[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 441 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 441

   Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that further 
  reductions to core national security funding will cause significant 
                    harm to United States interests.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 14, 2011

Mr. Forbes (for himself, Mr. Thornberry, Mr. Akin, Mr. Wilson of South 
Carolina, Mr. Turner of Ohio, Mr. Wittman, Mr. West, Mrs. Hartzler, Mr. 
 Franks of Arizona, Mr. Lamborn, Mr. Walberg, Mr. Bishop of Utah, Mrs. 
 Myrick, Mr. Broun of Georgia, Mr. Schilling, Mr. Cravaack, Mr. Miller 
   of Florida, Mr. Palazzo, Mr. Platts, Mr. Jones, Mr. Conaway, Mr. 
   Thompson of Pennsylvania, Mr. Gohmert, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. Heck, Mr. 
 Shuster, Mr. Hunter, Mrs. Roby, Mr. Kline, Mr. LoBiondo, Mr. Fleming, 
  Mr. Rooney, Mr. Rigell, Mr. Griffin of Arkansas, and Mr. Rogers of 
Alabama) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on the 
 Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 
   each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the 
                jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
   Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that further 
  reductions to core national security funding will cause significant 
                    harm to United States interests.

Whereas spending on national security did not create the current budget crisis 
        and further cuts to national defense will not solve it;
Whereas spending on national defense only constitutes 19 percent of total budget 
        authority;
Whereas top leaders of the Department of Defense and the United States Armed 
        Forces have continually warned that significant reductions in defense 
        spending pose serious risks to the future security of the United States;
Whereas decisions on future resources for national defense are being made 
        without the necessary foundation of strategy and an assessment of the 
        threats faced by the United States;
Whereas the future of United States national security is being decided based on 
        budgetary pressure, placing a range of United States national security 
        interests at risk;
Whereas over 90 percent of global trade, worth over $14,000,000,000,000, travels 
        by sea;
Whereas 75 percent of the world's maritime commerce travels through a small 
        handful of international straits and canals, which function as strategic 
        choke points;
Whereas global energy demand is on the rise and a significant portion of future 
        growth is projected to come from maritime nations such as India and 
        China;
Whereas the United States Armed Forces are a vital component of national power 
        and have provided a stabilizing influence for friendly and allied 
        nations around the world;
Whereas the modernization of China's People's Liberation Army appears focused on 
        shifting the military balance in the western Pacific Ocean in a 
        direction unfavorable to United States and regional interests;
Whereas further cuts to national security could make it difficult for the United 
        States to honor security commitments with friends and allies, such as 
        Taiwan and Israel, that could be left undefended against the rise of 
        competitors such as China or Iran;
Whereas a number of the most vital assets to the United States Armed Forces were 
        procured prior to the end of the Cold War and are in desperate need of 
        modernization;
Whereas the force structure of the United States Armed Forces has been in steady 
        decline since the end of the Cold War;
Whereas defense spending as a percentage of total Federal spending is 
        approaching historic lows not seen since before World War II;
Whereas the United States defense industrial base is a vital strategic asset and 
        decisions made in the coming months will affect its strength and 
        viability for decades to come;
Whereas Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta stated that large defense cuts ``will 
        impact our economic strength'' and ``would seriously cripple our 
        industrial base'';
Whereas Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta stated that $1,000,000,000,000 in cuts 
        to national defense could cause unemployment to increase by 1 percent;
Whereas if unemployment were to increase by only one-third of this amount, the 
        United States would see an additional 500,000 jobs lost, many of them 
        veterans of 10 years of war; and
Whereas further cuts to national security will have a significant negative 
        impact on members of the United States Armed Forces and their families: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives 
that--
            (1) further reductions to core national security funding 
        such as those triggered by the sequestration alternative of the 
        Budget Control Act of 2011, may cause irreparable harm to 
        United States interests; and
            (2) decisions on United States national security policy and 
        spending levels should be based on the following key 
        principles--
                    (A) security planning should be based on the 
                National Security Strategy and a sequential 
                determination of the threats to the United States and 
                its interests, an analysis of the capabilities needed 
                to deter or defeat the threats, an assessment of the 
                cost to obtain those capabilities and an assessment of 
                the risk associated with not obtaining them;
                    (B) a strong economy and a strong national security 
                are inextricably linked; and
                    (C) national security is the most important 
                obligation of the Federal Government and should take 
                precedence over other priorities.
                                 <all>