The House Appropriations Committee moved forward its $578.6 billion defense appropriations bill today, beating back a Democratic amendment that would reverse a boost to wartime spending that allows Republicans to sidestep congressionally-mandated spending caps.
The bill includes $490 billion in base spending and $88 billion in Overseas Contingency Operations funds, an increase of $38 billion over the president’s budget request. That extra money is used to fund the budget at the levels recommended in the president’s budget, which exceeded caps set by the Budget Control Act of 2011.
In a 21-30 vote, Republicans blocked a Democrat-backed amendment to transfer $38 billion in OCO funding back into the Pentagon’s base budget, a move that would have put the defense appropriations bill over the BCA limits.
Rep. Pete Visclosky (D-Ind.), ranking member of the House Appropriations Committee’s defense subcommittee, put forward the amendment.
“Increasing OCO funding is merely a fleeting salve to the sequester caps for one agency, and does not allow the Department of Defense to properly plan and budget for the future,” he said in his opening statement. He urged House and Senate leaders to begin negotiations on a compromise bill to repeal the BCA.
Should Visclosky’s amendment have been adopted, it would have made the bill subject to a point of order once it hit the House floor, said Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.), chairman of the defense subcommittee.
“Our base recommendation complies with the hard budget caps established by the Budget Control Act of 2011, passed by Congress and signed into law,” he said. “Unless there’s a dramatic legislative change, the law of the land requires this committee to mark up all bills to the level dictate by the Budget Control Act.”
Frelinghuysen reminded the committee that if the bill did not move forward, neither would the new initiatives contained in it, such as a 2.3 percent pay increase for U.S. troops and an additional $500 million in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance funding to pay for new aircraft, ground control stations and pilot training.
Visclosky’s amendment was widely supported by his Democratic colleagues.
Passing the amendment would send a strong message to the rest of Congress that the committee wants budget caps lifted and sequestration eliminated, said Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.).
“Both sides of the aisle are convinced that the budget caps under which we are forced to operate are not workable. The only way that we can change that is for Congress to change the law,” he said.
The OCO account has exploded beyond any reasonable measure of what a contingency fund should be, argued Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.).
“We’re giving billions of dollars of off-budget funds to an agency that cannot even pass an audit, that is full of waste, fraud and abuse,” she said. “While we funnel billions of dollars to an already bloated Pentagon, we continue to face economic security issues here at home.”
The appropriations committee does not have the authority to repeal the Budget Control Act and thus is bound by the law, said its chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.). “I wish it were otherwise, but wishing in this case is dreaming.”
Should the appropriations bill exceed the caps, Congress would likely fund the Pentagon through a continuing resolution or omnibus bill, he warned.
The appropriations bill contained several boosts to the president’s request. It added an extra 7 E/A-18G Growlers, one UH-1Y, eight F-35s and one MV-22 Osprey. The bill would also protect the A-10 from retirement by the Air Force and puts forward enough money to keep the fleet operating for another year (Defense Daily, May 19).
A manager’s amendment offered by Frelinghuysen included language calling for additional reports on programs such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Joint Surveillance and Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS) and the ground based strategic deterrent. The amendment was approved unanimously by voice vote.
The committee is concerned that the existing F-35 test plan does not sufficiently include pilot equipment—such as helmets and other gear—as part of chemical-biological decontamination testing. The amended language directs the Pentagon’s independent weapons tester to evaluate the plan and requires a Defense Department report that describes how the plan includes pilot equipment decontamination.
Another section on the next-generation JSTARS system directs the Air Force Secretary to brief the committee on program requirements, acquisition strategy and risk reduction. The committee is concerned by schedule growth in the new system, which will replace the legacy JSTARS, the amendment notes.
Other language added to the bill requires a report on the cost of the ground based strategic deterrent and its planned number of missiles.