Senate aims to wrap up defense bill this week

[CommunityEditor]

A Senate subcommittee cut $4 billion from the 2009 defense budget Wednesday in a move that diverts money from the Defense Department to domestic programs.

But lawmakers decided against making an additional $4.4 billion cut in unspent money set aside for reconstruction and security improvements in Iraq.

The $4 billion reduction in the Bush administration’s request, which leaves $487.7 billion for defense programs for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, follows a recent practice by lawmakers to shave money off the regular defense funding bill while depending on supplemental war funding to make up the difference. This maneuver frees money for spending on domestic programs without exceeding federal spending caps.

The shift in funds was a bipartisan decision.

Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, chairman of the Senate defense appropriations subcommittee that approved the budget by voice vote, said the cut still leaves enough money for priorities, such as personnel and readiness programs, but may reduce money for some weapons programs that are over budget or “are seeking funding that cannot be justified.”

The defense subcommittee’s ranking Republican, Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi, said even with the cut, the bill gives President Bush 98 percent of what he requested for the defense budget, including fully funding the Army’s Future Combat System and supporting the Army’s move to get equipment for lighter forces ahead of heavy brigades.

Navy shipbuilding would increase by $1 billion, and there is money for 14 F-35s, advance funding for F-22s and an additional Navy destroyer, Inouyue and Cochran said.

Inouye said the bill also includes a $750 million increase in funding for the National Guard and Reserve to fill “equipment needs,” and Cochran said there is a $270 million increase in the defense health care budget.

Full details on the funding bill were not made available by the senators nor their committee staff. Aides said no summary had been prepared and that the full bill and text would be kept under wraps until the full Senate Appropriations Committee approves the bill.

Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who has been aggressively investigating use and abuse of funding related to the war in Iraq, tried but failed to get the subcommittee to agree to a $4.4 billion cut in previously approved but unspent money for Iraq reconstruction and security improvements.

When senators balked, saying some of the money was for projects planned but not yet started, Dorgan offered to seek a $1 billion reduction instead, but that idea also was rejected.

Cochran called Dorgan’s idea “short-sighted at best and dangerous at worst,” and Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, warned it could lead to a presidential veto of the defense bill or a new request in next year’s budget from the Pentagon to restore the money that would be cut.

The House defense appropriations subcommittee approved its version of the military funding bill in July but has had trouble scheduling a full committee markup of the measure because of complications in the overall government funding process.

Congress has approved none of the 13 appropriations bills required to keep the government running in the new fiscal year that begins Oct. 1.

Cochran said it is possible that funding for all government agencies could be lumped into a single package and attached to the defense appropriations bill, which is the one measure that lawmakers are likely to finish before adjourning for the year.

Democratic aides, agreeing with Cochran’s notion of packaging the bills, said the defense bill also is the one funding measure Bush is most likely to sign, even if he disagrees with some of the details.

A summary of the bill provided by the subcommittee says it allocates $114.9 billion to military personnel, including funding increases in the Army, Marine Corps and Army National Guard. There is $153.5 billion for operations and maintenance, which the subcommittee says fully funds readiness and training programs, spare parts and base operations.

There is $101.8 billion for weapons procurement, including the big increase in shipbuilding. This includes building one Zumwalt-class destroyer and adding advance procurement for a DDG-51-class ship and provides advanced funding for two amphibious ships, the LHA(R) and LPD-26, and increases funding for the Virginia-class submarine program and the Littoral Combat Ship.

For missile defense, the bill deducts $353 million for the Missile Defense Agency, which still leaves $8.9 billion. It increases funding for some near-term programs while reducing funding for longer-term programs.


Article: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2008/09/military_defensefunding_cut_091008w/

[CommunityEditor]

Senate leaders hope to compress work on the 2009 defense policy bill — which traditionally takes two to three weeks and involves consideration of 300 or more amendments — into just four days as part of an abbreviated legislative schedule aimed at getting lawmakers home to run for re-election by the first week in October.

The bill, S 3001, is the annual defense authorization measure that provides permission for the Pentagon to move forward on $612.5 billion in programs, including $70 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan operations.

Included in the bill is a 3.9 percent raise in basic pay and drill pay that would take effect Jan. 1; increases in Army and Marine Corps end strength; expansion of bonuses and special pays; and new travel benefits.

The bill also bars the Defense Department from raising fees for people using the Tricare health insurance program.

The House of Representatives passed its version of the bill, HR 5658, on May 22 and has been waiting on the Senate to act so that negotiations can begin on a final compromise version.

Congressional leaders have been promising House and Senate members who face re-election in November that they will get ample time to campaign, setting Sept. 26 as the target date for completing essential legislation.

But the Senate’s delay in taking up the defense authorization bill, largely the result of partisan bickering over nondefense legislation, raises the possibility that the defense policy bill could be abandoned unless a quick compromise can be reached or lawmakers agree to work longer.

Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii, said getting the bill finished soon is important. Failure to complete it “would mean delays in pay increases, delays in benefits and delays in authorities that are necessary to train and equip our soldiers,” he said.

One possibility under discussion would have lawmakers return for a brief session after the November elections to pass a final version of the 2009 defense policy bill and any other vital legislation.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman, who will manage debate on the bill, was optimistic that it could be completed by week’s end.

Levin will work with Sen. John Warner, R-Va., the former committee chairman, in trying to reach agreement on how to handle the piles of expected amendments to the bill.

Warner called the bill “absolutely essential,” noting there has been an annual defense policy bill for the last 42 years.

Work on a separate defense appropriations bill, which provides money to pay for the authorized programs, also has been moving at a glacial pace because of disagreements over spending priorities.

The House defense appropriations subcommittee approved a draft version of the funding bill in July and the Senate defense appropriations subcommittee is scheduled to approve its version Wednesday.

Appropriators are confident they will provide funding for the Pentagon and other federal agencies before election day, but doing this may lead to all of the funding being bundled into a single bill.

President Bush said Monday that he hopes Congress keeps the defense funding bill separate from other appropriations, which would allow him to sign the military funding into law while leaving open the opportunity to veto nondefense spending if he finds it objectionable.

Congressional leaders have made no commitment to the White House and have not announced their get-out-of-town strategy for appropriations bills.


Article: http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/09/military_defenseauthorization_090908w/