYDP report,\u201d Sherwood said in a statement. \u201cThe Department has not to date complied with that request because we are very concerned that providing that level of detail for the outyears might put critical information at risk and breach classification standards.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe DoD is exploring all possible paths forward, including requesting relief from the new requirement, as well as trying to determine how much information can safely be public in addition to all the budget information already made available,\u201d he continued.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt is important to note that there is a difference between a formal Unclassified FYDP report and the unclassified outyear data for any given program that people often refer to as the FYDP for a program. We have and will continue to provide the classified FYDP as we have since 1989. There will be no reduction in any currently provided information,\u201d he added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Asked specifically if that meant information about the FYDP that is usually included in public budget documents provided to media, Sherwood said: \u201cThe legislative proposal would not affect or change how DoD currently provides budget information.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Whether that assurance will satisfy advocates of keeping the FYDP open is uncertain, but the DoD appears behind the ball on convincing Congress that less transparency is a good idea.<\/p>\n\n\n\t