Your support is ensuring that Heritage’s defense team has the resources needed to make an incredible impact on our nation’s security.

No other think tank can match the real world experience of Heritage’s defense team. The team has recently grown from 3 to 8 people, making it a nimble and effective group.

The team is made up of high ranking officers from each of the military branches and collectively they hold over 100 years of military experience.

Because of your support, Heritage’s defense team is able to maintain a completely unbiased perspective–unlike other think tanks that rely on government or industry money for their funding.

Some of their specific recommendations have been incorporated in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which recently worked its way through Congress.

Here’s a list of their recommendations that were included in the NDAA:

  • A topline base budget of $632 billion with $14 billion in reinvested savings.
  • Ending the establishment of a new Space Corps and for the streamlining of the space command-and-control structure.
  • A 2.4% pay raise, in opposition to initial 2.1% raises that were suggested by the White House and the Senate.
  • The Conference also took Heritage’s recommendation to reduce the number of headquarters high-level staff. It limits the number of Deputy Assistant Secretary to 48 and removes one Assistant Secretary.
  • The Conference adopted the full initial Heritage recommendation for the Missile Defense Agency and the supplemental request that was issue by the White House in November. The MDA funding totaled $12.3 billion in the conference report.
  • A more robust shipbuilding account to accelerate the goal of a 355 fleet. The Conference report authorized the building of 14 new ships, above both the House and the Senate initial NDAA.
  • More robust incentive pay programs for desirable and needed careers. 

Our Index of Military Strength continues to be an indispensable resource for the administration, with over 1 million page views to date.

Your support makes all of this possible.

Do you believe America’ s military is well-prepared for global conflict?

Comments (16)

Paul Wilson - November 17, 2017

I do not feel we are prepared for a modern conflict with another country, whether it is Iran or Russia. I feel we need to be proactive in developing weapons defense systems that other countries don’t have. Too many countries are obtaining our technology and weapons systems, such as nuclear missiles that didn’t use to have them. we need to protect ourselves from this. Also, don’t forget about China.

Art Meadows - November 17, 2017

We are prepared only if you consider a full TRIAD nuclear offense and a strategic in-place missile defense system. What worked for Reagan will work for Trump.

Dewey Reinhard - November 17, 2017

I agree with Mr. Wilson’s assessment, but I also feel that our existing capabilities are marginal ie. the Navy collisions, the existing rules of engagement for our troops, and being behind the power curve in cyber warfare.

John Conor - November 17, 2017

Funds are tight and will be that way forever. I like to see some bases that have overlapping coverage closed and the dollars saved be rolled into upgrading our service readiness, the VA’s delivery of treatments and wages for our military families. The world is a lot smaller now and response times quicker so do away with 2nd and 3rd tier bases or ask those nations that object to a closure in their country to pay for its operations costs.

Robert Hammons - November 17, 2017


George Quintanilla - November 18, 2017

We need to Strengthen our Military. We also need to take care of all our Retired Military personnel. Because they have done their part so now the Goverment needs to do thier part and take care of them.

June Spooner - November 18, 2017

The plan does not address the problem of lack of military personnel. Should we go back to the draft? Only 1% of families have a member in our armed forces. Air Force has plans with no one trained to fly them.

Ragnar Liljequist - November 18, 2017

I feel that American industry has financed the weaponizing of China to the point where they have exceeded our capability to defend ourselves. The communists have outfoxed the capitalists in my opinion.

Diana Solorzano - November 18, 2017

At this time we are not well equipped. We need to build weapons that are far more advanced than any other country. I would never want to see the United States engage in war. Peace through military strength and diplomacy.

Mrs. Phyllis Eix - November 18, 2017

I am confident we are on track to become well prepared for any military action that might be required of us, and I give much credit to Heritage for it’s contributions to the pool of recommendations.

Jerry Metcalf - November 18, 2017

First you must get the left-overs out of the DoD and anything to do with the military.

William Coates - November 18, 2017

No, and it doesn’t need to be. Our adversaries will not use the old WWII kind of all-out military offense. They have learned what works better; political subversion, infiltration, and guerrilla tactics. In the third world, those are accompanied by Boko Haram-type attacks on unarmed civilians where governments oppose guns in private hands. Since most governments are neither representative nor honest, there will always be dissatisfaction to feed subversive activities – usually by other dishonest people.
In advanced societies, government tends to grow until the parasite threatens its host economy and gets cut back by some sort of revolt – which can be violent. Google ‘Tytler Cycle’.
There is no point in defending repressive governments. There is no quick technological fix for the Boko Haram-type warfare, but really good intel would help.

Fred Morgenstern - November 18, 2017

Absolutely not!
Too many years of neglect and underfunding. Fighter strength in AF, USN and USMC is appalling. Need hundreds/thousands more SPEC Operators. Ship and CVN numbers are poor. We cannot fulfill nat’l strategy with our marginal services. Nukes are cold war era. It’ll take years and billions if not trillions to redress situation.

Jan Scott Rowland - November 20, 2017

Interesting analysis. I see you boast of having 8 high-ranking officers on your panel. When you are serious about understanding how things really get done, you’ll undoubtedly want to consult with some mid-grade non-comms, as well. A lot less politics, with a good dose of reality. “They ain’t as dumb as they look!”

BOBBY E. RICHARDSON - November 20, 2017


Ed Aiello - February 3, 2018

Not on an expanded basis! Under this new President we are beginning to make progress again in this area. We must remain diligent in our national security and foster Peace thru Strenght!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *