Back to news

November 3, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

What the defense industry is seeing and saying about the election

By:

WASHINGTON ― Anyone will tell you this is the most important election in U.S. history ― unless they happen to run a major American defense firm.

In earnings call after earnings call, defense industry executives projected calm ahead of Tuesday's election, mainly because they see the coronavirus pandemic carrying greater uncertainty (especially for firms with commercial aviation businesses). But another reason is that, despite wide projections of flat 2021 defense budgets no matter who controls the White House, industry is confident in the Pentagon's commitment to modernization.

“We continue to believe that bipartisan support for defense spending will endure and that our portfolio is well-aligned to support our National Defense Strategy,” Northrop Grumman CEO Kathy Warden said in remarks typical of third-quarter earnings calls last week. “While we plan for various budget scenarios, defense spending is largely threat-driven and today's threat environment warrants a strong defense. Emerging threats are intensifying, and we believe both political parties are committed to effectively countering these threats.”

If defense firms are upbeat, then Wall Street seems skeptical, with pure-play defense firms down this year and lagging the stock market, said Capital Alpha Partners' aerospace and defense analyst Byron Callan. Partisan gridlock, he noted, is what led to the budget caps that bedeviled federal budgeting for the last decade.

“You could argue that some of this underperformance is related to concerns about what the election's outcome could be. Even if the president wins, no one's predicting the House will flip, and then you'll still have gridlock in Congress,” Callan said. “Let's say there's a 50-50 split in the Senate. Things can get pretty sporty.”

Defense executives were comfortable making warm predictions about 2021, but the lack of comment about 2022 and 2023 was telling, said Callan. Also, Pentagon officials have warned they will have to tap modernization and readiness funds if Congress does not appropriate about $10 billion for defense contractors' coronavirus-related expenses.

So why didn't any CEOs use their earnings calls to amplify that message? “That was one of the dogs that didn't bark here. Either industry doesn't see it as an issue, or that it's inevitable it's not going to happen," Callan said.

With Democrats readying to debate steep defense cuts if they sweep the election, the expectation is that swollen national deficits ― driven by pandemic aid and Republican-led tax cuts ― will pressure the defense budget downward. But industry is banking on Washington's drive to prepare militarily for a rising China, a disruptive Russia and an unpredictable North Korea.

“Whether it's flat with a little bit of rise or flat with a little bit of fall may depend on the election, but I think that's a fairly narrow space you're working in politically, given the deficit and the threat vectors,” Bill Lynn, the CEO of defense and aerospace conglomerate Leonardo DRS, said in an interview. Lynn is a former deputy defense secretary and Raytheon lobbyist.

Though there's been speculation Democrats would cut defense spending, former vice president Joe Biden, who is running against Republican President Donald Trump, would face pressure not to for economic and political reasons, said Michael Herson, president and chief executive at American Defense International, a defense lobbying firm. (Biden has said, if elected, he doesn't foresee major defense cuts.)

“The first thing that Biden's going to worry about is COVID and the economic recovery,” Herson said in an interview. “So do you really want to touch defense spending, and add to your economic woes ― because it increases unemployment ― in the first year of your presidency?”

Defense Secretary Mark Esper has warned that a flat budget will force the armed services to make budgetary trade-offs and likely cuts to legacy programs. But the Pentagon has also communicated a commitment to modernization, and that's part of industry's confidence.

In September, Northrop won a $13.3 billion award for the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent program, the U.S. Air Force's effort to replace the LGM-30G Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile. But some Democrats have attempted to defund it, and investors grilled executives about the program's post-election survival prospects ― and those of Northrop's B-21 Raider.

Warden, Northrop's CEO, argued the nuclear triad becomes more of a budgetary priority when conventional military forces are under pressure.

“So we're confident that a new administration would recognize that value and continue to support the modernization efforts that are well underway for both GBSD and B-21,” she said.

The Pentagon over recent years has oriented itself toward technological competition with China, with related investments in artificial intelligence, next-generation networks, cybersecurity and space. Companies did not see signs of that momentum reversing.

“The government doesn't pivot on a dime,” Booz Allen Hamilton's chief financial officer, Lloyd Howell Jr., told investors. “And a lot of the programs that we currently support ... are increasingly tied to their missions, which is politically agnostic.”

The CEO of infrared imaging maker FLIR Systems, Jim Cannon, acknowledged there will be “top-line pressure on the budget ... no matter what happens with the election,” but he put stock in Army leaders' assurances that the service must remedy long-underfunded modernization efforts.

“The message that was sent out to industry loud and clear is that, after four decades largely without significant modernization transformation, now is the time,” Cannon said. “And if we look at the priorities that we're aligned against and the work that we've been doing for the past two years, we think we're well positioned there. But look: I agree there's a lot of uncertainty, a lot of work yet for us to do, but that's our perspective right now.”

When asked, L3Harris downplayed how a drawdown from Afghanistan ― which Trump and Biden both favor ― or hypothetical cuts to end strength would impact the sales of radios or night vision goggles.

“We're not even 40 percent through the modernization ramp with radio. So even if end strength comes down, as I expect it likely will, I don't think it's going to affect the growth rate in our radio business,” said CEO Bill Brown, arguing that night vision goggles and radios had “under-penetrated the force.”

“So if anything, reduced end strength might actually free up some dollars to be put onto modernization investments that really affect a broad part of our business,” he added.

Executives at companies without a stake in a specific major platform had a good story to tell, and several pointed to investments in cybersecurity or artificial intelligence. Leonardo DRS' Lynn said the firm's investments in communications, sensors and computing systems had made it “ambidextrous."

"We can go in any direction,” he said. “The larger companies have greater exposure across the breadth of the defense budget. We're more in targeted areas and haven't got broad exposure.

“We're in Army sensors, satellite communications; we're in 10 or 12 segments. We can be targeted, and frankly in a flat budget environment, that ability to target's important to grow at all.”

https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/11/02/what-the-defense-industry-is-seeing-and-saying-about-the-election/

On the same subject

  • PODCAST: The Navy Budget And Transformation – Opportunities And Challenges Ahead

    May 4, 2020 | International, Naval

    PODCAST: The Navy Budget And Transformation – Opportunities And Challenges Ahead

    An exclusive audio interview with Leonardo DRS CEO Bill Lynn discussing the role industry can play in helping the Navy and DoD achieve its next generation vision. By BREAKING DEFENSEon May 01, 2020 at 11:23 AM The Pentagon's plan to increase readiness, pursue modernization and advance the development of next-generation technologies is becoming increasingly clear. As the Navy budget continues to aim for a growing fleet and transformational capabilities, it will need to make decisions and trade-offs that impact the defense industrial base. Industry, which is pushing the rapid pace of technological innovation, can use its expertise to shape this future. In this brief podcast Bill Lynn, CEO of Leonardo DRS, discusses how the 2020-21 budget cycle creates opportunities for the defense industry to plan and partner with the Navy and DoD, using independent research and development and program investments. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/podcast-the-navy-budget-and-transformation-opportunities-and-challenges-ahead/

  • Brazil's Embraer sees supply chain bottlenecks hampering 2024 deliveries
  • Democrats face internal ‘fight’ on defense spending, says Smith

    October 8, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security, Other Defence

    Democrats face internal ‘fight’ on defense spending, says Smith

    Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The Democratic split over the size of future defense budgets will come to a head in the new Congress, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., predicted Tuesday. The outcome of the long-simmering dispute would take on higher stakes if some pre-election polling becomes a reality and Democrats retake Congress and the White House. Though President Donald Trump and his supporters claim the Democratic Party has been hijacked by the far left, Smith's remarks suggest the party's future direction, at least on defense spending, is not yet settled. Instead of slashing next year's $740 billion defense budget, as some progressives want, Smith is pushing, “a rational Democratic, progressive national security strategy,” as he called it. That stance seems to align Smith with his party's pragmatic standard-bearer, Joe Biden, who's said he doesn't foresee major defense cuts, if elected. “I don't think that rational policy involves 20 percent defense cut, but that fight is going to be had,” Smith said at an event hosted by George Mason University. “There are extremists on the right and extremists on the left, and what I'm trying to do is say, ‘Let's go for pragmatic problem solving.' I don't see extremism solving problems.” If Democrats are swept into power Nov. 3, it will be by voters opposed to President Donald Trump from across the political spectrum, Smith said. To hold on that mandate, Democrats would need to govern with a broad coalition and not overreach from the left on issues like defense. “Okay, we can win an election because people are appalled by Donald Trump,” Smith said, “but that doesn't mean that they're endorsing us in any sort of huge, dramatic way.” After the House passed an early version of last year's defense policy bill without Republicans aboard, negotiations to reconcile it with theWhite House and GOP-held Senate dragged for months before a compromise bill passed Congress with progressive priorities stripped from it, leaving them dissatisfied. This year, many of the progressives' priorities were deflected from the House's version of the bill, and it passed the chamber with support from more than half of Republicans and more than two-thirds of Democrats. Military spending remains popular with most Republicans, and they largely opposed progressive amendments in the House and Senate this summer to slash the authorization bill by 10 percent. HASC member Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., called the House amendment, “a deeply irresponsible stunt.” Biden and congressional Democrats are already under pressure from progressives like Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who have been part of a campaign to direct spending away from the military in favor of healthcare, education and jobs. Massive spending on national security, they say, didn't protect the country from COVID-19. “You have a progressive movement in the party now that is really motivated and mobilized around foreign policy and national security issues, and that's not going away,” Matt Duss, a Sanders foreign policy aide, told Defense News last month. “That is something a President Biden will have to work with, and I think his team understands that.” As both Biden, Trump and lawmakers of both parties have called for the U.S. to extricate itself from the Mideast and end the “endless wars” in Iraq and Afghanistan, Smith said it's important to educate a war-weary American people about why it's unwise to retreat from the world stage ― marked by hotspots in Libya, Syria and West Africa. “We've got to make the case to them: ‘Here's why the defense budget is what it is, here's why we're trying to accomplish what we're trying to accomplish, and here's why it's in your best interest,'” Smith said. “And we're going to be very aggressive about having public hearings and public discussions to listen to people, to listen to those concerns and try to address them.” The Pentagon's five-year defense plan indicates it will request flat defense spending after 2021, and ― amid pandemic-related expenses and historic deficits ― the budget is widely expected to stay flat regardless of who is president. Smith pretty much echoed that view Tuesday. “I think the reasonable assumption is yeah, the defense budget is going to be flat for a while ― and there is no reason on Earth in my view that we cannot defend the United States of America for $700 to $740 billion,” Smith said. “So I think the better question, the question to focus on, is how do we get more out of it?” On that one, Smith echoed some ideas from his committee's bipartisan Future of Defense Task Force. Its report emphasized the need, in order to compete with a surging China, to divest from some legacy programs and heavily invest in artificial intelligence, among other potentially game-changing technologies. Citing a spate of acquisition failures, Smith said Washington has to work with its defense contractors “about how we spend our money and the results we get for that money.” He also acknowledged the need to protect key contractors stressed by the pandemic's economic impacts and strengthen the industrial base overall. Smith defended the Pentagon's allocation of hundreds of millions of dollars in pandemic relief funding for items like jet and submarine parts instead of increasing the country's supply of medical equipment. The remarks seemed to set him at odds with liberals like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who have asked the Defense inspector general to look into the department's “reported misuse” of funds. The Democrat-led House Oversight and Reform Committee, Financial Services Committee, and select subcommittee on the coronavirus crisis are conducting a joint investigation. “Three committees in Congress are now investigating this, and I'm not one of them because there's nothing to investigate here, in my view,” Smith said. “This was part of the CARES Act: We gave a billion dollars to DoD to deal with COVID-related expenses. Very specifically, it said one of the COVID related expenses you could deal with was the defense industrial base, which they did. And now we're chewing on them for doing that.” Smith said the Pentagon did “nothing illegal,” but he suggested it's reasonable to explore whether DoD balanced the money it received appropriately and whether its payments to large contractors are flowing to smaller, more vulnerable firms, as they should. “I think it is important to make sure we keep the industrial base going,” Smith said, “but there's going to be pressure on that [decision].” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/10/07/democrats-face-internal-fight-on-defense-spending-says-smith/

All news