Advocates for increased Defense spending have pointed out that defense spending, as a proportion of the gross domestic product (GDP), is at a historical low of 3-4 percent over the last 10 years, while opponents argue that the end of the Cold War and the limited war we are fighting now justify less of an investment in Defense. This year the Army's leadership is attempting to make a stronger argument for additional dollars, while simultaneously refusing to entertain the question of diverting money from Air Force and Navy funding streams.

This paper examines the current state of the Army's funding in relation to its needs as well as in relation to its historical proportion of the Department of Defense (DoD) budget. DoD has traditionally allocated the Army approximately a quarter of the overall DoD budget, while the Navy and Air Force have received greater than 30 percent. These figures are roughly the same whether looking at the Reagan, Clinton, or either of the Bush Presidencies. Despite the heavy lifting done by the Army in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 Budget request had the Army getting about 25 percent while the Navy and Air Force receive slightly less than 30 percent each. The FY2008 request submitted to Congress in February 2007 moved that mark to 27 percent for the Army, 28 percent for the Air Force, 29 percent for the Navy/Marine Corps, and 16 percent for other DoD programs. These overall percentages do not vary by more than 2 percent of the historical average over the last 30 years.

Attitudes Aren't Free: Thinking Deeply about Diversity in the US Armed Forces emerged from a vision to collect essays from the brightest voices of experts across the range of contentious social issues to catalyze productive discussions between military members of all ranks and services. Forty-nine experts contributed to the following 29 chapters writing on the primary themes of religious expression, homosexuality, gender, race, and ethics. Chapters appearing in this volume passed the scrutiny of a double-blind peer-review by one or more referees from the board of reviewers. The chapters are largely written in a colloquial, intellectual op-ed fashion and capture a "snapshot" of the current discussions regarding a particular topic of interest to uniformed personnel, policy makers, and senior leaders. Each section seeks to frame the spectrum of perspectives captured within the current debates and lines of argument. Authors were specifically asked not to address all sides of the issue, but rather to produce a well-reasoned argument explaining why they believe their well-known position on an issue is in the best interests of the military members and make specific recommendations about how best to address the policy issues from their perspective. The volume is arranged in four primary sections by theme: Religious Expression, Homosexuality, Race and Gender, and Social Policy Perspectives. Within each section, readers will find multiple chapters-each embracing a different perspective surrounding the section's theme. Thus, because of the unbalanced nature of many of the individual chapters, it is critically important that readers focus on the entire spectrum of perspectives presented within a section to ensure they have the context necessary to frame any single perspective. Diversity of opinion has been the hallmark of the United States since its dramatic birth in 1776 and has continued unfettered through today where we now have developed the most innovative and effective military the world has ever known. Thus, it is imperative that we continue to reflect upon the diversity of ideas about how best to formulate the "right" social policy to ensure our service members can most effectively execute their missions.

While plastics are extremely useful materials for modern society, plastics production and waste generation continue to increase with worsening environmental impacts despite international, national and local policy responses, as well as industry commitments. The first of two reports, this Outlook intends to inform and support policy efforts to combat plastic leakage.