Some House Armed Services Members Say More New Ships Needed
(Base closings, troop levels also concerns at Rumsfeld hearing) (710) By David A. Denny Washington File Staff Writer Washington -- Several members of the House Armed Services Committee told Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld at a hearing February 6 that the proposed defense budget's funding level for shipbuilding in fiscal year 2003 is too low. Rumsfeld, accompanied by Air Force General Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and by Defense Department Comptroller Dov Zakheim, responded that the relatively young average age of the fleet allowed for a short-term shift in funding priorities away from shipbuilding and toward naval aviation, readiness and personnel programs. The FY 2003 budget calls for building five new ships, as well the conversion of two Trident nuclear ballistic missile submarines to fire cruise missiles. Funding is not proposed to reach what is considered a replacement level of nine to 11 ships until the fifth year of the budget. "[T]here aren't enough contracts to keep our six major shipyards, whose only customer is the United States Navy, going," said Representative Charles Taylor (Republican, North Carolina). Representative Thomas Allen, (Democrat, Maine), whose district includes the Bath Iron Works shipyard, described the proposed shipbuilding budget as "profoundly discouraging." And Representative Jo Ann Davis, (Republican, Virginia), whose district includes the Newport News shipyard, said "[w]e have problems right now even keeping the engineers and designers that we need." Representative Ike Skelton of Missouri, the ranking Democrat on the committee, mentioned the proposed contingency fund of nearly $10,000 million as a concern. "[I]nstead of expecting a blank check, the Pentagon should present Congress with a well thought-out proposal," Skelton said. Skelton led several other committee members in voicing concern that the proposed troop levels are too low, and recommended that the Army increase active personnel "by at least 5,000 soldiers this year, with subsequent increases to follow." He also faulted the shipbuilding level, and said "[w]e need to build seven ships, in my opinion, in fiscal year 2003, and nine ships in 2004, to reverse the downward trend in our Navy shipbuilding." He also criticized, as too low, the 4.1 percent proposed military pay increase, and wondered whether too much money was being budgeted for missile defense. "I think we may be devoting a great deal of money that we may not be able to spend as [we] had hoped in the missile defense area. It's unclear to me whether the department can wisely execute all of the money that is requested in that area," Skelton said. Representative Jim Saxton, Republican, New Jersey) was one of several congressmen who complained that military construction is budgeted at a 26 percent lower level than the current year. Two committee members -- Democrats Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii and Silvestre Reyes of Texas -- expressed confusion and concern over the establishment of a separate military command for homeland defense. "How that's supposed to work is beyond me," Abercrombie said. "I think that needs to be elucidated a lot more clearly before there's going to be any new ... [commander in chief] approved for homeland defense." Reyes, a former 26-year employee of the U.S. Border Patrol, said, "I'm concerned because I have been in opposition to militarization of the border ... and I would like for you to tell us what the role of this new command ... would be and how it interfaces with the United States Border Patrol, the Customs [Bureau], the inspections process." Rumsfeld responded, "the United States military has no intention or plan of getting involved in INS [Immigration and Naturalization Service] or Customs or Border Patrol activities except on a very short-time basis." He added that agencies requesting military assistance have been required to agree that such assistance would not last past August 15. Military relations with other agencies would only be in a support role, Rumsfeld said, "except for a couple of unique, distinctive things that involve weapons of mass destruction ... where we are a first responder, for example, in the capital area on some things." (The Washington File is a product of the Office of Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
