This
Statement of Administration Policy provides the Administration's views
on the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill, FY 2002, as reported
by the House Appropriations Committee.
The
Administration strongly supports passage of this bill. The Administration
appreciates the effort that the Committee has made to produce a
bill in line with the Administration's defense and emergency priorities
and that the Committee has maintained funding within agreed upon
levels. We look forward to working with the Congress to ensure that
the program and policy content of each of the thirteen appropriations
bills is within the agreed upon bipartisan spending level of $686
billion and that the emergency supplemental funding total remains
within the agreed upon level enacted in P.L. 107-38, the FY 2001
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Recovery from the
Tragedy that Occurred on September 11, 2001. The President's senior
advisors would recommend that the President veto any bill that provides
discretionary spending beyond these agreed upon levels.
Our
specific comments on this bill are noted below.
FY
2002 Emergency Response Fund
Department
of Defense
The
Administration appreciates the Committee's support of the requested
funding for the Department of Defense (DOD). However, we are concerned
that the House Report would place burdensome restrictions on DOD's
flexibility to address emerging funding requirements as we prosecute
the war on terrorism by subjecting DOD to traditional reprogramming
procedures. We look forward to working with the House to address
their concerns as the bill moves forward.
Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
The
Administration, like the Congress, is committed to providing assistance
to our Nation's first responders -- the first on the scene in the
event of a terrorist attack or other disaster -- in as efficient
a manner as possible. However, the Administration objects to the
House's decision to eliminate the $550 million requested for FEMA
for equipment and training for State and local emergency response
personnel. Due to FEMA's close working relationship with emergency
response personnel and its experience in managing disaster mitigation
programs, this program should be funded in FEMA, rather than in
the Department of Justice, as the House bill proposes. The Administration
has serious reservations about the $150 million reduction in grant
funding, the $69.8 million in unrequested Justice earmarks for this
program, and the $65 million in funds provided for FEMA activities
that do not support the efforts of the Office of National Preparedness
(ONP), as these actions will diminish the Administration's terrorism
preparedness efforts.
We
also object to the House's decision to eliminate the $50 million
requested for FEMA's ONP. The President has designated the ONP to
coordinate all Federal consequence management programs involving
weapons of mass destruction and to work closely with State and local
governments to ensure their planning, training, and equipment needs
are addressed. This decision could compromise the President's management
of this effort.
Department
of Transportation
The
Administration requests that the House fully fund the $300 million
requested for aircraft changes needed to increase aircraft security,
including fortified cockpit doors, transponder changes, and video
surveillance. Deployment is expected to commence much sooner than
envisioned by the Committee.
The
Administration strongly encourages the House to provide the requested
$203 million for the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard has mounted a
significant response to threats to homeland security and has redeployed
many of its resources to provide increased security at the Nation's
ports. To accommodate this surge of port security operations, the
Coast Guard needs funding for additional fuel and spare parts, 2,700
reservists called up to augment regular forces, and to keep assets
operating that were previously scheduled to be removed from service.
The funding level provided by the Committee is insufficient to meet
these needs.
Executive
Office of the President (EOP)
The
Administration is extremely concerned that the Committee provided
none of the requested $50 million, which is critically needed to
ensure the safety, support and service to the President and Vice
President of the United States and to strengthen protection of the
more than 2,000 men and women who work within the White House Complex.
The funds will enable the EOP to meet additional security requirements,
including installing emergency response and notification systems,
completing move-related activity associated with the forced relocation
of staff from the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, and relocating
the White House telephone staff.
Building
Security at Federal Facilities
The
$200.5 million requested for the General Services Administration
would support improved building security at Federal facilities throughout
the United States. However, the House Committee provided only the
funds related to security and replacement space associated with
Federal buildings in New York City ($87.4 million). The House is
urged to include the additional $113.1 million requested to ensure
increased levels of security is provided at Federal facilities nationwide.
In
addition, the Administration is concerned that the bill does not
provide funding for security upgrades at the main National Archives
Building in Washington, D.C. This building houses the Charters of
Freedom (Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of
Rights) and receives no security support from the Federal Protective
Service.
Potential
Amendments
The
Administration strongly supports House floor adoption of the "Walsh
Amendment" that would provide additional resources for response
and recovery efforts related to the New York City area within the
agreed upon limits for disaster recovery spending. The Administration
is committed to addressing the acute and unprecedented needs of
the New York City area. The Walsh Amendment would address all currently
identified needs.
The
President's senior advisors would recommend that the President veto
any bill that provides discretionary spending beyond these agreed
upon limits. We look forward to working with the Congress to ensure
that the highest priority needs are met in an expeditious manner.
FY
2002 Defense Appropriations Bill
We
commend the Committee's full support of the President's requested
military pay raise to increase the quality of life for America's
military service members. The Administration also appreciates the
Committee's inclusion of funding for changes to the military pay
table and to reduce the out-of-pocket housing expenditures of service
members. Additionally, the increases in the Defense Health Program
will ensure that the promise of TRICARE for Life is adequately funded.
While
the bill provides important funding for many of the Administration's
highest priorities, the Committee bill provides approximately $2
billion less for Department of Defense (DoD) programs in FY 2002
than requested by the President. These program reductions would
make it harder for the Department to counter 21st Century threats,
such as terrorism, and to carry out the needed transformation of
America's armed forces and defense posture. The following sections
describe the Administration's specific concerns with the bill.
Missile
Defense
The
bill would reduce the Administration's request of $8.3 billion for
missile defense programs by $441 million. The bill cuts more than
half of the funding requested by the Administration to study sea-
and space-based boost phase defense technologies, and reduces the
funding requested for sea-based mid-course defenses. The bill would
also severely reduce the funding requested for the Space-Based Laser
program, relegating this program to laboratory research. The bill
would eliminate the ability to field a contingency THAAD capability
in FY 2005 and cut risk reduction activities. In addition, the bill
would terminate the Space-Based Infrared System (SBIRS)- Low acquisition
program, thereby seriously undermining the Administration's missile
defense program and delaying our ability to defend against a broad
array of missile threats until beyond 2011. Finally, the bill would
impose restrictions on management flexibility and burdensome reporting
requirements precluding the ability to effectively manage missile
defense programs.
The
President is committed to the development and deployment of effective
missile defenses to protect the United States, our forces, and our
friends and allies as soon as possible. Missile defense remains
one of the Administration's highest priorities. The Administration
strongly opposes the bill's reductions in funding for key missile
defense programs and the termination of the SBIRS-Low acquisition
program and urges Congress to restore funding to the level requested
by the President.
Operation
and Maintenance Reductions
Directly
and through its general provisions, the House reductions netted
over $1.7 billion from Operation and Maintenance (O&M) accounts
and these reductions could impair military operations. In addition,
large portions of these reductions were based on unrealistic assumptions
about achievable FY 2002 savings -- primarily from reductions in
consultant services, headquarters staff, and A-76 studies. The Department
is moving as quickly as possible toward achieving savings in areas
such as these, but success will take time and congressional support.
Therefore, the real effect of the House's deep O&M reductions would
be to undercut the President's plan to address readiness shortfalls
and competitive sourcing, and reduce funds available for military
operations and support. Reduced funding for A-76 studies would eliminate
flexibility DoD must have to seek the public or private sources
best able to help it meet current threats. Also, section 8093 of
the bill would not achieve $200 million in foreign currency fluctuations
savings assumed by the Congress.
Fuel
Funding
The
Committee has underfunded the Administration's request for fuel
by not providing the $427 million requested to restore the cash
balances depleted when the Working Capital Fund sold fuel to the
Services in FY 2001 at budgeted prices lower than actual costs.
In addition, the House has reduced O&M accounts to reflect reduced
fuel prices. The President's request already reflects some of the
recent reduction in fuel prices. Given the marked volatility in
fuel markets and emerging world events, assuming stability of fuel
prices at the low point of the last several years is imprudent and
threatens to affect operations. Finally, the bill would reduce funding
for increased costs associated with electrical and natural gas utilities.
These proposed reductions would put DoD's ability to purchase needed
fuel and utilities at risk.
Military
Personnel Funding
The
Administration objects to the reduction in the military personnel
accounts by over $750 million because such a reduction could undermine
the ability of the Services to reach their personnel goals at this
critical time. The Department plans to achieve its military personnel
goals and has put in place a "stop loss" initiative to prevent key
military personnel from leaving the service during this critical
time. The Department should be given every opportunity and encouragement
to achieve these needed personnel levels, rather than being subjected
to duplicative reductions for manpower variance and projected under
execution.
Pentagon
Renovation Cost Adjustment
The
Administration disagrees with the Committee's reduction to the Operations
and Maintenance payments for the Pentagon Renovation Maintenance
Revolving Fund. These funds are critical to continue Pentagon operations
and the on-going renovation project and are entirely separate from
those related to the September 11th terrorist attack. This House
cut would leave the Pentagon with no funding for security, utilities,
cleaning, trash removal, and other support functions.
Depot
Maintenance Backlog
To
improve weapon system readiness, there has been a major effort to
increase depot maintenance in ships, aviation, and ground combat
systems. To that end, DoD proposed a readiness initiative that would
have increased the amount of maintenance performed by allowing competitions
between private contractors and public depots for workload that
exceeded the capacity of the public depots. The Administration is
disappointed that the Congress did not approve this proposal, thereby
impeding efforts to reduce backlog. While the Department shares
the Committee's concern regarding excess levels of funded depot
maintenance backlog and is working closely with the General Accounting
Office to identify more efficiency improvements, it is premature
to reduce this vital readiness support program.
DoD-Veterans
Affairs CHOICE
The
Administration is disappointed that the Committee bill does not
include the Administration's proposal for military retirees to choose
annually between DoD and VA for health care. This CHOICE initiative
would enhance continuity of care, while optimizing resources by
preventing duplication of benefits.
Trident
D-5 Missile Life Extension
The
Administration urges restoration of the $25 million reduction to
its $144 million request for life extension programs for the Trident
II D-5. This reduction would require the termination of four of
the five life extension programs and necessitate very costly requalification
actions in the future. Shutting down these programs would incur
termination costs of $15 million to $20 million, and re-qualification
and procurement re-start costs could reach $150 million.
Other
Funding Issues
The
reduction to the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund may
impede the scheduled use of Army Reservists on upcoming Bosnia peacekeeping
rotations. This in turn, would downgrade the combat readiness (and
delay the availability) of active component divisions that would
otherwise be available for rapid deployment to ongoing operations
or emergent crises.
The
Committee failed to fund fully the development of new technologies
of importance to DoD by taking numerous reductions to Air Force
satellite procurement and development programs. For example, the
$54 million reduction to the interagency National Polar-Orbiting
Operational Environmental Satellite System would increase the risk
that these satellites would not be available to back up the last
launches of the current generation of Department of Commerce and
DoD weather satellites. In addition, the $50 million cut to the
Global Hawk program is objectionable given how critical it is to
our ongoing efforts to combat terrorism.
The
Committee bill would significantly decrease the funding for the
DD21 program, making the current technology development programs
unexecutable. The technologies being developed with this funding
are critical to future ship programs.
The
reductions in the Navy-Marine Corps Intranet and the Department's
information systems would impede important information technology
progress.
The
Administration is pleased that the House recognizes the dangers
inherent in the use of incremental funding and advanced appropriations
in shipbuilding programs. Such practices would limit the flexibility
of both the Administration and the Congress to make rational decisions
in future shipbuilding programs while not actually increasing shipbuilding
rates.
Unrequested
Funding for Procurement and Earmarks
Much
of the additional funding in the Committee bill is for unrequested
procurement and R&D programs, funding that comes at the expense
of more urgent needs. The President's FY 2002 request represents
a balanced approach to modernization. The Committee bill would add
funding for several unrequested items such as $820 million for a
DDG-51 destroyer; $131 million for eight Army Blackhawk helicopters;
$7.5 million for a UC-35 support aircraft for the Navy; $85 million
for a C-40 aeromedical evacuation aircraft for the Air Force; $150
million for procurement and modification of a B-767 aircraft to
serve as a "testbed" for the Air Force's next generation tanker;
and $190 million for procurement and modification of a B-767 aircraft
to serve as a "testbed" for a potential JSTARS replacement platform;
$10 million for security locks; and $50 million above the Administration's
request for networking of Intelligence Surveillance and Reconnaissance
assets.
The
Administration opposes the earmarking of funds for un-reviewed science
and technology programs. In particular, the diversion of funds and
medical management resources to a large number of medical research
programs not related to national security, dilutes the focus away
from the defense mission, including protecting troops in the field
from chemical and biological threats.
Title
IX
The
House bill would create a new Title IX for Counter Terrorism and
Defense Against Weapons of Mass Destruction. The Administration
believes that splitting existing accounts and thereby creating a
separate title would establish an artificial distinction between
ongoing defense programs and efforts to counter the immediate threats.
The Administration recognizes the intent of this legislation and
the need to reexamine the relational functions of DoD with the Office
of Homeland Security. DoD has already instituted a counter terrorism
effort comprised of its most senior officials to review its activities.
The immediate effect of this legislation would be to fragment programs
and disrupt these ongoing activities. The Administration urges the
Congress to appropriate the amounts and authorities, included within
Title IX, to existing accounts within the bill and delete Title
IX.
|