The Navy's FY2011 budget proposes canceling the CG(X) cruiser program as unaffordable and instead building an improved version of the Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class Aegis destroyer called the Flight III version. This report provides background information on the CG(X) program as it existed prior to its proposed cancellation. For further discussion of the proposal to build Flight III DDG-51s in lieu of CG(X)s, see CRS Report RL32109, "Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress." The report is divided into the following sections: Background; CG(X) Cruiser Program Prior to Proposed Cancellation, including Announcement of the Program, Replacement for CG-47s, Planned Procurement Schedule, Mission Orientation, Potential Design Features, and Analysis of Alternatives (AOA); and FY2011 Proposal to Cancel the CG(X) Program. Appendixes are as follows: Legislative Activity in 2009, FY2008 Defense Authorization Act Bill and Report Language, CG(X) Analysis of Alternatives (AOA), and Earlier Oversight Issues for the CG(X). The oversight issues included Prospects for Eight-Ship Program with One Ship Every Three Years, Nuclear Power, Technical Risk, Hull Design, Unit Affordability vs. Unit Capability, BMD Impact on CG(X) Numbers and Schedule, Industrial-Base Implications, and Visibility of CG(X) Research and Development Costs.

The Navy's FY2011 budget proposes canceling the CG(X) program as unaffordable and instead building an improved version of the Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) class Aegis destroyer called the Flight III version. This report provides background information on the CG(X) program as it existed prior to its proposed cancellation. For further discussion of the proposal to build Flight III DDG-51s in lieu of CG(X)s, see CRS Report RL32109, Navy DDG-51 and DDG-1000 Destroyer Programs: Background and Issues for Congress.

Tax dollars wasted on over-priced ships. Good ships decommissioned for no reason. Brand-new shore infrastructure shuttered or ill-maintained. U.S. naval history from 1950 to the present is rife with mismanagement, the consequences of which fall largely on the taxpayers’ shoulders. And when most of the people making decisions in the Pentagon have never served on the deck of a ship, is it any wonder? With little to no oversight, the Navy has spent and wasted millions of dollars over the past seventy years. From decommissioning ships early to constructing classes of ships that are less capable than advertised to Congress, the Navy has heavily invested in systems that looked fine on paper but were failures in actual application. This detailed history of the state of commissioned ships includes recommendations for the allocation of funds into improvements that should be made to ensure sustainable and affordable ships for the U.S. Navy of the future. For readers interested in the detailed minutiae related to the development, cost, and lifetime of naval ships or of any military expenditures, for that matter—this book is a must-read manual. The Ship and Vessel index for this publication will be provided by contacting the author at: TheTaxpayerNavy.com

On April 22, 2010, the Bush School of Government and Public Service and the Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College co-sponsored a colloquium in Washington, DC, on a midterm assessment of leadership and national security reform in the Obama administration. Panelists included experts from the Project on National Security Reform; the Foreign Policy Research Institute; the Hudson Institute; the Council on Foreign Relations; the Reserve Officers Association; the American Security Project; and Creative Associates International, Inc. The colloquium theme focused on the need for advancing the research and study of national security reform by engaging the invited participants to share their expertise on ways to develop a deeper awareness and understanding of the reform issues facing the U.S. Government. Three panels of national security experts discussed: "Assessing National Security Reform"; "Legislative Imperatives"; and, "Assessing National Security Reform-The Way Forward." This book includes a summary of the panelists' presentations, along with chapters written after the colloquium to further address and to assess the effectiveness and the near-term potential for Obama administration's national security reform initiatives.

My intention here is simply to attempt to sway anyone and everyone not to vote for Barach Obama in the 2012 election. This entire endeavor goes to that end. I ask all of the educated women of this country to take another look at yourselves and just why you did vote for such a person in the 2008 election. Is it because you think you are such a liberal thinkers? Why not become an independent thinker this time around and vote for someone that has the best interest of this nation at heart, instead of someone that wants to systematically destroy this country piece by piece. Why not vote for someone that does not want to make this country a socialist country. This has been a good country. Let's continue with it the way our forefathers meant it to be.