A new congressional committee is welcoming ideas for restructuring the agencies that are in charge of our national security. The Panel on Roles and Missions is a bipartisan group of seven House Armed Services Committee (HASC) members who spent six months examining the jurisdictional boundaries between the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine Corps. More importantly, the panel also is vetting ideas for reforming the full spectrum of U.S. hard and soft power. Read the panel’s initial report (PDF).

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2008/03/3463942

One of DoD's most significant issues is the way OSD administers the POM process. OSD insists on a fresh look at the POM each year. The services need the authority to pursue multi-year aquisition programs in order to save money buying weapon systems at the lowest cost possible. Congress and OSD don't like multi-year buys because they lose control of the dollars for the length of the program.
A "fresh look" at the POM every year and denial of multi-year aquisition authority throws a monkey wrench in any attempt at strategic planning. We need a planned and programmed approach to mobilization for war. Every weapon system and mission requires an active, associate reserve, and guard component. The active component available for immediate deployment, with the associate reserves available for call up within 30 days to provide the manpower needed to maximize the ute rates of our weapon systems. The Guard would be available when mission requirements dictate reaching deeper into our war chest. Guard assets should be funded for the same ute rates as active duty major weapon systems and should be cycled through the active component to mitigate the differences in ute rates.
Providing the same mission capabilities and assets in each component ensures viability, credibility in depth, and the ability to retain experience as people inevitably leave active duty for a more stable life.