[Senate Hearing 108-176]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2004
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 15, 2003
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 9:47 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Stevens (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Stevens, Burns, and Inouye.
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN IKE PUZON, U.S. NAVY RESERVE
(RETIRED), DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATION, THE
NAVAL RESERVE ASSOCIATION
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CONRAD BURNS
Senator Burns [presiding]. I am not the chairman of this
subcommittee. I am just another one of the hired hands. And it
is terrible that you get scheduled on a day where we have vote-
a-rama. It is not fair to you, it is not fair to us, it is not
fair to anybody. So we will all go out and eat worms.
This is the first time that I have participated in this
part of the Defense appropriations process, so I feel ill-
equipped and ill-prepared, unwashed and uneducated about this
whole thing. But I am going to start it. We will be having
votes every 10 minutes and that is just not fair. But
nonetheless, your testimony will be taken and I am sure it will
be reviewed as this committee is pretty good about those
things.
I am Senator Conrad Burns and of course our chairman and
our ranking member will be back as soon as they cast their
votes. I have already voted on this first one, but you have to
watch those lights pretty closely. You know, if you miss one
vote, well, that shows up in a 30-second spot the next time you
run for reelection.
We thank you for your patience and your indulgence with the
inconvenience of this. We would like to start off with Captain
Ike Puzon, United States Navy Reserve, Retired. He is Director
of Legislation for the Naval Reserve Association. Captain,
thank you for coming this morning. We look forward to your
testimony.
Captain Puzon. Thank you, sir. On behalf of my colleagues,
we thank you for being here, and if we can strike quick while
no one else is here we will appreciate that.
Senator Burns. Good.
Captain Puzon. Thank you, sir, and the distinguished
members of the Senate Appropriations Committee and the staff,
for having us. It is an honor and a pleasure to be here before
you representing 22,000 members of the Naval Reserve
Association on behalf of over 86,000 members of the Naval
Reserve, especially during these times of increased usage of
the Guard and Reserve.
I am sure you have already heard in the past several weeks
and months what a magnificent job our Guard and Reserve has
done, what their families have done, and what their employers
have done in responding to the commitment that the Department
of Defense has asked these members to do. It is still important
to focus on the members today of these units in the Guard and
Reserve and the Naval Reserve, as well as the active duty
members.
The challenges that our Reserve, Guard, and active
components of the military face are gigantic, as you know,
during these times of increased threat to our national
security. It is encouraging that we have been so successful,
but it is really no surprise because of the people.
The focus of what we do next is blurred by constant
deployments, constant recalls, increased usage of equipment and
Guard and Reserve, and of course modern technology. In my mind,
the center stage should always be the people, both Active,
Reserve, and Guard, and also modern technology. I think in
today's age--good morning, sir.
Senator Stevens [presiding]. Good morning.
Captain Puzon. All too often the technology charisma
overrides the need for people.
Senator Stevens. Yes, sir. Go ahead.
Captain Puzon. Yes, sir, good morning.
I recently studied for the Secretary of Defense in the 21st
century and 2025 what technology would make a difference in
2025. Of the group that I was with in the study, we always came
back to was what people we would have in 2025.
Naval Reserve, as you know, are people. They are training,
they are responding, they are waiting, and they are deploying.
What the Guard and Reserve and the Naval Reserve in particular
provides has been discussed several times. Operational
readiness, stand-alone missions, parallel capability, and surge
capabilities have been talked about.
Yet in current operations and performance I think we need
to look at transforming our program and planning documents and
our appropriations process and our vision in the Navy. That
includes what I call, in a sports metaphor, an all-pro team of
experts. These are expert warfighters. They are not just
experts from a Reserve component, and they have proven that. We
need to include them in all planning documents.
This Reserve force is ready to go, it is ready to fight. It
is ready and it is capable units and individuals. I like to
talk to them and refer to them as all-pro military experts.
Some call them ordinary people doing extraordinary work and
extraordinary things. I just refer to them as an all-pro team
ready to go when you need them.
In some cases in the past, as you know, only Congress has
recognized that the Naval Reserve needed equipment and
personnel benefits to keep the force healthy and parallel. We
are at that time again where you the Congress must provide that
guidance. Due to affordability issues that you are very aware
of and without a doubt have been in constant awareness of, the
Congress must step in at this time and provide some guidance
and vision for the Naval Reserve. Because of the cuts that are
pending in 2004, fiscal year 2004, we will see this decrease in
our force structure.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Captain Ike Puzon
Chairman, Senator Inouye, and distinguished members of the
subcommittee, on behalf of the 22,000 members of the Naval Reserve
Association, and the 86,000 active Naval Reservists and the mirrored
interests of all members of the guard and reserve components, we are
grateful for the opportunity to submit testimony.
A popular fad in the press is to write about the plight of the
mobilized Reservist. These articles emphasize the anxiety of being away
from work and or family. As was stated in Wall Street Journal, ``The
activation of tens of thousands of military reservists is beginning to
interrupt careers and disrupt workplaces on a scale not seen in more
than a decade.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Massive Call-Up of Reservists disrupts Careers, Workplaces;
Kemba J. Dunham, Kris Maher and Greg Jaffe, Wall Street Journal, Feb.
18, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the press today, a climate of despair is painted about the
Reservist. Focus is on the needless hardship for members of the Guard
and Reserve, for their families and for their employers. The Naval
Reserve Association would like to dispel this Myth. In defense of the
Reservists, our indication is that there are a statistical few that
complain about their circumstances. Portrayed as a predicament by the
press, most Reservists, instead, view mobilization as an opportunity to
serve their country. Reservists are serving their country in uniform
proudly, and are not complaining. They do have concerns similar to
anyone in or out of uniform, who is deployed quickly and unexpectedly.
Reservists from any service have shown us time and time again that
they'll volunteer when asked, despite the impact of their personal and
professional life. This service beyond self is not appreciated by many
on the Active side or in DOD. Recent documents show that the Reserve
Components are not integrated into the Vision of future conflicts, and
Homeland Security.
Since 1990, the Active Duty services have grown languorous from a
diet of contributory assistance, recall, and mobilization support. The
number of contributory man-days has risen from 1 million in the late
1980's to nearly 13 million a year over the past few years. Rather than
confront budget appropriators, the Active Components have been content
to fill their force shortfalls with Reserve manpower.
If there is a raw nerve among Reservists, it is caused by how
individuals are being utilized, and how often that individual and the
unit is being called up. And, why aren't they being used. Pride and
professionalism is a large factor in the profile of a Reservist, as it
is with any member of the Armed Services. They want to be used how they
have been trained, and they want to complement the Active Forces. Too
often, they have been called up to do a marginal job, or stand weekend
or night watches allowing active members time off. In situations like
this, we often hear from our members that the active duty personnel of
a particular command are not working overtime. The model used by the
Navy calls for active duty personnel to be working a sixty hour work
week before Reservists would be involuntarily recalled to active duty.
Quite often, the requirement for recall is nothing more than to fill in
the gaps in existing active duty manning. Recall and proper use of
reservists needs constant monitoring and attention. We agree that
transformation of legacy personnel manpower programs is overdue. But,
Reserve Component involvement in personnel transformation is mandatory.
Another raw nerve among Reservists is attempts by the Navy to deny
individuals their full entitlements. Over and over, Reservists are
asked to make a voluntary mid to long term commitment of combining
drills with multiple sets of 29 day orders. There is an institutional
bias to issuing Reservists one set of orders for longer than 30 days
thereby denying them greater entitlements. We strongly believe that
this is an injustice to the individual and his/her employer that
Congress should question. Recent testimony by the Under Secretary of
Defense indicates some entitlements may change, however, a continuum of
entitlements for all Armed Services members is due in today's military.
Over a year ago, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve
Affairs meet with the Military Reserve Associations and asked how
frequently is it acceptable to recall Reservists? His hope was an
answer measured in years that could be programmed into a formula.
Reservists are not inventory numbers, but individuals, and they belong
to warfighting units.
In today's American way of war, the way a Reservist is used and
recalled is vital to successful military operations, and essential to
gaining the will of America. As Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul
Wolfowitz has said, ``How we manage our Reserve Components will
determine how well we as a nation are prepared to fight, today and
tomorrow.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Remarks by Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, to the
Reserve Officers Association 2002 National Conference, Philadelphia,
PA, June 20, 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The question we are asking is: ``Are today's DOD legislative
initiatives taking us in the right direction for a sound Military and a
strong National Defense, and meeting the National Security Strategy?''
The ultimate question for the Department of the Navy: ``What is your
Vision for use and equipping of the Naval Reserve Force?'' We hope that
DOD is learning lessons from the past to avoid repeating mistakes in
the future, and the Naval Reserve Association stands ready to assist in
turning lessons learned into improved policy. If current DOD and DoN
planning and resource documents are used, there will not be a Naval
Reserve Force in the next ten years. If there initiatives are followed,
there will be a pool of people somewhere--if they stay--that the Navy
can call upon to fill gaps created by the next asymmetric conflict. The
Naval Reserve Force has shown, time and again, when engaged--they are
the All Pros that are as professional or better than any force. The
recent VFA deployment is only one such example.
Our Key message for all to remember: One: Our nation needs a Naval
Reserve Force--with Air and Surface assets to go fight and win our
nations conflicts, it should be a center piece of our National Security
Strategy. Two: As a nation, we must start now to recapitalize these
forces, to remain relevant. Three: With the people and pay and benefits
at the center, the Naval Reserve Force can play a key role in Homeland
Security.
Again, thank you for this opportunity. Details of specific concerns
by our Association on DOD initiatives follow, we hope you can help
address them:
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE INITIATIVES
Roles and Missions
A Pentagon study has highlighted that the Guard and Reserve
structure, today, is an inherited Cold War relic. As a result, the
Guard and the Reserve organization has become the focus of
``transformation.'' While it won't be denied that there could be a need
for change, transformation for transformation sake could be
disadvantageous. Visionaries need to learn lessons from the past,
assimilate the technology of the future, and by blending each,
implement changes that improve warfighting. Transformation is needed to
move forward and ensure a Total Force that includes a strong Guard and
Reserve.
The Reserve Component as a worker pool
Issue.--The view of the Reserve Component that has been suggested
within the Pentagon is to consider the Reserve as of a labor pool,
where Reservist could be brought onto Active Duty at the needs of a
Service and returned, when the requirement is no longer needed. It has
also been suggested that an Active Duty member should be able to rotate
off active duty for a period, spending that tenure as a Reservist,
returning to active duty when family, or education matters are
corrected.
Position.--The Guard and Reserve should not be viewed as a
temporary-hiring agency. Too often the Active Component views the
recall of a Reservist as a means to fill a gap in existing active duty
manning. Voluntary recall to meet these requirements is one thing,
involuntary recall is another.
The two top reasons why a Reservist quits the Guard or Reserve is
pressure from family, or employer. The number one complaint from
employers is not the activation, but the unpredictability of when a
Reservist is recalled, and when they will be returned.
100 percent mission ownership
Issue.--Department of Defense is looking at changing the reserve
and active component mix. ``There's no question but that there are a
number of things that the United States is asking its forces to do,''
Rumsfeld said. ``And when one looks at what those things are, we find
that some of the things that are necessary, in the course of executing
those orders, are things that are found only in the Reserves.''
Position.--America is best defended through a partnership between
the government, the military and the people. The Naval Reserve
Association supports the continued recognition of the Abrams Doctrine,
which holds that with a volunteer force, we should never go to war
without the involvement of the Guard and Reserve, because they bring
the national will of the people to the fight. While a review of mission
tasking is encouraged, the Active Component should not be tasked with
every mission, and for those it shares, no more heavily than their
Reserve counterparts. Historically, a number of the high percentage
missions gravitated to the Reserve components because the Active Forces
treated them as collateral duties. The Reserve has an expertise in some
mission areas that are unequaled because Reservists can dedicate the
time to developing skills and mission capability, and sharing civilian
equivalencies, where such specialization could be a career buster on
Active Duty.
Augmentees
Issue.--As a means to transform, a number of the services are
embracing the concept that command and unit structure within the
Reserve Component is unnecessary. Reservists could be mustered as
individual mobilization augmentees and be called up because often they
are recalled by skills and not units.
Position.--An augmentee structure within the Naval Reserve was
attempted in the 1950's/1960's, and again in the 1980's. In one word:
Failure! Reservists of that period could not pass the readiness test.
The image of the Selected Reservists, sitting in a Reserve Center
reading a newspaper originates from the augmentee era. Some semblance
of structure is needed on a military hierarchy. Early on, Naval
Reservists created their own defense universities to fill the training
void caused by mission vacuum.
Combining Active and Reserve Appropriations
Issue.--The fiscal year 2004 Defense budget request makes it clear
that OSD intends to consolidate all pay and O&M accounts into one
appropriation per service. These consolidations would require various
legislative changes before they would become law. The rationale for the
consolidations is to provide greater flexibility for the Active chiefs
to move monies from the Reserve and Guard pay accounts to fund Active
component pay and O&M shortfalls. Managing fewer appropriations would
also make managing pay and O&M easier.
Position.--The Naval Reserve Association strongly opposes the
proposed consolidation of all Guard, Reserve and Active pay into one
service pay appropriation. We similarly oppose the proposed
consolidation of all Guard, Reserve and Active operations and
maintenance accounts into one service O&M appropriation. While we
support seeking efficiencies wherever possible, we view the proposed
``business'' consolidation as ill conceived, misrepresented as
inefficient, and as an attempt to reduce Congressional oversight. We
oppose it for a variety of other reasons, as well.
Under current law, the Reserve chiefs are the directors for their
respective Reserve pay and O&M appropriations. Public Law 90-168, as
amended by the fiscal year 1997 NDAA, vested in the Reserve Chiefs full
management and control of their respective Reserve financial resources.
Consolidating Reserve and Active pay into one appropriation would
divest the Reserve chiefs of this authority and preclude their
executing the programs and responsibilities, and maintaining the
readiness mandated by Congress.
Much of the Guard and Reserve annual training occurs during the
fourth quarter of a fiscal year, the same time frame when the Active
components are most likely to run short of funds and to desire to use
Reserve pay and O&M to fund their own shortfalls. Allowing the Active
components the ``flexibility'' to use Reserve funds whenever they need
to pay Active component bills means that somewhere a Reserve soldier
will not be paid or a Reserve unit, Reservist will not be trained for
mobilization or receive the specialized training needed for promotion,
and ultimately retention. The Active Component will have flexible
funding at the cost of Reserve Readiness.
Inferred changes to DOPMA and ROPMA
Issue.--It has been suggested within a DOD Roles and Missions study
that promotions in the Reserve Component need not be tied to Active
Duty promotion rates. It was further stated that allowing a skilled
Reservist to remain at a certain mid-grade rank enlisted or officer
rank longer would allow that individual to perform a vital mission
longer.
Position.--While NRA might support a change to the ``promote up or
out'' policy; we in no way endorse having the Selected Reserve become
an advancement wasteland.
Issue.--Secretary Rumsfeld has also publicly stated that he has the
Personnel & Readiness office looking at how DOD can get the benefit of
people in a specific job longer, and how we can have people increase
the number of total years they serve if they want to. He is willing to
extending military careers beyond 60 years of age.
Position.--While current policy permits individual waivers to
retain certain skill sets, the Naval Reserve Association feels that
authorizing changes to the length of tenure would have a negative
impact and a rippling effect. History has shown time and again, if
senior leaders are not encouraged to retire, there will be a retention
collapse in the middle ranks, which erodes the long-term future of a
component force. Few are so skilled, that a junior member can't fill
the position with similar qualifications.
Pay and Compensation
Issue.--A premature release of information in the form of a Naval
Reserve survey, revealed a DOD initiative to end ``two days pay for one
days work,'' and replace it with a plan to provide 1/30 of a Month's
pay model, which would include both pay and allowances. Even with
allowances, pay would be less than the current system. When concerns
were addressed about this proposal, a retention bonus was the suggested
solution to keep pay at the current levels.
Position.--Allowances differ between individuals and can be
affected by commute distances and even zip codes. Certain allowances
that are unlikely to be paid include geographic, housing, education
benefits, travel and adjustments for missing Healthcare.
The Naval Reserve Association holds reservations with a retention
bonus as a supplemental source. Being renewed annually bonuses tend to
depend on the national economy, deficit, and political winds. Further,
would this bonus just be grandfathered to current Reservists, with some
future generation forfeiting the bonus as an income source?
As one Reservists said, ``With the nonreimbursed expenses for
commuting and training, I could afford to drill at one days pay.''
Healthcare
Healthcare readiness is the number one problem in mobilizing
Reservists. The governments own studies show that between 20-25 percent
of Guardsmen and Reservists are uninsured.
We applaud the efforts of the TRICARE Management Activity. TMA has
a strong sense of which the customer is. They emphasize communications,
and are proactive at working with the military associations. NRA would
like to see a continued effort at:
--Ensuring quality coverage for mobilized Reservist to provide
continuity of healthcare.
--Seeking consistency of how TRICARE is implemented for mobilized
Reservists and families between regions, and
--Establishing a TRICARE Health plan for uninsured drilling
Reservists, similar to the successful SELRES Dental Program.
Business Initiative
Issue.--Many within the Pentagon feel that business models are the
panacea to perceived problems with in military structure.
Position.--Reservists have the unique perspective of holding two
careers; many with one foot in business and one foot in the military.
The Naval Reserve Association suggests caution rather than rush into
business solutions. Attempted many times in the past, business models
have failed in the military even with commands that proactively
support.
Among the problems faced are:
Implementing models that are incompletely understood by director or
recipient.
Feedback failure: ``Don't tell me why not; just go do it!''
The solution is often more expensive than the problem. Overburdened
middle management attempting to implement. Cultural differences.
While textbook solutions, these models frequently fail in business,
too.
Retirement: Age 55
Issue.--A one sided debate is being held through the press on
whether changes should be allowed to Guard and Reserve to lower the
retirement payment age. At a recent Pentagon press conference, Thomas
F. Hall, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, said
he has ``thought a lot about'' lowering reserve retirement age. Hall
said it would be ``expensive'' and might encourage Reservists to leave
the workforce at too young an age. The Defense Department is now
studying the issue to be part of a report to Congress next year.
Position.--Over the last two decades, more has been asked of
Guardsmen and Reservists than ever before. The nature of the contract
has changed; Reserve Component members would like to see recognition of
the added burden they carry. Providing an option that reduces the
retired with pay age to age 55 carries importance in retention,
recruitment, and personnel readiness.
Most military associations are hesitant to endorse this because
they envision money would be taken out of other entitlements, benefits,
and Guard and Reserve Equipment budgets. The Naval Reserve Association
suggests an approach to this issue that would not be that
``expensive.''
The Naval Reserve Association recommends for discussion/debate that
Reserve Retirement with pay prior to age 60 be treated like taking
Social Security retirement early--if you elected to take it at say age
55, you take it at an actuarially reduced rate.
Most of the cost projected by DOD is for TRICARE healthcare, which
begins when retirement pay commences. Again, if one takes Social
Security before reaching age 65 they are not eligible for Medicare. NRA
suggests that TRICARE for Reservists be decoupled from pay, and
eligibility remains at age 60 years. With Social Security as a model,
Reservists understand the nature of offsetting payments. The real
expense in this proposal would be the administrative startup costs and
whatever would be lost in interest crediting in the retirement trust
fund.
Retention concerns should be set aside. Commissioned officers
typically reach ROMPA limits at age 53. While enlisted are allowed to
drill to age sixty, many in the Navy are limited by High Year Tenure
policies that take them out of pay before then. When this happens, many
submit their retirement without pay requests. By age 50, an enlisted
has either already retired or is career.
At a minimum, hearings should be held to broaden the debate.
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY INITIATIVES
Temporary Recall of Reserve Officers (Three Years or Less)
Issue.--To properly match the Reserve officer's exclusion from the
active duty list as provided for by 10 U.S.C. 641(1)(D) with a
corresponding exclusion from the authorized grade strengths for active
duty list officers in 10 U.S.C. 523. Without this amendment, the active
component would have to compensate within their control grades for
temporary recalled Reserve officers who are considered, selected and
promoted by RASL promotion selection boards. This compensation causes
instability in promotion planning and a reduction in ``career'' ADL
officer eligibility and promotion for each year a Reserve officer
remains on ``temporary'' active duty. Therefore, Naval Reservists are
temporarily recalled to active duty and placed on the ADL for
promotional purposes. End result--failure of selection due to removal
from RASL peer group.
Position.--Strongly support grade strength relief for the small
percentage of Reserve officers who would possibly be promoted while
serving on temporary active duty. Granting relief is a Win-Win
situation. By removing the instability in promotion planning for the
active component, Reserve officers can be issued recall orders
specifying 10 U.S.C. 641(1)(D) allowing them to remain on the RASL for
promotion purposes.
Equipment Ownership
Issue.--An internal study by the Navy has suggested that Naval
Reserve equipment should be returned to the Navy. At first glance, the
recommendation of transferring Reserve Component hardware back to the
Active component appears not to be a personnel issue. However, nothing
could be more of a personnel readiness issue and is ill advised.
Besides being attempted several times before, this issue needs to be
addressed if the current National Security Strategy is to succeed.
Position.--The overwhelming majority of Reserve and Guard members
join the RC to have hands-on experience on equipment. The training and
personnel readiness of Guard and Reserve members depends on constant
hands-on equipment exposure. History shows, this can only be
accomplished through Reserve and Guard equipment, since the training
cycles of Active Components are rarely if ever--synchronized with the
training or exercise times of Guard and Reserve units. Additionally,
historical records show that Guard and Reserve units with hardware
maintain equipment at or higher than average material and often better
training readiness. Current and future war fighting requirements will
need these highly qualified units when the Combatant Commanders require
fully ready units.
Reserve and Guard units have proven their readiness. The personnel
readiness, retention, and training of Reserve and Guard members will
depend on them having Reserve equipment that they can utilize,
maintain, train on, and deploy with when called upon. Depending on
hardware from the Active Component, has never been successful for many
functional reasons. The NRA recommends strengthen the Reserve and Guard
equipment in order to maintain--highly qualified trained Reserve and
Guard personnel.
Closure of Naval Reserve Activities
Issue.--A proposal has been made, suggesting that a large number of
Naval Reserve Centers and Naval Air Reserve Activities be closed, and
that Naval Reservists could commute to Fleet Concentration Areas to
directly support gaining commands and mobilization sites.
Position.--The Naval Reserve Association is opposed to this plan
for the following reasons.
--The Naval Reserve is the one Reserve component that has Reserve
Activities in every state. To close many of these would be
cutting the single military tie to the civilian community.
--The demographics of the Naval Reserve is that most of the
commissioned officers live on the coasts, while most of the
enlisted live in the hinterland, middle America. The Naval
Reservists who are paid the least would have to travel the
farthest.
--The active duty concept of a Naval Reserve is a junior force, a
structure based upon enlisted (E1-E3s) and officers (O1-O2's)
billets that can't be filled because the individuals haven't
left the fleet yet. When the Coast Guard ``transformed'' its
Reserve force, it was a forced a restructuring that RIFFed many
senior officer and enlisted leadership from the USCGR ranks,
and caused a number of years of administrative problems.
--If training at fleet concentration centers was correctly
implemented, the Navy should bear the expense and burden of
transportation and housing while on site. Additionally, at
locations such as Naval Station Norfolk, the overlap of Active
Duty and Reserve training has shown an increased burden on
Bachelor Quarters and messing facilities. Frequently,
Reservists must be billeted out on the economy. With these
extra costs, training would prove more expensive.
--Such a plan would devastate the Naval Reserves; retention would
plummet, training and readiness would suffer.
Replacement of Full Time Staff (TARs) with Active Duty ``Station
Keepers''
Issue.--Another suggested initiative would to the replacement of
Full Time Staff (TARs) with Active Duty ``Station Keepers''.
Position.--This has failed in the past, because the Active Navy
doesn't commit its best or it's brightest to administer Reservists. It
is not viewed as career enhancing, and those who complete the
assignments tend to do poorly before competitive promotion boards. The
assignments tend to often gravitate to unqualified second and third
string players who are dead-ended in their careers, and Reservists
retention, recruitment, readiness and morale tend to suffer.
CONCLUSION
The Four ``P's'' can identify the issues that are important to
Reservists: Pay, Promotion, Points, and Pride.
--Pay needs to be competitive. As Reservists have dual careers, they
have other sources of income. If pay is too low, or expenses
too high, a Reservist knows that time may be better invested
elsewhere.
--Promotions need to be fairly regular, and attainable. Promotions
have to be through an established system and be predictable.
--Points reflect a Reservist's ambitions to earn Retirement. They are
as creditable a reinforcement as pay; and must be easily
tracked.
--Pride is a combination of professionalism, parity and awards: doing
the job well with requisite equipment, and being recognized for
ones efforts. While people may not remember exactly what you
did, or what you said, they will always remember how you made
them feel.
If change is too rapid in any of these four, anxiety is generated
amid the ranks. As the Reserve Component is the true volunteer force,
Reservists are apt to vote with their feet. Reservists are a durable,
and are the ``All Pro Team'' resource only if they are treated right.
Current conditions about the world highlights the ongoing need for the
Reserve Component as key players in meeting National Security Strategy,
we can't afford to squander that resource.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much. I hate to interrupt
you here now. We have been given a problem. There will be 30-
plus votes on the floor today. They occur every 10 minutes. So
we have to go back and forth to vote. We will have to limit you
in time, and what we are going to try--Senator Inouye, Senator
Burns, I do not know how long you are going to be here, but we
are going to try to rotate so one of us is here at all times.
But we will have to keep moving because it is going to be a
difficult time.
So I appreciate your courtesy. I do want to say this to
everyone. I am going to say, whoever is here is going to say
who is the next witness. For instance, the next one is Ms.
Holleman, and after that is Mr. Butler. We want you to know who
is coming up next so we can determine if that person is not
here and call up the next person before the next witness.
Is Mr. Holleman here now? Ms. Holleman. Pardon me.
Captain Puzon. Thank you, sir.
Senator Stevens. Thank you. I appreciate your courtesy.
Good morning, ma'am.
STATEMENT OF DEIRDRE PARKE HOLLEMAN, ESQ., CO-DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL MILITARY AND VETERANS ASSOCIATION,
AND NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, THE
RETIRED ENLISTED ASSOCIATION
Ms. Holleman. Good morning. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Burns, it is
an honor for me to be here to testify on behalf of the National
Military and Veterans Alliance. The alliance is an umbrella
group made up of 26 military, retiree, veterans, and survivor
associations, with almost 5 million members. Our concerns are
many, but our time is brief, so I will just touch on a few
issues.
It is crucial that military health care is fully funded.
These past few months have shown the important part the direct
health care system plays in our military readiness. We must
continue to be fully funded and the equipment and other
supplies that have been used supporting our deployments in Iraq
and Afghanistan must be replaced.
Additionally, the purchased health care system is essential
to provide the services necessary to maintain a satisfied,
healthy, and vigorous military family, whether active duty and
their families, retirees, or survivors. It also helps to
promote necessary retention.
In the last several years it has been this subcommittee's
concerns and actions that stopped the constant funding
shortfalls that have occurred for many years, and we are truly
grateful. We ask that you continue to make sure that there is
full funding in fiscal year 2004 for all parts of the defense
health care budget.
The alliance is also deeply concerned about the changes
that are going to occur shortly in the Tricare resource sharing
program. Through this program at the present time approximately
3,500 health care professionals work at the Medical Treatment
Facility (MTFs), treating approximately 2 million patients
every year. With the advent of the Temporary National Economic
Committee (TNECs), all these contracts will end and new ones
will have to be negotiated, presumably through the MTFs. It is
crucial that there is no break in services caused by this
contractual change. The alliance asks that this subcommittee
provide sufficient transitional funding and direction to this
valuable program so this valuable program can continue without
interruption.
With all the improvements that the military health care has
seen in the last few years, one program has been ignored,
Tricare Standard. Over 3.2 million military retirees under the
age of 65 and their families are covered by Standard. At this
time very little thought is given to them. Tricare Standard
beneficiaries should be contacted yearly and informed about
their program and any recent changes that have occurred. No
such contact occurs at this time.
It is especially important for the TRICARE Management
Activity (TMA) to contact grey-area retirees when they reach 60
years old to tell them of their automatic qualification and
benefits. They are not contacted now and often these retirees
needlessly retain and pay for private health care insurance.
Most importantly, we hope that Tricare Standard will start
to help recruit providers and help beneficiaries find them. At
this time there is no requirement to do either and therefore
Standard is becoming a more and more illusory benefit. The
alliance requests that both sufficient funding and direction
are given to improve this important program.
The Military and Veterans Alliance thanks you for having
this hearing and listening to our concerns. Our written
testimony deals with many additional areas. We hope that you
will consider those points when finalizing your appropriations
bills this year.
Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for your
attention.
Senator Stevens. Thank you for your courtesy. It is nice to
see you here today.
Ms. Holleman. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Deirdre Parke Holleman, Esq.
INTRODUCTION
Mister Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, the
National Military and Veterans Alliance (NMVA) is very grateful for the
invitation to testify before you about our views and suggestions
concerning defense funding issues.
The Alliance was founded in 1996 as an umbrella organization to be
utilized by the various military and veteran associations as a means to
work together towards their common goals. The Alliance's organizations
are: American Logistics Association, American Military Retirees
Association, American Military Society, American Retiree Association,
American World War II Orphans Network, AMVETS National Headquarters,
Catholic War Veterans, Class Act Group, Gold Star Wives of America,
Korean War Veterans Foundation, Legion of Valor, Military Order of the
Purple Heart, National Association for Uniformed Services, National
Gulf War Resource Center, Naval Enlisted Reserve Association, Naval
Reserve Association, Non Commissioned Officers Association, Society of
Medical Consultants to the Armed Forces, Society of Military Widows,
The Retired Enlisted Association, TREA Senior Citizens League, Tragedy
Assistance Program for Survivors, Uniformed Services Disabled Retirees,
Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vietnam Veterans of America.
The preceding organizations have almost five million members who
are serving our nation, or who have done so in the past and their
families.
The overall goal of the National Military and Veteran's Alliance is
a strong National Defense. In light of this overall objective, we would
request that the committee examine the following proposals.
CURRENT AND FUTURE ISSUES FACING UNIFORMED SERVICES HEALTH CARE
The National Military and Veterans Alliance must once again thank
this Committee for the great strides that have been made over the last
few years to improve the health care provided to the active duty
members, their families, survivors and Medicare eligible retirees of
all the Uniformed Services. The improvements have been historic.
TRICARE for Life and the Senior Pharmacy Program have enormously
improved the life and health of Medicare Eligible Military Retirees
their families and survivors. DOD's new Medicare Eligible Retiree
Health Care Fund has been put into place. This addition should help
stabilize funding for military health care in the future. Additionally,
reducing the catastrophic cap, improving the TRICARE Prime Remote
program and making other TRICARE improvements have improved the
situation of numerous other TRICARE beneficiaries. It has been a very
successful few years. But there are still many serious problems to be
addressed:
An Adequate Health Care Budget
As always, the most pressing issue facing military health care is
an adequate Defense Department Health Care Budget. This is again the
Alliance's top priority. With the additional costs that have come with
the deployments to Southwest Asia, Afghanistan and Iraq, we must all
stay vigilant against future budgetary shortfalls that would damage the
quality and availability of health care.
Improving Tricare Standard
While great steps forward have been made in health care for those
uniform services' beneficiaries covered under TRICARE Prime and TRICARE
for Life, TRICARE Standard has withered on the vine. TRICARE Standard
has truly become the stepchild of military health care. The Alliance
asks that this Committee financially support this final group of
forgotten beneficiaries. Some improvements in the situation can be
easily accomplished, others will indeed be difficult.
There should be a requirement that all TRICARE Standard
beneficiaries be contacted at least once a year with information of the
changes in the program and benefits. The Alliance believes that there
is no other health care plan in the country that does not contact its
beneficiaries on at least an annual basis. The TRICARE Management
Activity (TMA) is considering plans to improve communications between
TRICARE Prime and its beneficiaries. Including TRICARE Standard in such
a plan would be an easy improvement.
An additional population needing to be contacted is the ``gray
area'' Reservists when they reach age 60 and finally qualify for
retirement pay. Too often, this group of retirees is unaware of the
automatic enrollment, and individuals carry unneeded medical coverage.
They should be informed of the TRICARE Standard as a benefit, and what
it covers.
NMVA requests appropriations funding to support TMA making these
contacts.
A much harder improvement in TRICARE Standard involves creating
initiatives to convince health care providers to accept TRICARE
Standard patients. TRICARE reimbursement rates are tied to Medicare
reimbursement levels. It is well known that health care providers are
dissatisfied with TRICARE reimbursement levels. The Alliance was
pleased and relieved by the Administration's and Congress' recent
corrections and improvements in Medicare reimbursement rates. This
correction in the Medicare program will also be a great help to the
TRICARE Program.
Yet this is not enough. The history of low and slow payments in the
past for TRICARE Standard as well as what still seems like complicated
procedures and administrative forms makes it harder and harder for
beneficiaries to find health care providers that will accept TRICARE.
Any improvements in the rates paid for Medicare/TRICARE should be a
great help in this area. Additionally, any further steps to simplify
the administrative burdens and complications for health care providers
for TRICARE beneficiaries hopefully will increase the number of
available providers.
The Alliance asks the Defense Subcommittee to include language
encouraging continued increases in Medicare reimbursement rates.
One key tool in making low-cost MTF care available to military
beneficiaries has been the resource sharing program: putting civilian
health care professionals and support personnel into military hospitals
and clinics. Currently, there are 3,500 people working and providing
services in MTFs serving approximately 2 million patients annually.
The Alliance is concerned that a gap exists in the transition of
this program from its current configuration to that of the new
generation of T-Nex contracts. All current agreements must end with the
current contracts, yet there is no clear guidance on how the Services
will continue the resource share program, nor when the individual MTFs
will be able to renew access to the current resources to implement this
program.
The National Military Veterans Alliance request that this committee
provide transitional funding to insure uninterrupted service between
contracts.
Tricare Retiree Dental Plan (TRDP)
The focus of the TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan (TRDP) is to maintain
the dental health of Uniformed Services retirees and their family
members. Several years ago we saw the need to modify the TRDP
legislation to allow the Department of Defense to include some dental
procedures that had previously not been covered by the program. Adding
these procedures was necessary to fulfill the intent of the TRDP to
maintain good dental health for retirees and their family members. With
this modification the TRDP achieved equity with the active duty dental
plan.
With ever increasing premium costs, NMVA feels that the Department
should assist retirees in maintaining their dental health by providing
a government cost-share for the retiree dental plan. With many retirees
and their families on a fixed income, an effort should be made to help
ease the financial burden on this population and promote a seamless
transition from the active duty dental plan to the retiree dental plan
in cost structure. Additionally, we hope the Congress will enlarge the
retiree dental plan to include retired beneficiaries who live overseas.
The Alliance would appreciate this Committee's consideration of both
proposals.
NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE HEALTH CARE
First, we would like to thank the efforts by the office of
Secretary of Defense and TRICARE Management Activity for revising
Health Affairs Policy 96-018. The changes made to TRICARE Prime allow
families of activated Guardsmen or Reservists to be eligible for
TRICARE Prime when the military sponsor has active duty orders for more
than 30 days. This revision also allows the family to enroll without
enrollment fees or co-payments.
Changes made to the TRICARE Prime Remote for Active Duty Family
Members program allow the families of activated Reserve and National
Guard, Prime Remote coverage, no matter where the sponsor lives as long
as they resided with the service member before he or she left for their
mobilization site or deployment location, and the family continues to
reside there. We are very thankful for these improvements, however,
additional changes are still needed.
Mobilized Health Care--Medical Readiness of Reservists
The number one problem faced by Reservists being recalled was
medical readiness. The government's own studies indicate that between
20-25 percent of Reservists are without healthcare plans. Further study
will show that another group is under insured. Congress needs to
recommend a healthcare coverage for Reservists that could bridge this
medical gap.
A model for healthcare would be the TRICARE Dental Program, which
offers subsidized dental coverage for Selected Reservists and self-
insurance for SELRES families. Reservists pay $8.14 per month for an
individual's enrollment and $50.88 per month for a family enrollment.
If mobilized to active duty for more than 30 consecutive days, the
costs will be $8.14 for a single enrollment and $20.35 for a family
enrollment. Members of the Individual Ready Reserve (Other than Special
Mobilization Category) and their family members, and the family members
of the Selected Reserve (not on active duty) will pay a new monthly
rate of $20.35 for a single enrollment and $50.88 for a family
enrollment.
In an ideal world this would give universal dental coverage.
Reality is that the services are facing some problems. Premium
increases to the individual Reservist have caused some of the junior
members to forgo coverage. Dental readiness has dropped. Mobilized
members have been ``readied'' by tooth extraction rather than tooth
filling. The Military services are trying to determine how best to
motivate their Reserve Component members. It is hard to make dental
coverage mandatory if the Reservist must pay even a portion of it.
Position.--The National Military Veterans Alliance supports
utilization of Guard and Reserve Dentists to examine and treat
Guardsmen and Reservists who have substandard dental hygiene. The
TRICARE Dental Program should be continued, because we believe it has
pulled up overall Dental Readiness. Medical coverage plans should be
explored to insure universal medical coverage for Guardsmen and
Reservists; Reservists and their dependents should be allowed to join
TRICARE.
Some Options
The Department of Defense has a model program extending FEHBP
coverage to mobilized employees where basic employees premiums are
paid. Other federal agencies can adopt this policy on an agency-by-
agency basis but this policy is not uniform across all federal
agencies.
Position.--As an option to TRICARE standard, the Alliance would
like to see the government pay equivalent premiums directly to private
employers if these companies choose to extend health coverage to the
Reservist as an option.
Demobilized Health Care
Under the revised transitional healthcare benefit plan, Guard and
Reserve who were ordered to active duty for more than 30 days in
support of a contingency and have more than six years total active
federal service are eligible for 120 days of transition health care
following their period of active service. Guard and Reserve members
with less than six years service will get 60 days of continued medical
care. Families were excluded from this coverage. An initial fix was a
worldwide demonstration project, which permitted family members to be
covered under this plan.
Position.--While 75 to 80 percent of returning Reservists will have
healthcare when they return to their employers, the balance will be
without healthcare beyond the current 120 or 60-day limitation.
--There should not be a demarcation at six years between 60 and 120
days. The jobs performed by the Reserve Component members were
identical; their demobilization healthcare coverage should be
identical.
--Demobilization transition TRICARE coverage for the post activated
Reserve Component members should be expanded. A civilian is
allowed up to 18 months of coverage under COBRA when
transitioning between jobs. Military should be permitted the
same.
Further.--The National Military Veterans Alliance supports OSD
efforts to ensure the quality of demobilization processing. Each
returning Guardsman or Reservist should be given a benchmark separation
physical to document their health as they return from the
``battlefields.''
NMVA asks the committee for funding to support DOD's demobilization
health care demonstration programs.
OTHER RESERVE/GUARD ISSUES (LONG-TERM)
Age 55 Retirement Payment Age
Over the last two decades, more has been asked of Guardsmen and
Reservists than ever before. The nature of the contract has changed;
Reserve Component members would like to see recognition of the added
burden they carry. Providing an option that reduces the retired with
pay age from 60 to 55 years carries importance in retention,
recruitment, and personnel readiness. Some are hesitant to endorse this
because they envision money would be taken out of other entitlements,
benefits, and Guard and Reserve Equipment budgets. The National
Military and Veteran's Alliance recommends that Reserve retirement with
pay be allowed prior to age 60, but be treated like Social Security
retirement offset, at lower payments when taken at an earlier age. If a
Reservist elects to take retired pay at age 55, it would be taken at an
actuarially reduced rate, keeping the net costs at zero.
Most of the cost projected by DOD is for TRICARE healthcare, which
begins when retirement pay commences. Again following the Social
Security example, Medicare is not linked to Social Security payments.
NMVA suggests that TRICARE for Reservists be decoupled from pay, and
eligibility remain at age 60 years with Social Security as a model,
Reservists understand the nature of offsetting payments. The only
remaining expense in this proposal would be the administrative startup
costs and adjustments to retirement accrual contributed to the DOD
retirement accounts.
Pay and Compensation For Guard and Reserve
We are concerned about a recent DOD initiative to end ``two days
pay for one days work,'' and replace it with a plan to provide 1/30 of
a Month's pay model, which would include both pay and allowances. Even
with allowances, pay would be less than the current system. When
concerns were addressed about this proposal, a retention bonus was the
suggested solution to keep pay at the current levels. Allowances differ
between individuals and can be affected by commute distances and even
zip codes. Certain allowances that are unlikely to be paid uniformly
include geographic differences, housing variables, tuition assistance,
travel, and adjustments to compensate for missing Healthcare.
The National Military and Veterans Alliance holds reservations with
a retention bonus as a supplemental source. Being renewed annually
bonuses tend to depend on the national economy, deficit, and political
winds. Further, would this bonus just be grandfathered to current
Reservists, with some future generation forfeiting the bonus as an
income source. The NMVA strongly recommends that the reserve pay system
``two days pay for one days work,'' be retained, as is.
OTHER RESERVE/GUARD RECOMMENDATIONS (SHORT-TERM)
Ensure adequate funding to equip Guard and Reserve at a level that
allows them to carry out their mission. Do not turn these crucial
assets over to the active duty force. In the same vein we ask that the
Congress ensure adequate funding that allows a Guardsman/Reservist to
complete 48 drills, and 15 annual training days per member, per year.
This stems from the concern about a recent DOD plan, the ``Defense
Transformation for the 21st Century Act of 2003'' that would
potentially use some of these same ``Reserve'' dollars to fund
involuntary 90-day pre-mobilization call up for training. This funding
should come instead from the active duty budget, which will most
directly benefit from this ``deployment standards'' training.
The NMVA strongly recommends that Reserve Program funding remain at
sufficient levels to adequately train and support the robust reserve
force that has been so critical and successful during our Nation's
recent major conflicts.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Subcommittee the
Alliance again wishes to emphasize that we are grateful for and
delighted with the large steps forward that the Congress has affected
the last few years. The new health care programs for Uniformed Service
retirees 65 years and over (TRICARE for Life and the Senior Pharmacy)
and active duty members and their families (TRICARE Prime Remote and
the reduction of the catastrophic cap) have been great successes. We
are also very appreciative of recent changes that impact our ``citizen
soldiers'' in the Guard and Reserve. But there is still work to be done
to improve health care programs for all qualified beneficiaries, and
benefits and mission funding for our Guardsmen and Reservists. We
understand that all of these issues don't fall under the direct purview
of your subcommittee. However, we are aware of the continuing concern
all of the subcommittee's members have shown for the health and welfare
of our service personnel and their families. Therefore, we hope that
this subcommittee can further advance these suggestions in this
committee or in other positions that the members hold. We are very
grateful for the opportunity to speak on these issues of crucial
concern to our members. Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Next is Mr. Butler, Deputy Director of
Legislation, National Association of Uniformed Services. Good
morning.
STATEMENT OF BENJAMIN H. BUTLER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
LEGISLATION, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR
UNIFORMED SERVICES
Mr. Butler. Good morning. Mr. Chairman, the National
Association for Uniformed Services (NAUS) and the Society of
Military Widows is very grateful for the invitation to testify
before you about our views and suggestions concerning defense
funding issues. There are several issues covered in my formal
statement in detail. I would like to highlight a couple here
today pertaining to survivors.
First I would like to mention the age-62 survivor benefits
program offset with Social Security. NAUS's primary survivor
goal is the elimination of the age-62 Strategic Business Plan
(SBP) offset. This would increase the annuity from 35 percent
to the original 55 percent. Not only were many of the earliest
enrollees not provided the full explanation of the social
security offset, but the Federal Government provides a
substantially higher annuity with no offset for Federal Civil
Service survivors. We urge the committee to provide funding for
the annuity increase and end the often devastating effects of
the offset.
On a related front, the National Defense Authorization Act
for fiscal year 1999 provided a paid-up provision to the
survivor benefit plan. The law states that, effective October
1, 2008, if a retiree has paid into the program for 30 years
and is 70 years old then the premium is paid up. NAUS
recommends the appropriate funding to accelerate the paid-up
provisions and change the effective date from October 1, 2008,
to October 1, 2003, the 30th anniversary of the program.
Without a change, enrollees who meet this criteria are being
penalized after that date for 5 years.
Also on the survivor front, NAUS strongly urges funding for
S. 585. Currently, if the retired military sponsor who enrolls
in the survivor benefits program dies of a service-connected
disability, the surviving spouse is eligible for both the SBP
annuity and dependency and indemnity compensation, or DIC, from
the Department of Veterans Affairs. However, the SBP annuity is
offset by the full amount of DIC. Each program's purpose is
different. SBP's goal is to provide for the loss of the
sponsor's earned retired pay and DIC's goal is to provide the
surviving spouse compensation for the loss of their spouse due
to injuries caused by his or her service to their country. We
strongly urge funding to eliminate this offset.
Finally, I would like to mention the retention of DIC on
remarriage after age 55. All other Federal survivor benefits
are retained if the beneficiary remarries after a certain age.
The only exception is the military widow or widower receiving
DIC. Many survivors do not remarry because they cannot afford
to lose their DIC. As a matter of equity, a DIC survivor who
marries after the age of 55 should retain his or her DIC status
and benefits.
We would like to see the funding made available to end the
remarriage penalty. NAUS strongly supports the funding for this
type of legislation and any legislation that takes care of
those that we leave behind.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Stevens. Thank you for those suggestions and I
think you are right about that 55-year-old. We will do our
best, Mr. Butler.
Mr. Butler. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Benjamin H. Butler
INTRODUCTION
Mister Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, The
National Association for Uniformed Services (NAUS) is very grateful for
the invitation to testify before you about our views and suggestions
concerning the following defense funding issues:
Survivor Benefits Program (SBP) Improvements
Age 62 Survivor Benefits Program Offset
The National Association for Uniformed Services primary survivor
goal is the elimination of the age 62 Survivor Benefit Program annuity
offset. This would increase the annuity from 35 percent to the original
55 percent. Not only were many of the earliest enrollees not provided
the full explanation of the benefits and the Social Security Offset,
but the Federal Government provides a substantially higher annuity with
no offset for federal Civil Service survivors annuities. We urge the
committee to provide funding for the annuity increase, and end the
often-devastating effects of the offset.
30 Year Paid-Up Status
A secondary goal is the acceleration of the paid-up provisions by
changing the effective date from October 1, 2008 to October 1, 2003,
the 30th anniversary of the program. Enrollees who have reached the age
of 70 and have paid their SBP premiums for more that 30 years (360
payments) are being penalized. We ask that you provide funding to allow
those early enrollees to be allowed this relief.
Survivor Benefits Program/Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation Offset
The National Association for Uniformed Services strongly urges
funding for S. 585. Currently, if the retired military sponsor, who
enrolled in the Survivor Benefits Program, dies of a service-connected
disability, the surviving spouse is eligible for both the SBP annuity
and Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) from the Department of
Veterans Affairs. However, the SBP annuity is offset by the full amount
of the DIC annuity. Each program's purpose is different, SBP's goal is
to provide for the loss of the sponsors earned retired pay, and DIC's
goal is to provide the surviving spouse compensation for the loss of
their spouse due to injuries caused by his/her service to the country.
Defense Commissary Agency Funding and Staffing
The active duty service member continues to rate the Commissaries
as a top benefit of the Quality of Life and Family Program portion of
the military pay and compensation package. The 2002 Active Duty Status
of Forces Survey gave the Exchange and Commissaries a 67 percent
satisfaction rating. And yet, the Commissaries and Exchanges are still
under attack, during a time when our highly trained and motivated
military forces are away from their home bases. How can we justify
attacking their families' convenient access to high quality food at
savings that approach 30 percent?
Issue.--Why would the Department of Defense want to reduce the
commissary benefit at its greatest time of need? The answer is money.
DOD wants to reduce the subsidy for the commissary system that provides
food and other essentials to troops and families around the world,
which will end up in the military community losing the benefit.
Position.--The National Association for Unformed Services strongly
urges you to continue to provide the funding for the Commissary Subsidy
to sustain the current services, which garnished a 67 percent approval
rating, provided to the men and women protecting our nation.
Commissaries are a key component of the military pay and compensation
package. Any action that reduces the benefit means a diminished quality
of life and more out of pocket costs.
Issue.--The Defense Commissary Agency has already begun the process
of eliminating 2,650 personnel positions and reducing its funding by
$137,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.
Position.--NAUS believes that a reduction of this size will degrade
the quality of the benefit by eliminating smaller commissaries and
reducing days and hours of operation.
Issue.--The Department of Defense is planning the consolidation of
the Armed Services three-exchange services into one single entity,
though still retaining the ``look and feel'' of each store and
maintaining the service culture to which the patrons are accustomed.
The goal again, is to save money by elimination of redundant overheads,
delivery systems, and the power of economy of scaling purchasing.
Position.--NAUS does not endorse a consolidation, especially if
consolidation is for consolidation's sake. Streamlining, improving
internal operations and implementation of cost saving measures must not
reduce the value of the benefit.
NAUS supports funding for system studies, but not an accelerated
consolidation.
Summary.--We all understand the importance of saving scarce
taxpayer's dollars. Every taxpayer dollar collected must be used wisely
to keep down the amount of taxes the government collects; this is only
common sense. Therefore, every government agency, department or system
must be as efficient as possible. For example, the leaders of the
commissary system have been and are continuing to make internal changes
to improve efficiencies and reduce overhead operating costs. DOD should
be setting goals, not mandating changes.
Current and Future Issues Facing Uniformed Services Health Care
The National Association for Uniformed Services would like to thank
the Sub-Committee and the Full Appropriations Committee for its
leadership in the past for providing the landmark legislation extending
the Pharmacy benefit and TRICARE system to Medicare eligible military
retirees, their families and survivors, making the lifetime benefit
permanent, establishing the DOD Medicare Eligible Retiree Health Care
Fund, reducing the catastrophic cap and making other TRICARE
improvements. However, we must again urge that the Senate provides full
funding of the Defense Health Program, especially now, while more
activated reserve beneficiaries utilize the program.
In addition to medical care we are concerned that the current
funding within DOD for maintenance and infrastructure improvements is
inadequate. This lack of funding has forced commanders to make band-aid
fixes that in the long term require more costly repairs, or even
acceleration of closing completely. One example is the Armed Forces
Institute of Pathology, located on the grounds of the Walter Reed Army
Medical Center and which Congress declared a national resource in 1976.
This world-class national resource provides a broad range of patient
care consultant activities, educational programs and research for the
military medical system, the Department of Veterans Affairs and the
civilian medical community nationally and internationally. It is housed
in a building that is over 50-years old and deteriorating badly--like
much of the Walter Reed complex that is in need of repair and
maintenance.
Mr. Chairman, the overall goal of the National Association for
Uniformed Services is a strong National Defense. We believe that
comprehensive, lifelong medical and dental care for all Uniformed
Service beneficiaries regardless of age, status or location furthers
this goal. In light of these overall objectives, we would request that
the committee examine the following proposals:
TRICARE Improvements supported by NAUS
Our first and foremost goal is to increase the provider
reimbursement rates to more realistic amounts. Without adequate
reimbursement rates, the ability to maintain a viable, qualified list
of medical providers is hindered. That directly affects the health of
our service members and their families. Secondly, we ask that you
provide funding to improve the TRICARE Standard Program, to include
increased communication between the TRICARE Management Activity and the
Standard beneficiary about the benefits of the program and assisting
the Standard beneficiary in locating an available provider. Finally, we
encourage the subcommittee to maintain the TRICARE Standard plan as the
fee-for-service plan that was initially created and continue its
efforts to eliminate the pre-authorizations now required.
Medicare Part B Enrollment
The law enacting the TRICARE for Life program requires Medicare
Part B enrollment for participation in the TRICARE for Life program. In
addition, Part B is required for all retirees reaching age 65 on or
after 1 April 2001 for them to participate in the new pharmacy program
Secondly, some 12,000 retirees residing overseas are required to
participate in Part B Medicare in order to enroll in TRICARE for Life.
Since they cannot use the Medicare benefits overseas, we recommend that
this requirement be eliminated for all retirees residing overseas and
that upon their relocation to the United States be allowed to enroll in
Part B without the delayed enrollment penalty.
Also, some retirees who lived near military installations did not
enroll in Part B because they relied upon the promise of lifetime
medical care at the hospitals and clinics located on the military
bases, which have subsequently been closed. Many are in their 70's and
80's now and cannot afford to pay the huge Part B delayed enrollment
penalties.
Position.--We recommend that those who relied on these hospitals
and were 65 on or before 6 October 2000, the date TFL was enacted by
NDAA for fiscal year 2001, be allowed to participate in TFL without
enrolling in Part B Medicare or at the very least waive the delayed
enrollment penalties.
FEHBP
The National Association for Uniformed Services has been a long
time proponent of legislation that would provide military personnel the
option of participating in the Federal Employees Health Benefit
Program. Though confident that the TRICARE program and the TRICARE for
Life program will be successful, because they are an outstanding value
for most beneficiaries, in a few cases, the TRICARE/TRICARE for Life
options may not be the best choice, or may not be available for the
eligible beneficiary. For that reason, we believe the FEHBP option
should be enacted. Providing the FEHBP, as an option would help
stabilize the TRICARE program, provide a market based benchmark for
cost comparison and be available to those for whom TRICARE/TRICARE for
Life is not an adequate solution.
Position.--NAUS strongly urges the committee to provide additional
funding to support a full FEHBP program for military personnel as an
option.
Include Physician and Nurse Specialty Pay in Retirement
Computations
Results of the 2002 Active Duty Survey show that pay and benefits
are the most important factors impacting retention. Improving specialty
pay/bonuses and including specialty pay/bonuses in retired pay
calculations would aid retention. Therefore, prompt action to retain
these and other highly skilled medical professionals is needed.
Position.--The National Association for Uniformed Services requests
funding to allow the military physicians and nurses to use their
specialty pay in their retirement computations. The military services
continue to lose top quality medical professionals (doctors and nurses)
at mid-career. A major reason is the difference between compensation
levels for military physicians and nurses and those in the private
sector.
Uniform Claims processing and Billing
It has been the long term hope that part of the growing costs of
medical treatment in both the Department of Defense and the Department
of Veteran Affairs could be paid by billing private insurance companies
and Medicare/Medicaid systems (DOD and VA Subvention). Numerous
attempts to improve these financial streams have failed.
Position.--In part this failure has been caused because the various
systems do not share the same system for claims and billing. Since the
dominant system of all medical claims in the country is clearly
Medicare if DOD and the VA adopted the Medicare claims system ALL
parties--Private Insurance Companies, DOD, the VA and Medicare/Medicaid
would know what medical services, pharmaceuticals, laboratory services
and the like have been provided. Such a uniform billing plan could also
lead to improvements in allowing the VA to be a fully participating
TRICARE network provider. This does not solve the other billing
problems but at least it would put all the parties on the same sheet of
music.
DOD and VA Subvention
The attempt of Medicare subvention (having Medicare pay for
treatment of its beneficiaries at MTFs) with the DOD has been a huge
disappointment. The Department of Defense has received no stream of
payments. Medicare's required level of effort'' has never been reached
by an MTF. But this goal should not be abandoned. The active duty
member, his or her working spouse, the Veteran and the Military Retiree
have all spent their working careers paying money into the Medicare
system. The taxes have been paid but if they receive treatment in a MTF
or a VA hospital or clinic the facility receives nothing from Medicare
to help pay for that beneficiary's services.
Position.--The financially strained medical systems of the VA and
DOD should receive some of the support their patients have paid. Again,
if DOD and the VA adopted Medicare's billing system it could support an
effective attempt at subvention.
Active and Reserve
The most important element of military readiness is a high quality
force. The quality force that we have fighting for us today is the
result of over twenty years of effort. The National Association for
Uniformed Services doesn't want to see these gains lost.
We understand that DOD plans budget cuts, with the services again
looking at end strength reductions especially in the Reserve Components
at a time that we are fighting a war against multiple undefined
terrorist factions.
We request that you consider language in the appropriations bill to
direct DOD to cease further reductions in both Active and Reserve
components until the threats to our Nation are properly determined and
a National Defense Strategy is clearly defined. We shouldn't forget the
needs of our Soldiers, Sailors, Marines and Airmen in the field.
Quality of life includes quality on the job. The National Association
for Uniformed Services supports a 4.1 percent pay raise for all seven
of the Uniformed Services. We further support targeted pay raise
proposals for enlisted members in grades E-5 to E-9, and selected
warrant officers.
Additionally, NAUS feels that it is important to invest defense
dollars for equipment procurement beyond the administration's budget.
The service chiefs have provided non-funded requirements for both the
active and Reserve components that will be needed by our people in the
near future.
We ask that funds be provided utilizing the National Guard and
Reserve Equipment Account. While the Senate has pressured to reduce the
NGREA, the services have failed in their responsibility to budget for
Reserve equipment; until this is resolved we believe the NGREA should
be used for this purpose.
Reserve members were quick to step forward; some have already
sacrificed their lives during this war as part of this nation's total
force. In recognition, we ask for parity between active and reserve
components when it comes to pay and compensation and retirement. We
encourage this committee to support future hearings dealing with pay
and compensation as these proposals are developed.
NAUS believes that funding lifelong medical and dental care for all
of the uniformed service beneficiaries, regardless of age, Active or
Reserve status or location, supports the goal of mobilization
readiness. But we would like to call attention to the ongoing need of
funding TRICARE providers and, in turn, supporting the troubled TRICARE
network.
This is especially hard on the families of reservists who don't
relocate when their warriors are mobilized. We hope the committee will
support monies for military treatment facility subvention and
utilization of veterans affairs hospitals as TRICARE providers.
Transformation
The Secretary of Defense's office is conducting a series of studies
emphasizing transformation, relying on costly, undeveloped
technologies, seeking dollar savings by reducing end strength in a
flexible, adaptive fighting force.
The first suggested legislation has been released entitled the
``Defense Transformation for the 21st Century Act of 2003.'' While
Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld's staff has attempted to come up with new
solutions to old problems, blanket implementation may result in
unintended consequences.
Issues Affecting Appropriations
Increased cost to the retirement fund is NAUS's concern if the 75
percent ceiling is lifted, and a unrestricted multiplier is allowed,
permitting flag and general officers to be paid more in retirement than
on active duty.
NAUS is concerned with removing the pay limitations on retired pay
for general and flag officers, which is currently held equal to level
III of the Executive Schedule.
Enhanced General Transfer Authority; transfer of funds: NAUS
opposes granting authority to SECDEF to permit the transfer of 2.5
percent of the total appropriations between funds (except MILCON) for
military functions--five percent in times of war or emergency.
This is too high a sum of money, undercuts the appropriations
process, and creates a high risk to have authorized items stripped of
funding to support a DOD project viewed as underfunded.
Transfer of Funds to correct specific acquisition. NAUS feels there
is no need to allow reprogramming of funds. This is a requested change
from $10 million to $20 million, again reducing Congressional
oversight.
Another suggestion within the Transformation Act is allowing
``improved involuntary access'' to Reserve Component members for
enhanced training prior to mobilization. Suggested language calls this
``up to 90 days of active duty for training,'' which indicates that
this preparation for mobilization will come from reserve training funds
rather than from the budget of the active duty, which will most
directly benefit from this ``deployment standards'' training.
NAUS requests that the A.T. funding be expanded beyond the 15 days
of A.T. per guardsman and reservist, to allow for these additional
periods of training, otherwise this unit training will strip away
training dollars from individual reservists.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Sub-Committee, we
want to thank you for your leadership and for holding these hearings
this year. You have made it clear that the military continues to be a
high priority and you have our continuing support.
Senator Stevens. Next will be Mr. Duggan. But, Mr. Duggan
will you wait? We will start you when the Senator comes back. I
will go vote and someone else will be here.
Senator Inouye [presiding]. Please forgive us for this
vote-a-rama.
Mr. Duggan. Yes, sir. Good morning, sir.
Senator Inouye. The next witness will be Dennis ``Mike''
Duggan, Deputy Director of the National Security, Foreign
Relations Division of the American Legion.
STATEMENT OF DENNIS M. DUGGAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL SECURITY, FOREIGN RELATIONS
COMMISSION, THE AMERICAN LEGION
Mr. Duggan. Good morning, sir, and thank you. Mr. Chairman,
the American Legion, as the Nation's largest organization of
wartime veterans, is extremely grateful for this opportunity to
present its views regarding the Defense appropriations for
fiscal year 2004. We have always valued your leadership in
assessing and appropriating adequate funding for the defense
establishment, including its military quality of life,
readiness, and modernization or transformation.
The stunning military successes in Iraq validate this
committee's investing in our armed services and I am sure we
are all appreciative of that. As we speak, thousands of
soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, Active and Reserve
components, continue to valiantly serve in the Persian Gulf and
Afghanistan. All Americans are proud of what they have
achieved, while cognizant of the fact that the war on terrorism
does in fact continue.
Americans expect us to support our troops and to support a
strong national defense and we believe this fiscal year 2004
bill does that.
Mr. Chairman, our Armed Forces, as effective as they are,
are spread thin and over 220,000 reservists have been activated
for homeland security missions and the war on terrorism. Our
reserve components are no longer reserve. They are on the front
lines. The extent to which they are being used in larger
numbers and over longer periods of time may well result,
however, in reduced recruiting and retention. We do not know
that at this stage.
Some active component, reserve component shifts may be
necessary and may improve force levels and strengthen the
active capabilities. However, it appears that funding the
increase of active duty end strengths is imperative. We believe
that, the American Legion does, that the active duty end
strengths need to be increased.
We are also aware of a number of aging systems which the
Armed Forces continue to keep in their active inventory which
probably need replacing at this stage of the game, to include
refueling tankers for one. Another, of course, that comes to
mind is the CH, aging CH-46 Sea Knight, and there have been a
number of accidents involving that and I just wonder if they
just need to be replaced.
We understand the CH-47 Chinooks have been pretty well
upgraded, the Army version, with new engines and so forth. But
the CH-46 Sea Knight may need replacing or at least greatly
upgrading.
The American Legion applauds the SASC, Senate Armed
Services Committee, bill calling for a survey of military
retirees by the Department of Defense (DOD) to determine the
viability and the adequacy of the Tricare Standard benefit that
was brought up by the last speaker. We do urge that Tricare
reimbursement rates probably need to be increased and that the
Defense health system as well be fully funded. Many care-
eligible military retirees and their dependents remain forever
grateful of the Tricare for Life program and the Senior Tricare
Pharmacy Benefit as well for those over age 65.
The American Legion applauds the raises in base pay and
allowances for the active force. But family separation
allowances, hostile fire pay, or imminent danger pays, we
believe need to be increased, as does the rather archaic death
gratuity benefits as well. The 6,000 bucks is not a whole heck
of a lot for families that lose a loved one in action.
Reserve benefits need to be increased consistent with the
extent to which reservists are being mobilized to perform
active duty missions. Retired reservists should be eligible for
reservist pay and Tricare health care before the age of 60 and
also reservists should have unlimited access to military
commissaries.
Just one last word, Mr. Chairman, and that has to do with
the recently enacted combat-related special compensation for
disabled military retirees. It flagrantly to a large extent
leaves off our disabled reservists and guardsmen who have
served 20 or more years and who are not even eligible to really
apply for that special compensation.
Mr. Chairman, we thank you again for this opportunity.
Thank you, sir.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dennis M. Duggan
Mr. Chairman, The American Legion is grateful for the opportunity
to present its views regarding defense appropriations for fiscal year
2004. The American Legion values your leadership in assessing and
appropriating adequate funding for quality-of-life, readiness and
modernization of the Nation's armed forces.
Once again, the United States is involved in two wars--the war
against terrorism and Operation Iraqi Freedom. American fighting men
and women are proving that they are best-trained, best-equipped and
best-led military in the world. As Secretary of Defense, Donald
Rumsfeld has noted, the war in Iraq is part of a long, dangerous global
war on terrorism. The war on terrorism is being waged on two fronts:
overseas against armed terrorists and the other here protecting and
securing the Homeland. Indeed, most of what we as Americans hold dear
are made possible by the peace and stability, which the armed forces
provide.
The American Legion adheres to the principle that this Nation's
armed forces must be well manned and equipped, not to pursue war, but
to preserve and protect peace. The American Legion strongly believes
that past military downsizing was budget-driven rather than threat
focused. Once Army divisions, Navy carrier battle groups, and Air Force
fighter wings are eliminated from the force structure, they cannot be
rapidly reconstituted regardless of the threat or emergency
circumstances. Military recruitment has also been sporadic in the face
of obvious quality-of-life concerns, frequent and lengthy deployments,
and the recession, in spite of the patriotic American spirit which has
followed the terrorist attacks of September 11th.
The Administration's budget request for fiscal year 2004 totals
$2.2 trillion and authorizes $379.9 billion for defense or about 16.6
percent of the budget. The fiscal year 2004 defense budget represents a
$14 billion increase in defense spending over the current funding
level. It also represents 3.4 percent of our Gross Domestic Product,
more than the 3.3 percent in the fiscal year 2003 budget. Active duty
military manpower end strength is 1,388,100, only slightly changed from
the 1.37 million of fiscal year 2002. Selected Reserve strength is
863,300 or reduced by about 25 percent from its strength levels during
the Gulf War of 12 years ago..
Mr. Chairman, this budget must contain funding to fight the war on
terrorism, sustain military quality of life and continue to transform
the military. A decade of overuse of the military and it's under-
funding, however, will necessitate sustained investments. This budget
must also address increases in the military endstrength of the
Services, accelerate ship production, and funding for the concurrent
receipt of military retirement pay and VA disability compensation for
disabled military retirees.
If we are to win the war on terror and prepare for the wars of
tomorrow, we must take care of the Department's greatest assets--the
men and women in uniform. They are doing us proud in Iraq, Afghanistan
and around the world.
In order to attract and retain the necessary force over the long
haul, the military continues to look for talent in an open market place
and to compete with the private sector for the best young people our
nation has to offer. If we are to attract them to military service in
the active and reserve components, we need to count on their patriotism
and willingness to sacrifice, to be sure, but we must also provide them
the proper incentives. They love their country, but they also love
their families--and many have children to support, raise, and educate.
We have always asked the men and women in uniform to voluntarily risk
their lives to defend us; we should not ask them to forgo adequate pay
and subject their families to repeated unaccompanied deployments and
sub-standard housing as well.
The President's 2004 defense budget requests $98.6 billion for
military pay and allowances, including $3.7 billion for a 2 percent to
6.3 percent pay raise and $300 million for the option for targeted pay-
raises for mid-grade officers and NCOs. It also includes $4.2 billion
to improve military housing, putting the Department on track to
eliminate most substandard housing by 2007--several years sooner than
previously planned. It will also lower out-of-pocket housing cost for
those living off-base from 7.5 percent to 3.5 percent in 2004--so as to
hopefully eliminate all out-of-pocket costs for the men and women in
uniform by 2005.
Together, these investments in people are critical, because smart
weapons are worthless to us unless they are in the hands of smart, well
trained Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coastguardsmen.
The American Legion's National Commander has visited American
troops in South Korea, as well as a number of installations throughout
the United States. During these visits, he was able to see first hand
the urgent, immediate need to address real quality of life challenges
faced by service members and their families. He has spoken with
families on Womens' and Infants' Compensation (WIC). Quality of life
issues for service members, coupled with heightened operational tempos,
play a key role in the recurring recruitment and retention woes and
should come as no surprise. The operational tempo and lengthy
deployments must be reduced. Military missions were on the rise before
September 11 and deployment levels remain high and the only way, it
appears, to reduce repetitive overseas tours and the overuse of the
Reserves is to increase military endstrengths for the services.
Military pay must be on par with the competitive civilian sector. If
other benefits, like health care improvements, commissaries, adequate
quarters, quality child care, and impact aid for education are reduced,
they will only serve to further undermine efforts to recruit and retain
the brightest and best this nation has to offer.
QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE REVIEW (QDR)
Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, America has
conducted three substantial assessments of its strategy and force
structures necessary to meet the national defense requirements. The
assessment by the first President Bush Administration (``Base Force''
assessment) and the assessment by the Clinton Administration (``Bottom-
Up Review'') were intended to reassess the force structure in light of
the changing realities of the post-Cold War world. Both assessments
served an important purpose in focusing attention on the need to
reevaluate America's military posture; but the pace of global change
necessitated a new, comprehensive assessment of the current defense
strategy for the 21st Century. The current QDR was formatted before
September 11, 2001.
The American Legion has supported the force structure proposed by
the Base Force Strategy: Maintaining 12 Army active duty combat
divisions, 12 Navy aircraft carrier battle groups, 15 Air Force fighter
wings and three Marine Corps divisions, and a total manpower strength
of at least 1.6 million. The American Legion initially supported the
theory behind the two-war strategy: if America were drawn into a war
with one regional aggressor, another could be tempted to attack its
neighbor, especially if this aggressor were convinced that America and
its allies were distracted, lacked the will to fight conflicts on two
fronts, or did not possess the military power to deal with more than
one major conflict at a time. Determining the right size of U.S. forces
for more than one major conflict would provide a hedge against the
possibility that a future adversary might mount a larger than expected
threat. It would also allow for a credible overseas presence that is
essential in dealing with potential regional dangers and pursuing new
opportunities to advance stability and peace. The American Legion has
always believed that any such strategy should be capabilities-based
rather than budget-driven.
The two-war, nearly simultaneously, strategy was criticized as
being too narrowly focused on preparing for two specific conflicts, was
under-prepared for other contingencies and was never adequately
resourced. We believe that for the strategy to be credible it must
employ more robust force structures and continued increased budgeting
to improve quality-of-life, readiness and modernization. The American
Legion believes the ``win-win'' two-war Bottom-Up Review strategy was
delusional. With growing worldwide commitments, America has a ``win-
hold'' strategy, at best, with only 10 Army active combat divisions,
three Marine divisions, 12 Navy carrier groups and eight National Guard
Divisions to utilize.
The reality of a two-war strategy appears to have arrived. Once
again, we have fought in the Persian Gulf while keeping an eye on
developments in North Korea. The armed forces have appeared to be over
committed for too long with their many missions to include preparation
for conventional warfare, peacekeeping in the Balkans, counterguerilla
operations in the Philippines and Colombia as well as Homeland Security
and the global War on Terrorism to include combat operations in Iraq
and Afghanistan.
The American Legion also believes America can no longer afford to
become the world peace enforcer by dispatching forces on unbudgeted
operations whether the United Nations passes or does not pass a
resolution to do so. The American Legion believes Congress needs to
remain involved in the decision-making process regarding the commitment
of U.S. military forces. These forces should be deployed only when the
vital national interests of America are clearly at stake, supported by
the will of the American people and Congress, and a clear exit strategy
exists. Congress needs to become involved in the policy of committing
U.S. troops before troops are actively committed, not afterwards.
Clearly, our war in Iraq has satisfied all these conditions. For that
reason, the Armed Forces are deserving of congressional support for
increased resourcing.
PROCUREMENT/TRANSFORMATION
Only a few major systems currently in production would be funded in
the fiscal year 2004 defense budget. The funding level for procurement
is improved but needs to be sustained. The American Legion fully
supports the Army's Transformation Program. Major development programs
that The American Legion also supports include the Air Force F-22
fighter and C-17, F/A-18Es for the Navy, and Joint Strike Fighters for
the Air Force and Navy. Unquestionably, the Navy needs to upgrade its
aging fleet and air arm as well as acquire more submarines. The
American Legion strongly believes that the seven-ship rate of ship-
building needs to be increased so that at least 8-10 ships are built
annually.
If left unadvised, omissions in DOD's modernization budget will
have the following implications:
--They will result in the continued deterioration of the defense
industrial base.
--The future technological superiority of American forces will be at
risk thereby increasing the danger to servicemembers should
they be called into combat. We are currently retiring ships and
aircraft faster than they are being built.
--The failure to replace and upgrade equipment in a timely manner
will create a massive modernization shortfall in each of the
military services and, possibly, lead to even more serious
readiness problems in the long run.
America's winning technology in the Persian Gulf War, like its
victorious all-volunteer force, did not develop overnight, but had its
genesis in the decade of the 1980's. The modernization of the Armed
Forces since the end of the Persian Gulf War, unfortunately, has been
delayed and curtailed. The 2004 budget request is designed to advance
each of the transformational goals mentioned by the Secretary of
Defense in his Congressional testimony last year. It accelerates
funding both for the development of transformation programs as well as
by funding modernization. Recognizably, transformation is a process,
and is a process that must continue. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff during fiscal year 1998 defense budget hearings called for
procurement budgets of $60 billion annually, which for the first time
was reflected in the fiscal year 2001 budget. Army procurement dollars
alone have plummeted by almost 80 percent since the mid-1980's, and by
67 percent for all the services. Trade-offs to maintain readiness
within budget constraints have caused the Services to cancel a number
of weapons systems and to delay others.
A number of defense consulting firms have predicted that the armed
forces are heading for a ``train wreck'' unless annual defense budgets
called for procurement accounts in the $118 billion range, rather than
in the $45-60 billion range.
The American Legion urges Congress to preserve America's defense
industrial base by continuing to fund research, development and
acquisition budgets so as to retain its technological edge in the 21st
Century and assure that military production can surge whenever U.S.
military power is committed. Some of these capabilities, such as tank
production and shipbuilding, need to be retained. Key industrial
capabilities that preserve more of the defense industrial base need to
be identified and retained.
The American Legion opposes termination or curtailing of essential
service modernization programs, diminution of defense industrial
capabilities, and rejects the transfers of critical defense
technologies abroad.
The American Legion firmly believes with the continuing threat of
nuclear proliferation, America should retain its edge in nuclear
capabilities as represented by the TRIAD system, and the highest
priority should be the deployment of a national missile defense.
Although the development and deployment of advanced theater missile
defenses to protect U.S. forward deployed forces is imperative, any
dismantling of acquisition programs to defend the American people is
imprudent. America should continue to march on deploying an anti-
ballistic missile detection and interception system that is capable of
providing a highly effective defense against limited attacks of
ballistic missiles. The price of maintaining a strong defense is
expensive in terms of tax dollars, but failure to do so could prove
much more expensive in terms of human lives and real threats to
freedom. The national security framework provides the umbrella that
allows Americans to work and prosper without fear. A strong national
defense does not inhibit a strong economy; it complements it. Congress
and the military establishment must spend tax dollars prudently and
effectively. DOD must ensure that all aspects of its procurement and
manning levels are responsible and disciplined.
QUALITY OF LIFE
The American Legion's major National Security concern is the
enhancement of the quality of life issues for service members,
Reservists, National Guardsmen, military retirees, and their families.
During the 107th Congress, President Bush and Congress made marked
improvements in an array of quality of life issues for military
personnel and their families. These efforts are visual enhancements
that must be sustained.
In the fiscal year 2002 defense budget, the President and Congress
addressed improvements to the TRICARE system to meet the health care
needs of military beneficiaries; enhanced Montgomery GI Bill
educational benefits; and the addressed homelessness throughout the
veterans community. For these actions, The American Legion applauds
your strong leadership, dedication, and commitment. However, major
issues still remain unresolved: the issue of concurrent receipt of full
military retirement pay and VA disability compensation without the
current dollar-for-dollar offset needs to be resolved as well as the
need to improve Survivor's Benefits.
The American Legion will continue to argue that simple, equitable
justice is one reason to authorize and fund concurrent receipt.
Military retirees are the only Federal employees who must offset their
retired pay with VA disability compensation. Also, proponents claim
that the unique nature of military service, given their sacrifices and
hardships, should merit these retirees receiving both military retired
pay and VA disability compensation. For the past decade, many veterans'
programs have been pared to the bone in the name of balancing the
budget. Now, military retirees must pay premiums to TRICARE for full
health care coverage for themselves and their immediate family members.
Many veterans' advocates feel it is time that retirees receive
compensation for these fiscal sacrifices.
Often, VA service-connected disability compensation is awarded for
disabilities that cannot be equated with disabilities incurred in
civilian life. Military service rendered in defense and on behalf of
the Nation deserves special consideration when determining policy
toward such matters as benefits offsets. The American Legion believes
it is a moral and ethical responsibility to award disability
compensation to the needs of disabled veterans, given the sacrifices
and hardships they incurred during honorable military service to the
Nation. We are also aware that many of the disabled retirees receive
retirement pay that is beneath established poverty levels and by
definition in Title 38 are ``indigent'' veterans.
Mr. Chairman, The American Legion and the armed forces owe you and
this Subcommittee a debt of gratitude for your strong support of
military quality of life issues. Nevertheless, your assistance is
needed now more than ever. Positive congressional action is needed in
this budget to overcome old and new threats to retaining the finest
military in the world. Service members and their families continue to
endure physical risks to their well being and livelihood, substandard
living conditions, and forfeiture of personal freedoms that most
Americans would find unacceptable. Worldwide deployments have increased
significantly and the Nation is at war: a smaller armed forces has
operated under a higher operational tempo with longer work hours,
greater dangers, and increased family separations.
Throughout the drawdown years, military members have been called
upon to set the example for the nation by accepting personal financial
sacrifices. Their pay raises have been capped for years, and their
health care system has been overhauled to cut costs, leaving military
families with lessened access to proper health care. The American
Legion congratulates the Congress for their quality-of-life
enhancements. The system, however, is in dire need of continued
improvement.
Now is the time to look to the force recruiting and retention
needs. Positive congressional action is needed to overcome past years
of negative career messages and to address the following quality of
life features:
--Closing the Military Pay Gap with the Private Sector.--The previous
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff stated that the area of
greatest need for additional defense spending is ``taking care
of our most important resource, the uniformed members of the
armed forces.'' To meet this need, he enjoined Members of
Congress to ``close the substantial gap between what we pay our
men and women in uniform and what their civilian counterparts
with similar skills, training and education are earning.'' But
11 pay caps in the past 15 years took its toll and military pay
continues to lag behind the private sector at about 7.5
percent. With U.S. troops battling terrorism in the Persian
Gulf, The American Legion supports the proposed 4.1 percent
military pay raise, without a 2 percent reduction.
--Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH).--For those who must live off
base, the provision of the Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) is
intended to help with their out-of-pocket housing expenses.
Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld set a goal of entirely
eliminating average out-of-pocket housing expenses. This
committee has taken strong steps in recent times to provide
funding to move toward lowering such expenses. Please continue
to work to close the gap between BAH and the members' average
housing costs.
--Commissaries.--Several years ago, DOD had considered closing some
37 commissary stores worldwide and reducing operating hours in
order to resolve a $48 million shortfall in the Defense
Commissary Agency. Such an effort to reduce or dismantle the
integrity of the military commissary system would be seen as a
serious breach of faith with a benefit system that serves as a
mainstay for the active and reserve components, military
retirees, 100 percent service-connected disabled veterans, and
others. The American Legion urges the Congress to preserve full
federal subsidizing of the military commissary system and to
retain this vital non-pay compensation benefit. Furthermore,
The American Legion fully supports the full-time usage of
commissary stores by members of the Reserve Components, that
the system not be privatized, and that DECA manpower levels not
be further reduced.
RESERVE COMPONENTS
The advent of smaller active duty forces reinforces the need to
retain combat-ready National Guard and Reserve forces that are
completely integrated into the Total Force. The readiness of National
Guard and Reserve combat units to deploy in the War on Terrorism will
also cost in terms of human lives unless Congress is completely willing
to pay the price for their readiness. With only ten active Army
divisions in its inventory, America needs to retain the eight National
Guard divisions, in heightened readiness postures, as its life
insurance policy.
Reliance on National Guard and Reserve forces has risen 13-fold
over the pre-Gulf War era. This trend continues even though both
reserve and active forces have been cut back 30 percent and about 25
percent, respectively, from their Cold War highs. Since the terrorist
attacks on the American homeland on Sept. 11, more than 200,000 Guard
and Reserve troops have been activated to support homeland defense and
overseas operations in the War on Terror.
National Guard and Reserve service today involves a challenging
balancing act between civilian employment, family responsibilities, and
military service. Increasingly, National Guard and Reserve families
encounter stressful situations involving healthcare, economic
obligations, and employer uncertainty. Benefit issues of particular
concern in this arena include:
--Review and upgrade the Reserve compensation and retirement system
without creating disproportional incentives that could
undermine active force retention;
--Restore the tax deductibility of non-reimbursable expenses directly
related to Guard and Reserve training;
--Streamline the reserve duty status system without compromising the
value of the compensation package;
--Improve Reserve Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) benefits proportional to
the active duty program;
--Allow reservists activated for 12 months or longer to enroll in the
active duty MGIB:
--Allow them to accrue for retirement purposes all points earned
annually; and
--Permit Guardsmen unlimited access to military commissaries.
Growing concerns are that the Reserve Components, especially the
National Guard, should not be overused in contingency or peacekeeping
operations, as these servicemembers have regular civilian jobs and
families as well. The National Guard also has state missions in their
home states. The American Legion understands that retention rates and,
therefore, strength levels are falling in those states which have
deployed or scheduled to deploy Guardsmen overseas. Governors of these
states continue to express concern that state missions will not be
accomplished. The National Guard from 44 states have had a presence in
35 foreign countries.
The American Legion is also supportive of all proposed quality-of-
life initiatives that serve to improve living and working conditions of
members of the Reserve components and their families.
HEALTH CARE FOR MILITARY BENEFICIARIES
Today, there are approximately 8.2 million beneficiaries in the
military health care program. Military retirees and their dependents
make up nearly one half of that number, and over 500,000 retirees have
lost or will lose their access to military health care as a result of
the closure of approximately 40 percent of military treatment
facilities. Access to affordable health care, regardless of age, status
or location, has represented a major concern among military retirees.
The creation of TRICARE for Life and a TRICARE Senior Pharmacy
benefit in Public Law 106-398 was an historic triumph for Congress and
those 1.3 million Medicare-eligible military retirees and dependents.
While TRICARE for Life came with its own funding stream in fiscal year
2002, authorization must be budgeted to provide for the program for
fiscal year 2004. The American Legion recommends that you continue to
improve this important program by providing the necessary funding. The
American Legion also applauds your work last year in eliminating
TRICARE co-payments for active duty family members. We also salute the
Department of Defense for reducing active duty time for Reservists to
30 days for their families to be eligible for TRICARE.
Although Congress enacted legislation to restore TRICARE to
Medicare-eligible beneficiaries as a wraparound to Medicare (TRICARE
for Life) and to improve TRICARE for active duty families, further
improvements are still needed, especially for retired beneficiaries
under age 65. TRICARE must be a consistent, reliable and equitable
health care benefit for all uniformed services beneficiaries,
regardless of age or geography.
The fiscal year 2001 NDAA eliminated copays for active duty family
members enrolled in Prime, and enacted TRICARE For Life (TFL) and
TRICARE Senior Pharmacy (TSRx) for Medicare-eligibles. With TFL
implementation complete Congress and DOD must turn their attention to
improving serious shortcomings in healthcare benefits for TRICARE
beneficiaries under the age of 65.
--Low reimbursement rates are causing providers to refuse any TRICARE
patients or reduce the number of TRICARE patients they will
treat, limiting beneficiary access and choice. Solution:
Increase statutory (Medicare) payment rates; require use of
existing authority to raise TRICARE rates where necessary to
ensure sufficient numbers of participating providers.
--TRICARE is cumbersome to use and causes administrative hassles for
providers and beneficiaries attempting to obtain authorization,
expedite claim repayment, or move between regions. Solution:
Improve TRICARE Prime enrollment procedures, portability, and
beneficiary education. Decrease administrative burdens,
eliminate non-availability statement requirements, streamline
claims processing requirements with greater reliance on
electronic claims technology, and eliminate unnecessary
reporting requirements. Require TRICARE contractors to assist
beneficiaries in finding TRICARE Standard providers.
--Institute ``benefits plus benefits'' reimbursement methodology. TFL
pays beneficiary expenses not covered by Medicare (``benefits
plus benefits''). For TRICARE Standard beneficiaries with other
health insurance (OHI), TRICARE seldom pays expenses not
covered by other insurance (``benefits less benefits'').
Solution: Restore TRICARE reimbursement policy to pay up to
what TRICARE would have paid had there been no OHI coverage (as
was the policy before 1993).
Since the commencement of the first class of graduates of the
Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences (USUHS) in 1980, over
3,200 physicians continue to pursue careers as physicians in the Army,
Navy, Air Force and the U.S. Public Health Service each year. The USUHS
education process emphasizes primary care medicine and also provides
special training in military medicine and combat stress courses not
found in civilian medical school curricula. USUHS graduates have also
proven themselves willing to accept operational overseas assignments
often viewed as less than desirable by civilian medical school
graduates.
Both the fiscal year 1996 National Defense Appropriations Act and
the National Defense Authorization Act prohibit the closure of USUHS.
The Defense Authorization Act also provided a five year prohibition on
reducing the staffing levels of USUHS below the levels established as
of October 1, 1993. The American Legion urges the Congress to resist
any efforts to circumvent the law to downscale or close the USUHS. The
American Legion is convinced that the USUHS is an economical source of
career medical leaders who serve this nation during peace and war and
provide military health care consistency and stability. The American
Legion urges the Congress to retain and fully fund USUHS as a continued
source of career military physicians for the Army, Navy, Air Force and
U.S. Public Health Service. The American Legion also supports the
construction of an Academic Center to accommodate the USUHS Graduate
School of Nursing.
OTHER MILITARY RETIREE ISSUES
The American Legion believes strongly that quality-of-life issues
for retired military members and families also are important to
sustaining military readiness over the long term. If the Government
allows retired members' quality-of-life to erode over time, or if the
retirement promises that convinced them to serve are not kept, the
retention rate in the current active-duty force will undoubtedly be
affected. The old adage that you enlist a recruit, but you reenlist a
family is truer today than ever as more career-oriented servicemembers
are married or have dependents.
Accordingly, The American Legion believes Congress and the
Administration must place high priority on ensuring that these long-
standing commitments are honored:
--VA Compensation Offset to Military Retired Pay (Retired Pay
Restoration).--Under current law, a military retiree with
compensable VA disabilities cannot receive full military
retirement pay and VA disability compensation. The military
retiree's retirement pay is offset (dollar-for-dollar) by the
amount of VA disability compensation awarded. We would like to
thank the committee for providing funding for the authorized
special compensation programs; however, The American Legion
supports restoration of retired pay (concurrent receipt) for
all disabled military retirees. The purposes of these two
compensation systems are fundamentally different. Longevity
retirement pay is designed primarily as a force management tool
to attract large numbers of high quality members to serve for
at least 20 years. A veteran's disability compensation is paid
for an injury or disease incurred or aggravated during military
service. Monetary benefits are related to the residual effects
of the injury or disease or for the physical or mental pain and
suffering and subsequently reduced employment and earnings
potential. The American Legion also urges that disabled retired
Reservists' and those retired under the early retirement
authority be eligible for the authorized Special Compensation
programs. What better time to authorize and fund concurrent
receipt than during this period of War?
--Social Security Offsets to the Survivors' Benefits Plan (SBP).--The
American Legion supports amending Public Law 99-145 to
eliminate the provision that calls for the automatic offset at
age 62 of the military SBP with Social Security benefits for
military survivors. Military retirees pay into both SBP and
Social Security, and their survivors pay income taxes on both.
The American Legion believes that military survivors should be
entitled to receipt of full Social Security benefits which they
have earned in their own right. It is also strongly recommended
that any SBP premium increases be assessed on the effective
date, or subsequent to, increases in cost of living adjustments
and certainly not before the increase in SBP as has been done
previously. In order to see some increases in SBP benefits, The
American Legion would support a gradual improvement of survivor
benefits from 35 percent to 55 percent over the next five-year
period. The American Legion also supports initiatives to make
the military survivors' benefits plan more attractive.
Currently, about 75 percent of officers and 55 percent of
enlisted personnel are enrolled in the Plan.
--Reducing the Retired Reservist age from 60 to 55.--The American
Legion believes that retirement pay should be paid sooner as
many of these retirees will not live to their 60th birthday.
Similarly, these retirees and their dependents should be
eligible for TRICARE health care and other military privileges
when they turn 55.
--Military Retired Pay COLAs.--Servicemembers, current and future,
need the leadership of this Subcommittee to ensure Congress
remains sensitive to long-standing contracts made with
generations of career military personnel. A major difficulty is
the tendency of some to portray all so-called ``entitlement''
programs, including military retirement, as a gratuitous gift
from the taxpayer. In truth, military retired pay is earned
deferred compensation for accepting the unique demands and
sacrifices of decades of military service. The military
retirement system is among the most important military career
incentives. The American Legion urgently recommends that the
Subcommittee oppose any changes to the military retirement
system, whether prospective or retroactive, that would
undermine readiness or violate contracts made with military
retirees.
--The SBP Veterans Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) Offset
for Survivors.--Under current law, the surviving spouse of a
retired military member who dies from a service connected
disability and was also enrolled in SBP, the surviving spouse's
SBP benefits are offset by the amount of DIC (currently $948
per month). A pro-rated share of SBP premiums is refunded to
the widow upon the member's death in a lump sum, but with no
interest. The American Legion believes that SBP and DIC
payments, like military retirement pay and disability
compensation, are paid for different reasons. SBP is elected
and purchased by the retiree based on his/her military career
and is intended to provide a portion of retired pay to the
survivor. DIC payments represent special compensation to a
survivor whose sponsor's death was caused directly by his or
her uniformed service. In principle, this is a government
payment for indemnity or damages for causing the premature loss
of life of the member, to the extent a price can be set on
human life. These payments should be additive to any military
or federal civilian SBP annuity purchased by the retiree. There
are approximately 31,000 military widows/widowers affected by
the offset under current law. Congress should repeal this
unfair law that penalizes these military survivors.
--Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA).--The
American Legion urges Congressional support for amending
language to Public Law 97-252, the Uniformed Services Former
Spouses Protection Act. This law continues to unfairly penalize
active-duty armed forces members and military retirees. USFSPA
has created an even larger class of victims than the former
spouses it was designed to assist, namely remarried active-duty
service members or military retirees and their new family. The
American Legion believes this law should be rescinded in its
entirety, but as an absolute minimum, the provision for a
lifetime annuity to former spouses should be terminated upon
their remarriage. This is consistent with most divorce decrees.
Based on this current provision, monthly provisions for life
are being granted to former spouses regardless of marital
status, need, or child custodial arrangements. The time has
come to cease lifetime annuities to former military spouses,
should they remarry. Judicial determinations of appropriate
support should be determined on a case-by-case basis and not be
viewed as an ``entitlement'' by former spouses as exists under
current law. The American Legion urges hearings on the USFSPA.
CONCLUSION
Thirty years ago, America opted for an all-volunteer force to
provide for the national security. Inherent in that commitment was a
willingness to invest the needed resources to bring into existence a
competent, professional, and well-equipped military. The fiscal year
2004 defense budget, while recognizing the War on Terrorism and
Homeland Security, represents another good step in the right direction.
What more needs to be done? The American Legion recommends, as a
minimum, that the following steps be implemented:
--Continued improvements in military pay, equitable increases in
Basic Allowances for Housing and Subsistence, military health
care, improved educational benefits under the Montgomery G.I.
Bill, improved access to quality child care, impact aid and
other quality-of-life issues. The concurrent receipt of
military retirement pay and VA disability compensation needs to
be authorized and funded. The Survivors' Benefit Plan needs to
be increased from 35 to 55 percent for Social Security-eligible
military survivors.
--Defense spending, as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product, needs
to be maintained at a minimum of 3.5 percent annually, which
this budget still does not achieve.
--The end strengths of the active armed forces need to be increased
to at least 1.6 million for the Services.
--The Quadrennial Defense Review strategy needs to call for enhanced
military capabilities to include force structures, increased
endstrengths and improved readiness which are more adequately
resourced.
--Force modernization needs to be realistically funded and not
further delayed or America is likely to unnecessarily risk many
lives in the years ahead.
--The National Guard and Reserves must be realistically manned,
structured, equipped and trained; fully deployable; and
maintained at high readiness levels in order to accomplish
their indispensable roles and missions. Their compensation,
benefits and employment rights need to be continually improved.
Although we realize that many of these recommendations must be
authorized by the Armed Services Committee, The American Legion urges
each member of this subcommittee to work with their colleagues on the
Armed Services Committee and secure passage of these much needed
improvements to quality of life for all components of our military,
included those who have already served.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes The American Legion's statement.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, Mr. Duggan. I can
assure you that Senator Stevens and I are equally concerned
about the problems that families of reservists and guardsmen
have experienced during the recent war, and we have begun
discussions also on separation pay and on health programs. We
are fully cognizant that the men and women who serve us in
uniform and stand in harm's way are volunteers. And if we want
them to continue signing up and staying in, we better make
certain that life can be made comparably comfortable to those
who are not in uniform. We will do our best, sir.
Mr. Duggan. Yes, sir. Thank you, sir.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much.
Our next witness is Dr. Wayne S. Sellman of the American
Psychological Association. Dr. Sellman, welcome, sir.
STATEMENT OF WAYNE S. SELLMAN, Ph.D., VICE PRESIDENT
AND DIRECTOR FOR PUBLIC POLICY ISSUES, THE
HUMAN RESOURCES RESEARCH ORGANIZATION; ON
BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL
ASSOCIATION
Dr. Sellman. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. I am Steve
Sellman. I am the Vice President and Director of Public Policy
Issues for the Human Resources Research Organization, and I am
former Director for Accession Policy in the Office of the
Secretary of Defense. For the past 40 years I have been
involved in military personnel management, policymaking, and
research.
You have been a great friend to the military and military
psychology and it is a particular pleasure for me to be here
before you today. I have prepared testimony on behalf of the
American Psychological Association, which is a scientific and
professional organization of more than 150,000 psychologists
and affiliates.
Although I am sure that you are aware of the large numbers
of psychologists providing mental health services to military
members and their families, you may be less familiar with the
broad range of behavioral research conducted by the
psychological scientists within the Department of Defense.
Military behavioral scientists work on issues critical to
national defense, particularly with support from the Army
Research Institute, the Army Research Laboratory, the Office of
Naval Research, and the Air Force Personnel Research
Laboratory.
I would like to address the proposed cuts in the
President's fiscal year 2004 human-centered research budget for
these laboratories within the context of the larger DOD science
and technology, or S&T, program. The American Psychological
Association joins the Coalition for National Security Research
in urging the subcommittee to provide $11.4 billion for basic
and applied defense research across DOD in fiscal year 2004.
This figure for the S&T account also is in line with the
recommendations of the Defense Science Board and the
Quadrennial Defense Review.
In terms of human-centered research, all of the military
services conduct or sponsor science in the broad categories of
personnel, training, and leader development, warfighter
protection, sustainment and physical performance, and system
interfaces and cognitive processing. There also are additional
smaller human systems research programs funded through the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency, the Marine Corps, and the Special
Operations Command.
Despite substantial appreciation for the critical role
played by behavioral science in national security, total
spending on this research is cut from $405 million appropriated
in fiscal year 2003 to $377 million in the President's fiscal
year 2004 budget. An August 2000 DOD report requested by your
subcommittee in the face of continuing erosion of behavioral
science funding found that this area of military research has
historically been extremely productive, with particularly high
return on investment and high operational impact.
The American Psychological Association strongly encourages
the subcommittee to restore planned fiscal year 2004 cuts to
military behavioral science programs. There is more detail on
the specific S&T accounts in my written statement, but the
Army, Navy, and Air Force are facing cuts in their applied
human-centered research programs. Psychological scientists
address many critical and important issues and problems vital
to our national defense with expertise in understanding and
optimizing cognitive functioning, perceptional awareness,
complex decisionmaking, and human-systems interfaces. In these
dangerous times, such issues have unfortunately become even
more mission-critical, and we urge you to support the men and
women in uniform by reversing another round of psychological
research cuts.
Thank you very much.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Wayne S. Sellman
Conflict is, and will remain, essentially a human activity in which
man's virtues of judgment, discipline and courage--the moral component
of fighting power--will endure--It is difficult to imagine military
operations that will not ultimately be determined through physical
control of people, resources and terrain--by people . . . Implicit, is
the enduring need for well-trained, well-equipped and adequately
rewarded soldiers. New technologies will, however, pose significant
challenges to the art of soldiering: they will increase the soldier's
influence in the battlespace over far greater ranges, and herald
radical changes in the conduct, structures, capability and ways of
command. Information and communication technologies will increase his
tempo and velocity of operation by enhancing support to his decision-
making cycle. Systems should be designed to enable the soldier to cope
with the considerable stress of continuous, 24-hour, high-tempo
operations, facilitated by multi-spectral, all-weather sensors.
However, technology will not substitute human intent or the decision of
the commander. There will be a need to harness information-age
technologies, such that data does not overcome wisdom in the
battlespace, and that real leadership--that which makes men fight--will
be amplified by new technology. Essential will be the need to adapt the
selection, development and training of leaders and soldiers to ensure
that they possess new skills and aptitudes to face these challenges.--
NATO RTO-TR-8, Land Operations in the Year 2020
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I'm Dr. Steve
Sellman, Vice President and Director for Public Policy Issues at the
Human Resources Research Organization, and former Director for
Accession Policy in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. I am
submitting testimony on behalf of the American Psychological
Association (APA), a scientific and professional organization of more
than 150,000 psychologists and affiliates. Although I am sure you are
aware of the large number of psychologists providing clinical services
to our military members here and abroad, you may be less familiar with
the extraordinary range of research conducted by psychological
scientists within the Department of Defense. Our behavioral researchers
work on issues critical to national defense, particularly with support
from the Army Research Institute (ARI) and Army Research Laboratory
(ARL); the Office of Naval Research (ONR); and the Air Force Research
Laboratory (AFRL). I would like to address the proposed cuts to fiscal
year 2004 human-centered research budgets for these military
laboratories within the context of the larger Department of Defense
Science and Technology budget.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE (DOD) SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BUDGET
APA joins the Coalition for National Security Research (CNSR), a
group of over 40 scientific associations and universities, in urging
the Subcommittee to provide DOD with $11.4 billion for 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3
level research in fiscal year 2004. This figure also is in line with
recommendations of the independent Defense Science Board and the
Quadrennial Defense Review, the latter calling for ``a significant
increase in funding for S&T programs to a level of three percent of DOD
spending per year.''
As our nation rises to meet the challenges of a new century,
including current engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as other
asymmetric threats and increased demand for homeland defense and
infrastructure protection, enhanced battlespace awareness and
warfighter protection are absolutely critical. Our ability to both
foresee and immediately adapt to changing security environments will
only become more vital over the next several decades. Accordingly, DOD
must support basic Science and Technology (S&T) research on both the
near-term readiness and modernization needs of the department and on
the long-term future needs of the warfighter.
Despite substantial appreciation for the importance of DOD S&T
programs on Capitol Hill, and within independent defense science
organizations such as the Defense Science Board (DSB), total research
within DOD has remained essentially flat in constant dollars over the
last few decades. This poses a very real threat to America's ability to
maintain its competitive edge at a time when we can least afford it.
APA, CNSR and our colleagues within the science and defense communities
recommend funding the DOD Science and Technology Program at a level of
at least $11.4 billion in fiscal year 2004 in order to maintain global
superiority in an ever-changing national security environment.
BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH WITHIN THE MILITARY SERVICE LABS
In August, 2000 the Department of Defense met a congressional
mandate to develop a Report to the Senate Appropriations Committee on
Behavioral, Cognitive and Social Science Research in the Military. The
Senate requested this evaluation due to concern over the continuing
erosion of DOD's support for research on individual and group
performance, leadership, communication, human-machine interfaces, and
decision-making. In responding to the Committee's request, the
Department found that ``the requirements for maintaining strong DOD
support for behavioral, cognitive and social science research
capability are compelling'' and that ``this area of military research
has historically been extremely productive'' with ``particularly high''
return on investment and ``high operational impact.'' Given such strong
DOD support, APA strongly encourages the Committee to restore planned
fiscal year 2004 cuts to military behavioral science programs and
provide funding at fiscal year 2003 appropriated levels:
--Increase the Army's overall 6.2 budget from $66.034 million to
$69.099 million; and the Army's overall 6.3 budget from $63.508
million to $74.634 million in fiscal year 2004.
--Increase the Navy's overall 6.2 budget from $19.982 million to
$24.554 million; and the Navy's overall 6.3 budget from $28.746
million to $36.027 million in fiscal year 2004.
--Increase the Air Force's overall 6.2 budget from $51.764 million to
$55.249 million; and the Air Force's overall 6.3 budget from
$31.641 million to $35.743 million in fiscal year 2004.
Within DOD, the majority of behavioral, cognitive and social
science is funded through the Army Research Institute (ARI) and Army
Research Laboratory (ARL); the Office of Naval Research (ONR); and the
Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL). These military service
laboratories provide a stable, mission-oriented focus for science,
conducting and sponsoring basic (6.1), applied/exploratory development
(6.2) and advanced development (6.3) research. These three levels of
research are roughly parallel to the military's need to win a current
war (through products in advanced development) while concurrently
preparing for the next war (with technology ``in the works'') and the
war after next (by taking advantage of ideas emerging from basic
research).
All of the services fund human-related research in the broad
categories of personnel, training and leader development; warfighter
protection, sustainment and physical performance; and system interfaces
and cognitive processing. In addition, there are additional, smaller
human systems research programs funded through the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA), the Marine Corps, and the Special Operations Command.
Despite substantial appreciation for the critical role played by
behavioral, cognitive and social science in national security, however,
total spending on this research is cut from $404.984 million
appropriated in fiscal year 2003 to $376.753 million in the
Administration's fiscal year 2004 budget. Whereas basic research (6.1)
increases by six percent, due to a substantial increase in the Navy's
budget (Air Force 6.1 decreases slightly and Army 6.1 increases
slightly), all three services propose cuts in their 6.2 and 6.3
funding. Navy 6.2 human-related research decreases by over 18 percent,
and 6.3 research declines by over 20 percent. Only small 6.2 and 6.3
investments in behavioral research by OSD, DARPA, Special Operations
Command, and the Marine Corps increase over fiscal year 2003 levels in
the President's fiscal year 2004 budget.
Behavioral and cognitive research programs eliminated from the
mission labs as cost-cutting measures are extremely unlikely to be
picked up by industry, which focuses on short-term, profit-driven
product development. Once the expertise is gone, there is absolutely no
way to ``catch up'' when defense mission needs for critical human-
oriented research develop. As DOD noted in its own Report to the Senate
Appropriations Committee:
``Military knowledge needs are not sufficiently like the needs of
the private sector that retooling behavioral, cognitive and social
science research carried out for other purposes can be expected to
substitute for service-supported research, development, testing, and
evaluation . . . our choice, therefore, is between paying for it
ourselves and not having it.''
The following are brief descriptions of critical behavioral
research funded by the military research laboratories.
ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES (ARI)
AND ARMY RESEARCH LABORATORY (ARL)
ARI works to build the ultimate smart weapon: the American soldier.
ARI was established to conduct personnel and behavioral research on
such topics as minority and general recruitment; personnel testing and
evaluation; training and retraining; and attrition. ARI is the focal
point and principal source of expertise for all the military services
in leadership research, an area especially critical to the success of
the military as future war-fighting and peace-keeping missions demand
more rapid adaptation to changing conditions, more skill diversity in
units, increased information-processing from multiple sources, and
increased interaction with semi-autonomous systems. Behavioral
scientists within ARI are working to help the armed forces better
identify, nurture and train leaders. One effort underway is designed to
help the Army identify those soldiers who will be most successful
meeting 21st century noncommissioned officer job demands, thus
strengthening the backbone of the service--the NCO corps.
Another line of research at ARI focuses on optimizing cognitive
readiness under combat conditions, by developing methods to predict and
mitigate the effects of stressors (such as information load and
uncertainty, workload, social isolation, fatigue, and danger) on
performance. As the Army moves towards its goal of becoming the
Objective Force (or the Army of the future: lighter, faster and more
mobile), psychological researchers will play a vital role in helping
maximize soldier performance through an understanding of cognitive,
perceptual and social factors.
ARL's Human Research & Engineering Directorate sponsors basic and
applied research in the area of human factors, with the goal of
optimizing soldiers' interactions with Army systems. Specific
behavioral research projects focus on the development of intelligent
decision aids, control/display/workstation design, simulation and human
modeling, and human control of automated systems.
OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH (ONR)
The Cognitive and Neural Sciences Division (CNS) of ONR supports
research to increase the understanding of complex cognitive skills in
humans; aid in the development and improvement of machine vision;
improve human factors engineering in new technologies; and advance the
design of robotics systems. An example of CNS-supported research is the
division's long-term investment in artificial intelligence research.
This research has led to many useful products, including software that
enables the use of ``embedded training.'' Many of the Navy's
operational tasks, such as recognizing and responding to threats,
require complex interactions with sophisticated, computer-based
systems. Embedded training allows shipboard personnel to develop and
refine critical skills by practicing simulated exercises on their own
workstations. Once developed, embedded training software can be loaded
onto specified computer systems and delivered wherever and however it
is needed.
AIR FORCE RESEARCH LABORATORY (AFRL)
Within AFRL, Air Force Office of Scientific Research (AFOSR)
behavioral scientists are responsible for basic research on manpower,
personnel, training and crew technology. The AFRL Human Effectiveness
Directorate is responsible for more applied research relevant to an
enormous number of acknowledged Air Force mission needs ranging from
weapons design, to improvements in simulator technology, to improving
crew survivability in combat, to faster, more powerful and less
expensive training regimens.
As a result of previous cuts to the Air Force behavioral research
budget, the world's premier organization devoted to personnel selection
and classification (formerly housed at Brooks Air Force Base) no longer
exists. This has a direct, negative impact on the Air Force's and other
services' ability to efficiently identify and assign personnel
(especially pilots). Similarly, reductions in support for applied
research in human factors have resulted in an inability to fully
enhance human factors modeling capabilities, which are essential for
determining human-system requirements early in system concept
development, when the most impact can be made in terms of manpower and
cost savings. For example, although engineers know how to build cockpit
display systems and night goggles so that they are structurally sound,
psychologists know how to design them so that people can use them
safely and effectively.
SUMMARY
On behalf of APA, I would like to express my appreciation for this
opportunity to present testimony before the Subcommittee. Clearly,
psychological scientists address a broad range of important issues and
problems vital to our national security, with expertise in
understanding and optimizing cognitive functioning, perceptual
awareness, complex decision-making, stress resilience, and human-
systems interactions. We urge you to support the men and women on the
front lines by reversing another round of cuts to the human-oriented
research within the military laboratories.
Below is suggested appropriations report language which would
encourage the Department of Defense to fully fund its behavioral
research programs within the military laboratories:
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Behavioral Research in the Military Service Laboratories.--The
Committee recognizes that psychological scientists address a broad
range of important issues and problems vital to our national security
through the military research laboratories: the Air Force Office of
Scientific Research, the Army Research Institute and Army Research
Laboratory, and the Office of Naval Research. Given the increasingly
complex demands on our military personnel, psychological research on
leadership, decision-making under stress, cognitive readiness,
training, and human-technology interactions have become even more
mission-critical, and the Committee strongly encourages the service
laboratories to reverse cuts made to their behavioral research
programs. A continued decline in support for human-centered research is
not acceptable at a time when there will be more, rather than fewer,
demands on military personnel, including more rapid adaptation to
changing conditions, more skill diversity in units, increased
information-processing from multiple sources, and increased interaction
with semi-autonomous systems.
Senator Inouye. Doctor, as you well know, I have an in-
house adviser on my staff and he keeps me apprised of all the
issues involved in your association. I can assure you of our
support.
Dr. Sellman. Thank you, sir.
Senator Inouye. Thank you.
Our next witness is Rear Admiral Retired Richard D. West,
President of the Consortium for Oceanographic Research and
Education. Admiral West.
STATEMENT OF REAR ADMIRAL RICHARD D. WEST, U.S. NAVY
(RETIRED), PRESIDENT, CONSORTIUM FOR
OCEANOGRAPHIC RESEARCH AND EDUCATION
Admiral West. Thank you, Senator Inouye. Good morning, sir.
Senator Inouye. Good morning.
Admiral West. Thank you for the opportunity to appear
before you and your committee this morning. I would like to
talk about basic research within the United States Navy. As you
know, I am Rear Admiral Dick West, President of the Consortium
for Oceanographic Research and Education, commonly referred to
as CORE. I appear on behalf of 71 member institutions,
including Penn State, Texas A&M, Scripps Institution of
Oceanography, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, the
Universities of Alaska, Hawaii, Southern Mississippi, New
Hampshire, Texas, South Carolina, and California. These
institutions and other members represent the nucleus of
American academic oceanographic research.
I joined CORE in August of 2002 after retiring from the
United States (U.S.) Navy as oceanographer and navigator in the
Navy. Prior to this position, I was deputy director for the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. As an oceanographer, I
was a primary customer for the products from our Nation's
oceanographic institutions.
I come before you this morning to express concern about a
specific direction within the Office of Naval Research (ONR).
Since its founding in 1946, ONR has been one of the Nation's
leading supporters of high-risk, cutting-edge basic research.
The Office has supported the research of 50 Nobel laureates. It
has participated in breakthrough discoveries in areas such as
lasers, precision timekeeping, and molecular biology. It has
served the Navy and all of DOD well.
When we look at the last 50 years, we see a history of
courageous investment and bold discoveries that have helped end
the Cold War. However, when we look to the coming decades the
future of naval research does not appear so bright. Most of the
science that underlies today's Navy was high risk and cutting
edge when conducted decades ago. None of the researchers then
could have imagined how their research would have created the
impressive technological edge we just had in Operation Iraqi
Freedom.
Today we are concerned that the ONR may be veering off
course from its traditional support for high-risk, long-term
basic research. We are concerned that the 6.1 account that is
supposed to be for discovery-oriented basic research is being
migrated to short-term, product-driven applied research. We
firmly believe that applied research and advanced technology
development are crucial parts of Research, Development, Test
and Evaluation (RDT&E), but it is imperative there be basic
research if we expect to have the scientific underpinnings for
pioneering innovations in the 6.23 and more applied programs.
It is because of the importance of basic science in the
capabilities of the Navy After Next that we are concerned by
ONR's statements that the Navy's basic research program will be
``integrated with more applied S&T to promote transitions of
discoveries.'' This translates to a ``show me what you can do
for me now'' and we fear that this message is going to the
program managers and scientists.
A focus on integrating discovery-oriented basic research
with more application-driven research will have a negative
influence by creating a risk-adverse atmosphere in both the
universities and with the program management. Researchers are
being discouraged from pursuing bold and innovative ideas,
ideas that could take years to complete but provide those
technical breakthroughs in the future, that one technology,
that one technology answer, what we will need in the future.
Instead, they are focusing on research that will result in
products now. While the results will surely be high quality,
they are unlikely to be the type of research that will result
in breakthroughs in understanding and technology.
We believe that a message needs to be sent to address
research creep in the 6.1 account. While we believe greater
investment in Navy S&T accounts is absolutely necessary, all
the funding in the world may not lead to new discoveries if the
6.1 account does not address basic research.
Adding congressional attention to the discussion of Navy
basic research should serve as a reinforcement to ONR to renew
its commitment to the regime of research that has served this
country so well. Working together, Congress and the research
community must communicate to the Secretary, the Chief of Naval
Operations (CNO), and the Commandant that basic research is
essential to the fleet and is a congressional priority.
If ONR is not given the ability and direction to pursue an
aggressive regime of high-risk, cutting-edge basic research
now, we could be shortchanging our fighting forces in the
future.
Thank you for this opportunity to bring this to your
attention, sir.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Richard West
Chairman Stevens, Ranking Member Inouye, and Members of the Defense
Subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I want to thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you this morning and for the
strong support you and your committee have shown for basic research
within the United States Navy.
I am Rear Admiral Dick West, President of the Consortium for
Oceanographic Research and Education, commonly referred to as CORE. I
appear on behalf of our 71 member institutions, including Penn State,
Texas A&M, Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the Universities of
Alaska, Hawaii, Southern Mississippi, New Hampshire, Texas, South
Carolina, and California at San Diego. These institutions and our other
members represent the nucleus of American academic oceanographic
research.
I joined CORE in August 2002 after retiring from the U.S. Navy as
Oceanographer and Navigator of the Navy. As you know, the Oceanographer
provides oceanographic, meteorological, geospatial information and
navigation support to the fleet. Prior to serving as Oceanographer, I
was the Deputy Director for the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.
Other shore assignments included Director, Surface Combat Systems
Division on the CNO's Staff, Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations
CINCSOUTH, and Commander, Operational Test and Evaluation Force. From
1992-1993, as Commanding Officer of the Surface Warfare Officers
School, I directed a large, advanced studies academic institution,
providing a continuum of professional education and training to prepare
naval officers to serve at sea. I served in Vietnam with the riverine
forces and commanded ships during hostilities in the Arabian Gulf. As
Oceanographer, I was the primary customer for the products from our
nation's oceanographic institutions.
Since its founding in 1946, the Office of Naval Research has been
one of the nation's leading supporters of high-risk cutting edge basic
research. The Office has supported the research of fifty Nobel
laureates. It has participated in breakthrough discoveries in areas
such as lasers, precision timekeeping, and molecular biology. Without
question the past five decades have seen the ONR fulfill its mission,
``To plan, foster and encourage scientific research in recognition of
its paramount importance as related to the maintenance of future naval
power, forced entry capability, and the preservation of national
security.''
America's oceanographers were and continue to be active partners
with the Office of Naval Research in providing today's and tomorrow's
sailors and marines with the tools necessary to be the finest
warfighters in the world. When we look back at the past fifty years, we
see a history of courageous investment and bold discoveries that paved
the path for the end of the Cold War. However, when we look to the
coming decades, the picture does not seem so bright.
Bold, high-risk, cutting-edge basic research has been a crucial
component of the Navy's battlespace superiority for decades. For
example, basic research into packet switching laid the foundation for
what we know today as the Internet and has been the fundamental science
behind the technology underlying net-centric warfare, an increasingly
important asset to the Navy and Marine Corps.
In the Iraqi theatre, ship-launched precision munitions played a
crucial role in defeating Iraqi forces while limiting civilian
causalities. Navy-supported basic research in precision timekeeping
enabled the development of the highly accurate Global Positioning
System (GPS). GPS is the backbone of the guidance system that allows
commanders to launch and deliver fire-power to targets with previously
unimaginable accuracy and lethality. Without the basic research decades
ago into the fundamental physics necessary to develop the atomic clocks
that are at the backbone of the GPS system, the Navy's ability to
accurately strike targets would be severely compromised.
As you may know, basic research supported by the Navy led to the
development of the laser. This discovery led directly to the advent of
small, easily handled lasers that allow soldiers, sailors, airmen and
marines to accurately locate targets and provide coordinates for
sailors and airmen to deliver munitions to targets.
The research discussed above was high-risk and cutting edge when it
was conducted decades ago. None of the researchers then could have
imagined its application or importance in conflicts today. While such
research was not focused on specific applications, without it and
without the support that made it possible, our soldiers, sailors,
airmen and marines would not have had the technological edge they
enjoyed in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Today, we are concerned that ONR may be veering off course in a
direction that departs from its traditional aggressive support for
high-risk basic research. This concern is not so much with the level of
funding in the 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 accounts. Rather, it reflects a growing
tendency to commit funding in the 6.1 account that is supposed to be
used for discovery-oriented basic research to short-term applied
research that is product-driven. Let me be clear, we firmly believe
that applied research and advanced technology development are crucial
parts of RDT&E, but it is imperative that there be robust basic
research, if we expect to have the scientific underpinnings for
pioneering innovations in the 6.2 and more applied programs.
It is because of the importance of basic science in the
capabilities of the Navy After Next, that we are concerned by ONR
statements that the Navy's basic research program will be ``integrated
with more applied S&T to promote transitions of discoveries.''
Unfortunately, this statement could be interpreted as code for ``show
me what you've done for me lately'' and program managers and scientists
seem to be getting the message loud and clear.
The focus on integration of discovery-oriented basic research with
more application driven research could have a negative impact on naval
basic research by creating a risk-averse atmosphere in both the
universities and with program management and officers within the Navy.
However, the greater risk is that researchers become discouraged from
pursuing bold and innovative ideas and lines of research that could
take years to complete and have practical application decades from now.
Instead, researchers focus on pursuing research that they know will
result in products. While the results will surely be high quality, they
are unlikely to be the type of research that will result in
breakthroughs in understanding.
High-risk research offers the promise of transformational
discoveries but it is prone to failure before it yields pioneering
discoveries. On the other hand, it is only by pushing the boundaries,
constantly taking risks, and looking for bold hypothesis that
scientists foster the discoveries that may lead to the next laser,
tomorrow's global positioning system, or the net-centric warfare of
2030.
CORE was particularly pleased to note your inclusion of language in
the fiscal year 2003 Defense Appropriations report expressing
discouragement at the low levels of Navy S&T investment and encouraging
the Navy to resume its previously robust support for S&T. We believe
that a similar message needs to be sent to address ``research-creep''
in the 6.1 account.
We are encouraging you today to provide clear instruction to the
leadership of the Office of Naval Research to reaffirm the Navy's
commitment to high-risk, cutting-edge, basic research. The past
successes of such basic research provide a clear justification for
renewing this investment in the Navy's future.
We believe that this is a commitment that ONR can and should be
willing to make. Often such issues as the character of research
supported by ONR are eclipsed by more direct concerns like funding
availability. While we believe greater investment in the Navy S&T
accounts is absolutely necessary, all the funding in the world may not
lead to new discoveries if the research funding in the 6.1 account is
spent on applied research. Adding Congressional attention to the
discussion of naval basic research should serve as a ``wake-up'' call
for ONR and return it to the regime of research that has served
America's sailors and marines well for decades.
We ask you to recognize and impress a message upon the Navy and
Marine Corps leadership. While the basic research ONR supports today
will not deliver today's admirals and generals a product they can
deploy, it may afford the lieutenants and captains under their command
profoundly more robust weapons systems when they are combat commanders.
It is because of an aggressive regime of basic research thirty years
ago, when today's military leaders were being commissioned, that an
effective and diverse suite of combat systems is available to prosecute
their mission now. Working together, Congress and the research
community must communicate to the Secretary, the Chief of Naval
Operations and the Commandant, that basic research is essential to the
fleet and is a Congressional priority. If ONR is not given the ability
and direction to pursue an aggressive regime of high-risk cutting edge
basic research now, the nation could be shortchanging our sons and
daughters, the sailors and marines of the Navy After Next.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to bring these important
issues to your attention. I welcome the opportunity to answer any
questions.
Senator Inouye. Admiral West, we concur with you sir,
because we believe that the proper underpinnings for research
is basic research. And we believe the recent operation in Iraq
demonstrated that, and we hope to convince our colleagues
across the river that we should continue that.
Thank you very much.
Admiral West. We appreciate your support, sir. We are here
to help.
Senator Inouye. Our next witness is the chief executive
officer of Sanaria, Incorporated, Dr. Stephen Hoffman,
representing the American Society of Tropical Medicine and
Hygiene. Dr. Hoffman.
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN HOFFMAN, M.D., CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, SANARIA, INC.; ON BEHALF OF THE
AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TROPICAL MEDICINE AND
HYGIENE
Dr. Hoffman. Good morning, Mr. Ranking Member. I am Stephen
Hoffman, Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Sanaria, a company
working to develop a malaria vaccine. I am a retired Captain in
the U.S. Navy Medical Corps and past president of the American
Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. I am here this
morning to present testimony on the Society's behalf. The
American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene is a
professional society of 3,500 researchers and practitioners----
Senator Inouye. Doctor, can you press that button?
Dr. Hoffman. The American Society of Tropical Medicine and
Hygiene is a professional society of 3,500 researchers and
practitioners, dedicated to the prevention and treatment of
infectious and tropical diseases. The collective experience of
our members is in the areas of tropical infectious diseases,
basic science, medicine, insect vector control, epidemiology,
vaccinology, public health, biodefense, and bioterrorism
defense.
I am here today to encourage your support for infectious
disease research at the Department of Defense. The Military
Infectious Diseases Research Program has done an excellent job
in its mission to develop new products to protect and maintain
the health of our troops wherever they are deployed. Working
with other U.S. public health agencies, DOD scientists at the
U.S. Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases
(USAMRIID), the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR),
and the Naval Medical Research Center, the latter two working
in the Inouye Building at Forest Glen very effectively, and DOD
medical laboratories abroad are helping us to better
understand, diagnose, and treat infectious and tropical
diseases. These include viral diseases such as West Nile Virus,
bacterial diseases such as tuberculosis, and parasitic diseases
such as malaria.
Infectious diseases are the second leading cause of death
worldwide, accounting for over 13 million deaths. Twenty well-
known diseases, including tuberculosis, malaria, cholera, and
Rift Valley Fever, have reemerged or spread geographically
since 1973, often in more virulent and drug-resistant forms.
Over 30 previously unknown disease agents have been identified
in this period for which therapy is not optimal or does not
exist at all, including Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV),
Ebola, Marburg, and the most recent threat, Severe Acute
Respiratory Syndrome, or SARS.
These naturally occurring diseases can strike our troops at
any time and they are potential threats for biological warfare
or bioterror attack. Historically, tropical diseases such as
these have impaired military operations. For example, malaria
had a large impact on U.S. service personnel serving in
Southeast Asia. In some regions up to 60 percent of troops were
reported to be infected.
In the most recent conflict, suspicions of Iraqi supplies
of anthrax, botulism, and plague led to fear of biological
attacks. The successful administration of anthrax vaccine
reduced the risk to American troops, but many suspected
biological weapons have no proven treatments and further
research is necessary to protect our military personnel.
Military scientists have made significant accomplishments
in the fight against these deadly illnesses, which I describe
in my written statement. Suffice it to say that the Defense
Department's medical research programs are second to none and
they play a critical role in our Nation's infectious disease,
biodefense, and bioterrorism defense efforts.
The Society believes the military's overseas laboratories
deserve special mention. The U.S. Army and Navy currently
support medical research labs located in five developing
countries--Thailand, Egypt, Indonesia, Kenya, and Peru--with
substations in neighboring countries. These research
laboratories serve as critical sentinel stations, alerting
military and public health agencies to dangerous infectious
disease outbreaks and increasing microbial resistance to drugs.
The research stations are an important national resource in
the ongoing battle against emerging disease and should be
strengthened with increased funding and increased opportunities
for collaborations with civilian scientists. The laboratories
provide field sites for important research that cannot feasibly
be conducted in the United States, including basic research,
testing of new drugs and vaccines, and increasing our
understanding of disease and the spread of disease.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, the American Society for Tropical
Medicine and Hygiene urges you to support the military
infectious disease research program and asks for $70 million in
fiscal year 2004. The Society also recommends $35 million for
the military HIV research program, which has become a world
leader in the study of HIV genetic variation and in the
development and testing of new vaccines.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, our borders remain porous to
infectious and tropical diseases, including the West Nile virus
found here in Washington, D.C., and of course most recently
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS). Other diseases still
largely confined to the troops, like malaria, pose a major
threat to our military and to American travelers. In all
military operations in the last century where malaria was
transmitted, including the Pacific theater in World War II,
Vietnam, and Operation Restore Hope in Somalia, more casualties
were caused by malaria than by combat injuries. Further
research into infectious diseases can reduce the threat to
American lives.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to present the
views of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene.
Senator Stevens [presiding]. Thank you, Doctor. This
committee started the research on HIV at the Department of
Defense and will continue to support it. I appreciate your
courtesy. Thank you.
Dr. Hoffman. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Stephen L. Hoffman
The American Society for Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH)
thanks the Subcommittee for the opportunity to present this testimony.
The ASTMH is a professional society of 3,500 researchers and
practitioners dedicated to the prevention and treatment of infectious
and tropical diseases. The collective experience of our members is in
the areas of tropical infectious diseases, basic science, medicine,
insect vector control, epidemiology, vaccinology, public health,
biodefense and bioterrorism defense.
My name is Stephen L. Hoffman, I am a past president of ASTMH, a
retired CAPT in the U.S. Navy Medical Corps, and currently the CEO of
Sanaria, a company working to develop a malaria vaccine. I am here
today to encourage your support for infectious disease research at the
Department of Defense.
IMPACT OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES ON THE MILITARY
Historically, tropical diseases have impaired military operations.
For example, malaria had a large impact on U.S. service personnel
serving in southeast Asia; in some regions up to 60 percent of troops
were reported to be infected. During Desert Storm, potential exposure
to the parasitic disease leishmaniasis led to banning American military
personnel who had served in the Persian Gulf from donating blood to
prevent infecting the U.S. blood supply.
In the most recent conflict, suspicions of Iraqi supplies of
anthrax, botulism, and plague led to fear of biological attacks. The
successful research into anthrax vaccine reduced the risk to American
troops. But, many suspected biological weapons have no proven
treatments, and further research is necessary to protect our military
personnel.
THE MILITARY INFECTIOUS DISEASE RESEARCH PROGRAM
A Presidential Executive Order issued September 30, 1999, entitled
``Improving Health Protection of Military Personnel Participating in
Particular Military Operations,'' mandates that ``It is the Policy of
the United States Government to provide our military personnel with
safe and effective vaccines, antidotes, and treatments that will negate
or minimize the effects of these health threats.''
Many diseases are endemic to areas of military operations.
Accordingly, the primary mission of the DOD's Military Infectious
Diseases Research Program is to develop new products with which to
protect and maintain the health of our troops in the theater. With
worldwide deployment of our military personnel, it is imperative to
protect them against infectious diseases that occur around the globe.
Often our troops are exposed to new strains of infections that do not
exist within our own borders.
The Department of Defense (DOD) medical research programs are
vitally important to maintain the health of our troops wherever they
are deployed. Furthermore, the programs play a critical role in our
nation's infectious disease, biodefense, and bioterrorism defense
efforts. Working with other U.S. public health agencies, DOD scientists
at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases
(USAMRIID), the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research (WRAIR), the
U.S. Naval Medical Research Center (NMRC), and DOD medical laboratories
in Asia, Africa, and South America are helping us to better understand,
diagnose, and treat infectious diseases, especially tropical infectious
diseases.
The Society believes the military's overseas laboratories deserve
special mention. The U.S. Army and the Navy currently support medical
research laboratories located in five developing countries, including
Thailand, Egypt, Indonesia, Kenya, and Peru. These research
laboratories serve as critical sentinel stations alerting military and
public health agencies to dangerous infectious disease outbreaks and
increasing microbial resistance to drugs. The research stations are an
important national resource in the ongoing battle against emerging
disease, and should be strengthened with increased funding and
increased opportunities for collaborations with civilian scientists.
The laboratories provide field sites for important research that cannot
feasibly be performed in the United States, including basic research,
testing of new drugs and vaccines, increasing our understanding of
diseases and their spread. The overseas laboratories strengthen
collaborations between U.S. and foreign countries, expanding our
knowledge and understanding of infectious diseases, and providing
hands-on training for both U.S. and local students and investigators,
and for local health authorities.
a multitude of disease threats
Infectious diseases are caused by a wide variety of viruses,
bacteria, and parasites. For example,
--Viruses cause West Nile Virus, dengue fever, yellow fever, Ebola,
Marburg, HIV/AIDS, and the most recent threat, severe acute
respiratory syndrome (SARS);
--Bacteria cause cholera, tuberculosis, anthrax, plague, and
botulism; and
--Parasites cause malaria and leishmaniasis.
Infectious diseases are the second leading cause of death
worldwide, accounting for over 13 million deaths (25 percent of all
deaths worldwide in 1999). Dozens of well-known diseases--including
tuberculosis, malaria, and cholera--have reemerged or spread
geographically since 1973, often in more virulent and drug-resistant
forms. Over 30 previously unknown disease agents have been identified
in this period for which therapy is not optimal or does not exist at
all, including HIV, Ebola, Nipah virus, Marburg virus, hepatitis C, and
the most recent threat, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS).
Moreover, many of these same threats are potential agents for a
biological warfare or bioterror attack. Research on these diseases
stands to benefit the civilian population as well as the military.
a history of success in tropical disease research
Consistent with the standard set by our nation's armed forces and
the men and women who selflessly serve in our military, it should come
as no surprise to anyone that the Defense Department's medical research
programs are second to none. As the leader in tropical and infectious
disease research, DOD programs have been vital for the successful
outcome of military campaigns. It was the DOD research program that
developed the first modern drugs for prevention and treatment of
malaria, which even today affects 2.4 billion people, or about 40
percent of the world's population, and causes up to 2.7 million deaths
each year or about 5 percent of all fatalities worldwide.
Along with Venezuelan Equine Encephalitis, the DOD also developed
or supported promising vaccines for prevention of Rift Valley Fever,
Argentine Hemorrhagic Fever, Adenovirus disease in recruits, and
plague. Two of these vaccines (plague and adenovirus) are no longer
licensed in the United States.
As a result of a significant outbreak in Saudi Arabia and Yemen,
the first epidemic outside of Africa, Rift Valley Fever vaccine has
become of interest to troops in the Middle East. Rift Valley fever is a
deadly, fever-causing viral disease which can lead to hemorrhagic fever
or encephalitis. It is commonly associated with mosquito-borne
epidemics, and it can also be spread through contaminated meat. Spread
of this disease to the United States is not out of the question, since
mosquitoes capable of transmitting Rift Valley Fever are found in the
United States. Further development of these vaccines is an important
national priority.
Other notable advances accomplished by military experts in tropical
diseases working with corporate partners include the invention of
hepatitis A vaccine at WRAIR and its ultimate licensure based on
studies conducted at the U.S. Armed Forces Research Institute of
Medical Sciences (AFRIMS) in Bangkok; the discovery (during WWII), and
later licensure of Japanese encephalitis vaccine, based on studies
conducted at AFRIMS and WRAIR; and the discovery and licensure of
mefloquine and halofantrine for treatment and prevention of malaria.
U.S. Navy scientists working at the Naval Medical Research Unit-2
formerly in Taiwan developed intravenous therapy for cholera, and
created the foundation for oral rehydration therapy for cholera and
other diarrheal diseases, which has been hailed by some as the most
important medical discovery of the 20th century.
A significant accomplishment made by military scientists at WRAIR
and their corporate partners is the discovery of the first prototype
vaccine shown to be capable of preventing falciparum malaria. Novel
vaccines, such as a DNA vaccine for malaria, are being developed under
the leadership of scientists at the NMRC. Most recently, licensure has
been awarded for Malarone, a new drug for prevention and treatment of
malaria. Another anti-malarial drug, Tafenaquine, is in advanced field
trials with a corporate partner. With the certainty that resistance to
malaria drugs quickly appears, these drugs have a useful lifespan of
only about ten years. Replacements must be sought continually.
FURTHER DOD RESEARCH IN INFECTIOUS DISEASES NEEDED
A January, 2000, unclassified report from the CIA's National
Intelligence Council concluded that infectious diseases are likely to
account for more military hospital admissions than battlefield
injuries. ``The Global Infectious Disease Threat and Its Implications
for the United States,'' labeled global infectious disease a threat to
U.S. national security. The report also assessed the global threat of
infectious disease, stating ``New and reemerging infectious diseases
will pose a rising global health threat and will endanger U.S. citizens
at home and abroad, threaten U.S. armed forces deployed overseas, and
exacerbate social and political instability in key countries and
regions in which the United States has significant interests.'' The
recent SARS epidemic has clearly highlighted the ongoing threat of
infectious diseases, and it has demonstrated the profound impact these
infectious diseases can have, both in terms of health, psychology, and
a nation's economy.
ASTMH REQUEST
ASTMH urges a strong national commitment to the DOD infectious
disease research programs to accelerate the discovery of the products
that protect American military personnel and citizens at home and
abroad, and to improve global health and economic stability in
developing countries. The DOD's Military Infectious Disease Research
Program (MIDRP) has been a highly successful program. ASTMH urges the
Subcommittee to make DOD infectious disease research a high priority in
the DOD budget for fiscal year 2004, and to provide $70 million, up
from the $42 million in the current budget, to take full advantage of
the high-quality research opportunities.
The Society also hopes this Subcommittee will continue to oversee
the DOD's HIV Research Program as new agreements with the National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) develop. The HIV
Research Program, mandated by Congress in 1987 because of the
significant risk of active-duty personnel in acquiring the HIV virus,
is a world leader in the study of HIV genetic variation world-wide and
in the development and testing of new vaccines to be used against HIV
strains anywhere in the world. It is critical that the overseas
collaborations and agreements facilitated by the current leadership
from the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research be preserved to ensure
the continued progress of current and planned clinical trials to test
the efficacy of new vaccine products. ASTMH recommends $35 million for
the HIV Research Program, up from approximately $23 million in the
current budget.
Finally the Society also supports the Global Pathogen Surveillance
Act (S. 871) recently introduced by Senator Biden, which authorizes
additional resources to increase the number of personnel and expand
operations at the DOD overseas laboratories. The Society requests that
the Subcommittee fully fund this initiative at the $18 million level
authorized by the bill, if it is enacted into law during the upcoming
year.
CONCLUSION
Our borders remain porous to infectious and tropical diseases,
including most recently the West Nile Virus, which has been found here
in Washington, DC. Other diseases still largely confined to the
tropics, like malaria, pose a major threat to our military and to
American travelers. In all military operations in the last century
where malaria was transmitted, including the Pacific Theater in World
War II, Vietnam, and Somalia, more casualties were caused by malaria
than by combat injuries. And with global warming, the increasing
resistance of insect vectors to insecticides, and the increasing
resistance of the malaria parasite to antimalarial drugs, the range of
malaria and other vector-borne diseases is expanding.
The ASTMH urges you to provide strong support for the DOD Military
Infectious Diseases Research Programs. Our nation's commitment to this
research is critically important given the resurgent and emerging
infectious disease threats that exist today. If we don't make these
important programs a priority, the health of our troops, as well as the
health of all Americans, will continue to be at risk; we will continue
to experience increased health costs; and infectious diseases will
flourish around the world, prolonging economic and political
instability.
Thank you for the opportunity to present the views of the American
Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, and for your consideration of
these requests.
Senator Stevens. The next witness is Karen Peluso, Director
of the Neurofibromatosis Corporation in New England. Good
morning.
STATEMENT OF KAREN PELUSO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
NEUROFIBROMATOSIS, INC., NEW ENGLAND
Ms. Peluso. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to talk about the
importance of continuing the Army's neurofibromatosis (NF)
research program.
Neurofibromatosis is a genetic tumor disorder that causes
tumors to grow anywhere on the nerves in or on our body. It can
be disfiguring and debilitating. It can cause brain tumors,
tumors of the spine, hearing loss, blindness, learning
disabilities, and cancer.
I was introduced to neurofibromatosis 20 years ago when my
daughter was diagnosed with NF, and I was very fortunate at the
time that my pediatrician was able to recognize the cafe au
lait birthmarks on her body, which were an outward sign of NF.
At that time I was very frustrated by the fact that I could not
find any information. In fact, our pediatrician showed us his
medical book, which had a very small paragraph which talked
about neurofibromatosis. And myself with a group of other
parents became an advocacy group to try to create awareness and
promote research.
1993 was a turning point in our quest to find a treatment
and cure for NF when this subcommittee made an appropriation of
$8 million for a 3-year study of neurofibromatosis. After that
3 years, the results were astounding. The scientists were so
enthusiastic about how studying NF would open new information
regarding diseases that affect millions of people, like cancer
and brain tumors and learning disabilities, not just the people
who have neurofibromatosis. NF was also directly linked to
military purposes as it can be used in studying wound healing
and nerve regeneration after exposure to chemical toxins.
Congress has given NF research strong partisan support and
the Army's NF research has produced dramatic results every
year. Now clinical trials have begun to use drugs to try to
shrink these tumors.
Twenty years later after I learned that my daughter has
neurofibromatosis, I work in the office of Neurofibromatosis,
Incorporated, in New England and every day our phone rings with
new parents who have received the diagnosis of NF, and they are
filled with the same fear that I had 20 years ago: How will
this affect my child? What is going to happen to her? NF is so
unpredictable.
I can give them the good news and the bad news. The good
news is that, thanks to the Army's innovative NF research
program, great strides are being made and we are getting closer
to a cure. But the bad news is we still do not have a
treatment, we still do not have a cure, and we have to keep up
this fight.
That is why I am here today to respectfully ask that this
committee make a recommendation of $25 million for the NF
research program through the Army in fiscal 2004. We cannot
stop our fight now, we have come so far and we are so close. I
ask this subcommittee for your continued support and thank you
for your past support.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Karen Peluso
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear before you
today to present testimony to the Subcommittee on the importance of
continued funding for Neurofibromatosis (NF), a terrible genetic
disorder directly associated with military purposes and closely linked
to many common ailments widespread among the American population.
I am Karen Peluso, Executive Director of NF Inc.-New England, which
is a participant in a national coalition of NF advocacy groups. I have
been actively involved in creating awareness of NF and promoting
scientific research in this area since 1982. I am here on behalf of the
100,000 Americans who suffer from NF, including my daughter, as well as
approximately 150 million Americans who suffer from diseases linked to
NF, including some of the most common forms of cancer, congenital heart
disease, hypertension, and learning disabilities.
Mr. Chairman, I am requesting increased support, in the amount of
$25 million, to continue the Army's highly successful NF Research
Program (NFRP). The program's great success can be seen in the
commencement of clinical trials only ten years since the discovery of
the NF1 gene. Now, with NF in the expensive but critical era of
clinical and translational research, scientists closely involved with
the Army program have stated that the number of high-quality scientific
applications justify a much larger program.
What is Neurofibromatosis (NF)?
NF is a genetic disorder involving the uncontrolled growth of
tumors along the nervous system which can result in terrible
disfigurement, deformity, deafness, blindness, brain tumors, cancer,
and/or death. NF can also cause other abnormalities such as unsightly
benign tumors across the entire body and bone deformities. In addition,
approximately one-half of children with NF suffer from learning
disabilities. It is the most common neurological disorder caused by a
single gene. While not all NF patients suffer from the most severe
symptoms, all NF patients and their families live with the uncertainty
of not knowing whether they will be seriously affected one day because
NF is a highly variable and progressive disease.
Approximately 100,000 Americans have NF. It appears in
approximately one in every 3,500 births and strikes worldwide, without
regard to gender, race or ethnicity. It is estimated that 50 percent of
new cases result from a spontaneous mutation in an individual's genes
and 50 percent are inherited. There are two types of NF: NF1, which is
more common, and NF2, which primarily involves acoustic neuromas and
other tumors, causing deafness and balance problems.
Most strikingly, research has shown that NF is closely linked to
cancer, brain tumors, learning disabilities, and heart disease,
potentially affecting over 150 million Americans in this generation
alone.
NF's Connection to the Military
NF research is directly linked to military purposes because it is
closely linked to cancer, brain tumors, learning disabilities, brain
tissue degeneration, nervous system degeneration, deafness, and
balance. Because NF manifests itself in the nervous system, this
Subcommittee, in past Report language, has stated that Army-supported
research on NF includes important investigations into genetic
mechanisms governing peripheral nerve regeneration after injury from
such things as missile wounds and chemical toxins. For the same reason,
this subcommittee also stated that NF may be relevant to understanding
Gulf War Syndrome and to gaining a better understanding of wound
healing. Today, NF research now includes important investigations into
genetic mechanisms which involve not just the nervous system but also
other cancers.
The Army's Contribution to NF Research
Recognizing NF's importance to both the military and to the general
population, Congress has given the Army's NF Research Program strong
bipartisan support. After the initial three-year grants were
successfully completed, Congress appropriated continued funding for the
Army NF Research Program on an annual basis. From fiscal year 1996
through fiscal year 2003, this funding has amounted to $110.3 million,
in addition to the original $8 million appropriation. Between fiscal
year 1996 and fiscal year 2002, 299 proposals were received, of which
85 awards have been granted to researchers across the country and
another 17 projects have been recommended for funding this year.
The Army program funds innovate, groundbreaking research which
would not otherwise have been pursued, and it has produced major
advances in NF research, such as the development of advanced animal
models and clinical trials. The program has brought new researchers
into the field of NF, as can be seen by the nearly 60 percent increase
in applications in the past year along. Unfortunately, despite this
increase, the number of awards has remained relatively constant over
the past couple of years.
In order to ensure maximum efficiency, the Army collaborates
closely with other federal agencies that are involved in NF research,
such as NIH and the VA. Senior program staff from the National Cancer
Institute (NCI) and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders
and Stroke (NINDS), for example, have sat on the Army's NF Research
Program's Integration Panel which sets the long-term vision and funding
strategies for the program. This assures the highest scientific
standard for research funding while ensuring that the Army program does
not overlap with other research activities.
Because of the enormous advances that have been made as a result of
the Army's NF Research Program, research in NF has truly become one of
the great success stories in the current revolution in molecular
genetics, leading one major researcher to conclude that more is known
about NF genetically than any other disease. Accordingly, many medical
researchers believe that NF should serve as a model to study all
diseases.
Future Directions
The NF research community is now ready to embark on projects that
translate the scientific discoveries from the lab to the clinic. This
translational research holds incredible promise for NF patients, as
well as for patients who suffer from many of the diseases linked to NF.
This research is costly and will require an increased commitment on the
federal level. Specifically, increased investment in the following
areas would continue to advance NF research and are included in the
Army's NF research goals:
--Clinical trials
--Development of drug and genetic therapies
--Further development and maintenance of advanced animal models
--Expansion of biochemical research on the functions of the NF gene
and discovery of new targets for drug therapy
--Natural History Studies and identification of modifier genes--such
studies are already underway, and they will provide a baseline
for testing potential therapies and differentiating among
different phenotypes of NF
--Development of NF Centers, tissue banks, and patient registries.
Fiscal Year 2004 Request
Mr. Chairman, the Army's highly successful NF Research Program has
shown tangible results and direct military application with broad
implications for the general population as well. The program is now
poised to fund translational and clinical research, which is the most
promising yet the most expensive direction that NF research has taken.
The program has succeeded in its mission to bring new researchers and
new approaches to research into the field. Therefore, increased funding
is now needed to take advantage of promising avenues of investigation,
to continue to build on the successes of this program, and to fund this
translational research thereby continuing the enormous return on the
taxpayers' investment.
In recent years, the program has granted its first two clinical
trial awards but had to decline other clinical trial applications that
scored in the ``Excellent'' range in the peer review process, solely
because of limited funds. This is why scientists closely involved with
Army program believe that the high quality of the scientific
applications would justify a much larger program than is currently
funded.
I am here today to respectfully request an appropriation of $25
million in your fiscal year 2004 Department of Defense Appropriations
bill for the Army Neurofibromatosis Research Program. This is a $5
million increase over the current level of funding as a step toward
capitalizing on all of the research opportunities now available
Mr. Chairman, in addition to providing a clear military benefit,
the DOD's Neurofibromatosis Research Program also provides hope for the
100,000 Americans like my daughter who suffer from NF, as well as the
tens of millions of Americans who suffer from NF's related diseases
such as cancer, learning disabilities, heart disease, and brain tumors.
Leading researchers now believe that we are on the threshold of a
treatment and a cure for this terrible disease. With this
Subcommittee's continued support, we will prevail.
Thank you for your support of this program and I appreciate the
opportunity to submit this testimony to the Subcommittee.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
Ms. Peluso. Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Is there any money anywhere in the budget
to your knowledge for that?
Ms. Peluso. Pardon me?
Senator Stevens. Any money anywhere in the budget for that
NF, do you know?
Ms. Peluso. Well, last year there was $20 million. Is there
money in this year's budget? I am sorry, I do not know the
answer to that, sir. Let me ask----
Senator Stevens. We will find out.
Thank you very much.
Ms. Peluso. Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Mr. Morris, Robert Morris, Chief Executive
Officer of the Fort Des Moines Memorial Park and Education
Center.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT V. MORRIS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
FORT DES MOINES MEMORIAL PARK, INC.
Mr. Morris. Good morning, Senator Stevens. As you are
aware, Fort Des Moines is the only military installation that
can boast of being the launching point for black commissioned
officers, female commissioned officers, and female enlisted
troops into the United States Army, and we are very pleased
with the record of the descendants of Fort Des Moines in the
Iraq War.
Fort Des Moines has introduced a project called the
National Education Project (NEP), which is timely since,
according to the U.S. Census, the majority of Americans will be
non-white by year 2055, as will be our Armed Forces. The
project's mission is to educate America's youth with an
accurate portrayal of black and female contributions to
military history and their impact on equality in the greater
society. This youth education will enhance understanding of,
support for, and participation in America's armed forces.
The NEP offers multiple multicultural, non-sexist academic
lessons related to the military command integration that
occurred at Fort Des Moines. The first U.S. Army officer
candidate school opened to black Americans in 1917 and to women
in 1942 as part of the First Women's Army Corps give the
national historic site a unique place in history.
The target audience for the academic lessons are K through
12 who possess a limited knowledge of non-white and female
contributions to the military and to the Nation. The curriculum
and documentary programs will be distributed nationwide via
Internet and educational television at no cost to the end
users. The program includes a series of evaluation measures to
ensure classroom usage and effectiveness.
Our National Education Project, an unprecedented
educational initiative, is a dynamic response to the
diversifying needs of our Nation and our Armed Forces. To this
end, we request a $2.1 million appropriation to develop and
implement the project in the long-term interest of our national
defense.
As you are aware, Senator, we have had a number of the real
pioneers in the military through race involved in our project,
including General Hoisington, the first female general, and
General Colin Powell, who served on our board for 3 years until
he became Secretary of State. This we feel is a very unique
opportunity to do something that has never been done.
As you are aware, we have been here before and our park is
almost complete. We will be open next July and we are looking
forward to expanding our programming nationally.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Robert V. Morris
As America's Greatest Memorial to Black and Female Soldiers, Fort
Des Moines is the only military installation to hold the distinction of
launching black and women commissioned officers and female enlisted
troops into the United States Army.
Set for dedication in July 2004, our five (5) acre park includes a
20,000 sq. ft. museum, historic Chapel, reflecting pool and monument by
noted sculptor Richard Hunt. In order to achieve sustained nation-wide
outreach, Fort Des Moines has introduced a unique National Education
Project (NEP) which is timely since, according to the U.S. Census, the
majority of American's will be non-white by year 2055 as will our Armed
Forces.
The project's mission is to educate America's youth with an
accurate portrayal of black and female contributions to military
history and their impact on equality in greater society. This youth
education will enhance understanding of, support for and participation
in America's Armed Forces.
The NEP offers multi-cultural, non-sexist academic lessons related
to the military command integration that occurred at Fort Des Moines.
The first U.S. Army officer candidate schools open to black Americans
in 1917 and to women in 1942 as part of the first Women's Army Corps
give our National Historic Site a unique place in history. The target
audience for the academic lessons are k-12 youth who possess a limited
knowledge of non-white and female contributions to the military and the
nation. The curriculum and documentary programs will be distributed
nation-wide via internet and educational television at no cost to the
end users. The program includes a series of evaluation measures to
insure classroom usage and effectiveness.
Our National Education Project, an unprecedented educational
initiative, is a dynamic response to the diversifying needs of our
nation and our Armed Forces. To this end, we request a $2.1 million
appropriation to develop and implement this great project in the long-
term interest of our national defense.
Senator Stevens. Well, thank you. We will do our best.
Colin Powell did call me about this last year. I will talk to
him about it again.
Mr. Morris. Thank you very much.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Next is Robert Washington, co-chairman of the Military
Coalition.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT WASHINGTON, SR., FLEET RESERVE
ASSOCIATION; CO-CHAIRMAN, THE MILITARY
COALITION HEALTH CARE COMMITTEE
Mr. Washington. Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Stevens. Good morning, sir.
Mr. Washington. The Military Coalition is most grateful to
the leadership and strong support of last year's significant
improvements in military pay, housing allowance, and other
personnel programs for the Active, Guard, and Reserve personnel
and their families. As much as Congress accomplished last year,
very significant inequities and readiness challenges remain to
be addressed. The following recommendations are made.
The coalition strongly recommends restoration and funding
of service end strength consistent with long-term sustainment
of the global war on terrorism and the war in Iraq. The
coalition urges the subcommittee to fund the administration-
proposed pay raises and restore full pay comparability. The
coalition opposes privatization of commissaries and strongly
supports full funding of the benefit to sustain the current
level of service for all commissary patrons.
The coalition is asking the subcommittee to use your
considerable powers of influence and persuasion with the Ways
and Means Committee to break the logjam that has stalled
military tax relief bill legislation sorely needed to eliminate
the tax inequities and penalty on active duty Guard and Reserve
members and their families.
The coalition urges the subcommittee to appropriate
sufficient funds for DOD to communicate benefit information
directly to Standard beneficiaries, develop a Standard
beneficiary education program, assist Standard beneficiaries in
finding providers who will accept new Tricare Standard
patients, including interactive, online lists, and other means
of communication, and to develop a program to enhance Tricare
Standard provider recruitment; also to appropriate sufficient
funds to institute a pilot project at several locations of
varying characteristics to test the extent to which raising
Tricare Standard rates increased the number of providers who
are willing to accept new Standard patients.
The coalition urges the subcommittee to appropriate
sufficient funds to make the Tricare medical program available
for members of the National Guard and Reserve components and
their families prior to activation on a cost-sharing basis, in
order to ensure medical readiness and provide continuity of
coverage to members of the Selected Reserve.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I again thank you for the
opportunity to present the coalition's views.
Senator Stevens. Well, thank you for coming again. We
appreciate your courtesy, Mr. Chairman.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Robert Washington, Sr.
Mister Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee. On
behalf of The Military Coalition, a consortium of nationally prominent
uniformed services and veterans' organizations, we are grateful to the
Subcommittee for this opportunity to express our views concerning
issues affecting the uniformed services community. This testimony
provides the collective views of the following military and veterans'
organizations, which represent approximately 5.5 million current and
former members of the seven uniformed services, plus their families and
survivors.
Air Force Association
Air Force Sergeants Association
Air Force Women Officers Associated
AMVETS (American Veterans)
Army Aviation Association of America
Association of Military Surgeons of the United States
Association of the United States Army
Chief Warrant Officer and Warrant Officer Association, U.S. Coast
Guard
Commissioned Officers Association of the U.S. Public Health
Service, Inc.
Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States
Fleet Reserve Association
Gold Star Wives of America, Inc.
Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America
Marine Corps League
Marine Corps Reserve Officers Association
Military Chaplains Association of the United States of America
Military Officers Association of America
Military Order of the Purple Heart
National Guard Association of the United States
National Military Family Association
National Order of Battlefield Commissions
Naval Enlisted Reserve Association
Naval Reserve Association
Navy League of the United States
Non Commissioned Officers Association
Reserve Officers Association
Society of Medical Consultants to the Armed Forces
The Retired Enlisted Association
United Armed Forces Association
United States Army Warrant Officers Association
United States Coast Guard Chief Petty Officers Association
Veterans of Foreign Wars
Veterans' Widows International Network
The Military Coalition, Inc., does not receive any grants or
contracts from the federal government.
PERSONNEL ISSUES
Mr. Chairman, The Military Coalition (TMC) is most grateful to the
leadership and members of this Subcommittee for their strong support
leading to last year's significant improvements in military pay,
housing allowances and other personnel programs for active, Guard and
Reserve personnel and their families. But as much as Congress
accomplished last year, very significant inequities and readiness
challenges remain to be addressed.
In testimony today, The Military Coalition offers its collective
recommendations on what needs to be done to address these important
issues and sustain long-term personnel readiness.
ACTIVE FORCE ISSUES
Since the end of the Cold War, the size of the force and real
defense spending have been cut more than a third. In fact, the defense
budget today is just 3.2 percent of this Nation's Gross National
Product--less than half of the share it comprised in 1986. But national
leaders also have pursued an increasingly active role for America's
forces in guarding the peace in a very-dangerous world. Constant and
repeated deployments have become a way of life for today's
servicemembers, and the stress is taking a significant toll on our men
and women in uniform and their families, as well.
Despite the notable and commendable improvements made during the
last several years in military compensation and health care programs,
retention remains a significant challenge, especially in technical
specialties. While some service retention statistics are up from
previous years' levels, many believe those numbers are skewed by post-
9/11 patriotism and by Services' stop-loss policies. That artificial
retention bubble is not sustainable for the long term under these
conditions, despite the reluctance of some to see anything other than
rosy scenarios.
From the servicemembers' standpoint, the increased personnel tempo
necessary to meet continued and sustained training and operational
requirements has meant having to work progressively longer and harder
every year. ``Time away from home'' has become a real focal point in
the retention equation. Servicemembers have endured years of longer
duty days; increased family separations; difficulties in accessing
affordable, quality health care; deteriorating military housing; less
opportunity to use education benefits; and more out-of-pocket expenses
with each military relocation.
The war on terrorism has only heightened already burdensome mission
requirements, and operating--and personnel--tempos continue to
intensify. Members' patriotic dedication has been the fabric that
sustained this increased workload for now, and a temporarily depressed
economy also may have deterred some losses. But the longer-term outlook
is problematic.
Personnel Strengths and Operations Tempo.--The Coalition has been
dismayed and deeply disappointed at the Department of Defense's
reluctance to accept Congress efforts to increase Service end strength
to meet today's much-increased operations tempo. The Department's
response is to attack the problem by freeing up resources to realign to
core war-fighting skills. While the Department's transformation vision
is a great theory, its practical application will take a long time--
time we don't have after years of extraordinary optempo that is already
exhausting our downsized forces.
The Coalition strongly believes that earlier force reductions went
too far and that the size of the force should be increased,
commensurate with missions assigned. The force was already overstrained
to meet its deployment requirements before 9/11, and since then our
forces have absorbed major contingency requirements in Afghanistan and
Iraq.
Deferral of meaningful action to address this problem cannot
continue without risking serious consequences. Real relief is needed
now. With no evidence of declining missions, this can only be achieved
by increasing the size of the force.
The Military Coalition strongly recommends restoration and funding
of Service end strengths consistent with long-term sustainment of the
global war on terrorism and fulfillment of national military strategy.
The Coalition supports application of recruiting resources as necessary
to meet this requirement. The Coalition urges the Subcommittee to
consider all possible manpower options to ease operational stresses on
active, Guard and Reserve personnel.
Pay Raise Comparability.--The Military Coalition appreciates the
Subcommittee's leadership during the last five years in reversing the
routine practice of capping servicemembers' annual pay raises below the
average American's. In servicemembers' eyes, all of those previous pay
raise caps provided regular negative feedback about the relative value
the Nation placed on retaining their services.
Unfortunately, this failed practice of capping military raises to
pay for budget shortfalls reared its head again earlier this year when
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget proposed capping
2004 and future military pay raises at the level of inflation. The
Coalition was shocked and deeply disappointed that such a senior
officer could ignore 25 years of experience indicating that pay caps
lead inevitably to retention and readiness problems. Not only was the
proposal ill timed as troops massed for a war with Iraq--it's just bad,
failed policy.
The President rejected his senior budget official's advice for five
of the seven uniformed services--but, unfortunately, the
Administration's budget for fiscal year 2004 proposes to cap the pay of
NOAA and USPHS officers at 2 percent. The Military Coalition strongly
objects to this disparate treatment of members in those uniformed
services. The Coalition urges the Subcommittee to intercede in their
behalf with colleagues on the appropriate oversight committees for NOAA
and USPHS personnel to ensure that these commissioned officers receive
the same treatment as their fellow comrades-in-arms.
Pay raise comparability with private sector wage growth is a
fundamental underpinning of the all-volunteer force, and it cannot be
dismissed without severe consequences for national defense.
When the pay raise comparability gap reached 13.5 percent in 1999--
resulting in a predictable readiness crises--Congress took responsible
action to change the law. Largely because of your efforts and the
belated recognition of the problem by the Executive Branch, the gap has
been reduced to 6.4 percent as of 2003.
Fortunately, the President rejected his budgeteers' advice, and has
proposed an average 4.1 percent raise for fiscal year 2004, which would
shrink the gap another full percentage point to 5.4 percent. Even at
that rate, it would take another 5 years to restore full comparability.
So this is no time to reinstitute pay caps.
On the contrary, we urge the Subcommittee to consider that the law
mandating increased military raises will expire in 2006, after which
military raises will again be capped one-half percentage point per year
below private sector wage growth (see chart below).
The Military Coalition urges the Subcommittee to fund the
Administration-proposed raise and restore full pay comparability on the
quickest possible schedule. Further, the Coalition strongly urges the
Subcommittee to fund equal raises to PHS and NOAA corps officers and
not create--for the first time ever--separate pay tables within the
uniformed services.
Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH).--The Military Coalition supports
revised housing standards that are more realistic and appropriate for
each pay grade. As an example, enlisted members are not authorized to
receive BAH for a 3-bedroom single-family detached house until
achieving the rank of E-9--which represents only one percent of the
enlisted force. TMC believes that as a minimum, this BAH standard
should be extended to qualifying servicemembers in grades E-7 and
above, immediately.
The Coalition is most grateful to the Subcommittee for acting in
1999 to reduce out-of-pocket housing expenses for servicemembers.
Responding to Congress's leadership on this issue, the Department of
Defense proposed a phased plan to reduce median out of pocket expenses
to zero by fiscal year 2005. This aggressive action to better realign
BAH rates with actual housing costs is having a real impact and
providing immediate relief to many servicemembers and families who were
strapped in meeting rising housing and utility costs.
The Military Coalition urges the Subcommittee to fund adjustments
in grade-based housing standards to more adequately cover members'
current out-of-pocket housing expenses.
Family Readiness and Support.--The family continues to be a key
consideration in the readiness equation for each servicemember. The
maintenance of family readiness and support programs is part of the
cost of performing the military mission. We must ensure that families
have the opportunity to develop the financial and readiness skills
needed to cope with deployment situations. It is important to meet the
childcare needs of the military community including National Guard and
Reserve members. Overall family support programs must meet the needs of
National Guard and Reserve members being called to active duty in ever-
increasing numbers.
The Military Coalition urges funding to improve education and
outreach programs and increase childcare availability to ensure a
family readiness level and a support structure that meets the
requirements of increased force deployments for active duty, National
Guard and Reserve members.
Commissaries.--The fiscal year 2003 budget reduced Defense
Commissary Agency funding by $137 million and envisioned eliminating
over 2,600 positions from stores and headquarters staff by September
30, 2003. While DeCA indicates there will be no loss in service to the
customer, the Coalition is concerned that the size and scope of the
reductions may negatively impact quality and service to customers,
including additional store closings, reduced hours, longer cashier
lines and reduced stock on store shelves. This would have a
significantly adverse impact on the benefit, which is widely recognized
as a valuable part of the servicemember's compensation package and a
cornerstone of quality of life benefits.
The Military Coalition opposes privatization of commissaries and
strongly supports full funding of the benefit to sustain the current
level of service for all commissary patrons.
Tax issues.--The Coalition understands that tax matters fall under
the purview of a different committee. But there are unique issues
affecting active duty, National Guard and Reserve members, and their
families, and we hope that members of the Subcommittee will use their
significant powers of persuasion to convince their colleagues to
address these needed changes quickly.
The Coalition strongly urges that every effort be made to break the
logjam over the military tax relief bill (H.R. 1664). Considerable
congressional support exists for the changes envisioned by this
legislation, but the bill is now stalled for a number of reasons--none
of which concern the merits of the legislation. This legislation will
immediately benefit thousands of military homeowners who have been
unfairly (and inadvertently) penalized with capital gains tax
liabilities incurred because they were forced to sell their homes after
extended government-directed absences away from their principle
residences. This legislation will also provide needed tax deductions
for unreimbursed travel and per diem expenses incurred by drilling
Guard and Reserve personnel, who are asked to train more to enhance
their readiness skills to support contingency missions. And, very
significantly, the military tax relief bill fully tax exempts the death
gratuity benefit paid to survivors of military members killed on active
duty--which will immediately eliminate the inexplicable tax these
survivors have to pay now.
The Military Coalition urges the Subcommittee to use their
considerable powers of influence and persuasion with the Ways and Means
committee to break the logjam that has stalled the military tax relief
bill--legislation sorely needed to eliminate tax inequities that
penalize active duty, Guard and Reserve members, and their families.
The Coalition also supports legislation that would amend the tax
law to let Federal civilian retirees and active duty and retired
military members pay health insurance premiums on a pre-tax basis. Many
uniformed services beneficiaries pay premiums for a variety of health
insurance programs, such as TRICARE supplements, the active duty dental
plan or TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan (TRDP), long-term care insurance,
or TRICARE Prime enrollment fees. For most beneficiaries, these
premiums and enrollment fees are not tax-deductible because their
health care expenses do not exceed 7.5 percent of their adjusted gross
taxable income, as required by the IRS. This creates a significant
inequity with private sector and some government workers, many of whom
already enjoy tax exemptions for health and dental premiums through
employer-sponsored health benefits plans. A precedent for this benefit
was set for other Federal employees by a 2000 Presidential directive
allowing federal civilian employees to pay premiums for their Federal
Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) coverage with pre-tax
dollars.
Although we recognize that this is not within the purview of the
Subcommittee, the Coalition hopes that Subcommittee members will lend
their support to this legislation and help ensure equal treatment for
all military and federal beneficiaries.
The Coalition urges the Subcommittee to support legislation to
provide active duty and uniformed services beneficiaries a tax
exemption for premiums or enrollment fees paid for TRICARE Prime,
TRICARE Standard supplements, the active duty dental plan, TRICARE
Retiree Dental Plan, FEHBP and Long Term Care.
Death Gratuity.--The current death gratuity amount was last
increased in 1991 when it was raised from $3,000 to $6,000. This amount
is insufficient to cover costs incurred by families responding to the
death of an active member.
The Military Coalition recommends funding to increase the military
death gratuity from $6,000 to $12,000, and making the gratuity tax-
free.
HEALTH CARE TESTIMONY
The Military Coalition (TMC) is appreciative of Congress's
exceptional efforts to honor health care commitments to uniformed
services beneficiaries, particularly for active duty and Medicare-
eligibles. However, much remains to be done. We wish to address certain
chronic problem areas, and additional initiatives essential to
providing an equitable and consistent health benefit for all categories
of TRICARE beneficiaries, regardless of age or geography.
While Congress has substantially eased cost burdens for Medicare-
eligibles and for active duty families in TRICARE Prime and Prime
Remote, we need to draw attention to the 3.2 million TRICARE Standard
beneficiaries under the age of 65, many of whom face increasingly
significant provider accessibility challenges.
ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR THE DEFENSE HEALTH BUDGET
Once again, a top Coalition priority is to work with Congress and
DOD to ensure full funding of the Defense Health Budget to meet
readiness needs and deliver services, through both the direct care and
purchased care systems, for ALL uniformed services beneficiaries,
regardless of age, status or location. An adequately funded health care
benefit is essential to readiness and the retention of qualified
uniformed service personnel.
The Subcommittee's oversight of the defense health budget is
essential to avoid a return to the chronic underfunding of recent years
that led to execution shortfalls, shortchanging of the direct care
system, inadequate equipment capitalization, failure to invest in
infrastructure and reliance on annual emergency supplemental funding
requests as a substitute for candid and conscientious budget planning.
While supplemental appropriations were not required last year, we
are concerned that the current funding level only meets the needs of
the status quo and does not address the growing requirement to support
the deployment of forces to Southwest Asia and Afghanistan. Addressing
funding for these increased readiness requirements; TRICARE provider
shortfalls and other needs will require additional funding.
The Military Coalition strongly recommends the Subcommittee
continue its watchfulness to ensure full funding of the Defense Health
Program, to include military medical readiness, TRICARE, and the DOD
peacetime health care mission. The Defense Health Budget must be
sufficient to provide financial incentives to attract increased numbers
of providers needed to ensure access for TRICARE beneficiaries in all
parts of the country.
TRICARE IMPROVEMENTS
Access to care is the number one concern expressed by our
collective memberships. More and more beneficiaries report that few, if
any, providers in their area are willing to accept new TRICARE Standard
patients. Enhanced benefits for our seniors and decreased cost shares
for active duty beneficiaries will be of little consequence to
beneficiaries who cannot find a TRICARE provider.
Network and Standard Provider Availability.--Large numbers of
beneficiaries continue to report increased difficulty locating
providers who will accept new TRICARE patients, even though the
Department of Defense indicates that the number of TRICARE providers is
at near an all-time high.
Clearly, there is a problem with how provider participation is
measured and monitored. The current participation metric is calculated
as the percentage claims filed on an assigned basis. Nowhere does DOD
or its support contractors ask or track whether participating or
authorized providers are accepting new patients. Since participation is
fluid, providers are permitted to accept or refuse TRICARE patients on
a day-by-day basis; therefore, beneficiaries often must make multiple
inquiries to locate a provider who is taking patients on that day.
Allegedly, current TRICARE contracts require Manage Care Support
Contractors (MCSC) to help Standard patients find providers, but this
is not the actual practice. Further, there is no such requirement in
the new TRICARE Next Generation of Contracts (TNEX). MCSCs are under no
obligation to recruit Standard providers or provide up to date lists of
Standard providers, leaving beneficiaries on their own to determine if
a provider is willing to accept Standard patients. We urge the
subcommittee to fund a program to increase Standard provider
recruitment by educating civilian providers about the TRICARE Standard
benefit. We believe this issue is too critical to depend upon the
``chance'' that the civilian contractors will voluntarily elect to
provide this service as a ``valued added product'' in all regions.
Simply stated, Standard beneficiaries are neglected. No effort is
made to reach out to them, to provide education about the extent of the
Standard benefit, to directly communicate benefits information, or
provide support to locate a provider. The Coalition adamantly believes
DOD has an obligation to develop an education and communication program
for Standard beneficiaries. DOD should direct MCSCs to assist Standard
beneficiaries as well as Prime beneficiaries. Options should include
providing interactive on-line lists of Standard providers, with
indications of which ones are currently accepting new Standard
patients. When a beneficiary cannot find a provider, the MCSC should
help them do so.
The Military Coalition urges the Subcommittee to appropriate
sufficient funds for DOD to communicate benefits information directly
to Standard beneficiaries, develop a Standard beneficiary education
program, assist Standard beneficiaries in finding providers who will
accept new TRICARE Standard patients, including interactive on-line
lists and other means of communication and to developed a program to
enhance TRICARE Standard provider recruitment.
Provider Reimbursement.--Provider groups tell us that TRICARE is
the lowest-paying program they deal with, and often poses them the most
administrative problems. This is a terrible combination of perceptions
if you are a TRICARE Standard patient trying to find a doctor.
The Coalition is concerned that the war on terrorism and the war in
Southwest Asia are straining the capacity of the military's direct
health care system, as large numbers of medical corps members are
deployed overseas. More and more TRICARE patients are turning to turn
to the civilian sector for care--putting more pressure on civilian
providers who already have absorbed significant fee cuts from TRICARE.
Our deployed service men and women need to focus on their mission,
without having to worry whether their family members back home can find
a provider. Uniformed services beneficiaries their family members and
survivors deserve the nation's best health care, not the cheapest.
In order to achieve parity and encourage participation, both
Medicare and DOD have the ability to institute locality-based rates to
account for geographical variation in practice costs to secure
sufficient providers. DOD has statutory authority (10 U.S.C. 1097 (b))
to raise rates for network providers up to 115 percent of TRICARE
Maximum Allowable Charge (TMAC) in areas where adequate access to
health care services is severely impaired. To date, DOD has resisted
using its authority to raise reimbursement levels.
Raising TRICARE payment rates to competitive levels with other
insurance is essential to solving the Standard access problem. There
are cost implications of doing this, and the Coalition understands the
preference in both the Executive and Legislative Branches to focus on
administrative issues rather than payment levels. However, providers
indicate that it is a money issue. They may be willing to accept low
payments from Medicare out of a sense of obligation to seniors, the
volume of patients, and because Medicare has a reliable electronic
payment system. They are not so willing to accept low TRICARE payments.
Other insurance programs pay providers rates that are significantly
higher than Standard's. The Coalition doubts that access problems can
be addressed successfully without raising rates. The only way to assess
the merits is to institute a pilot project to test if raising TRICARE
Standard payment rates improves access for beneficiaries.
The Military Coalition urges the Subcommittee to appropriate
sufficient funds to institute a pilot project at several locations of
varying characteristics to test the extent to which raising TRICARE
Standard rates increases the number of providers who are willing to
accept new Standard patients.
Healthcare for Members of the National Guard and Reserve.--Sec. 702
of the fiscal year 2003 NDAA authorized further Prime eligibility for
certain dependents of Reserve Component Members residing in remote
areas whose sponsors are ordered to extended active duty of at least 30
days. The Coalition is pleased that DOD recently announced its intent
to implement Sec 702, as well as to extend the Prime benefit to Reserve
Component dependents who reside within Military Treatment Facility
(MTF) catchment areas.
The Coalition is most appreciative that TRICARE Prime and TRICARE
Prime Remote (TPR) benefits will now be standardized for ALL Reserve
Component families when the sponsor is called to active duty for 30
days, regardless of whether the family resides in a MTF catchment area
or not. The Coalition is also pleased that DOD has waived for Reserve
Component beneficiaries the TPR requirement that family members reside
with their sponsor in an areas outside of MTF catchment areas.
Health insurance coverage has an impact on Guard-Reserve (G-R)
medical readiness and family morale. Progress has been made during
transitional periods after call-ups, but more needs to be done to
provide continuity of care coverage for reserve component members prior
to activation.
Health insurance coverage varies widely for members of the G-R:
some have coverage through private employers, others through the
Federal government, and still others have no coverage. Reserve families
with employer-based health insurance must, in some cases, pick up the
full cost of premiums during an extended activation. Although TRICARE
eligibility starts at 30 days activation, many G-R families would
prefer continued access to their own health insurance rather than being
forced to find a new provider who accepts TRICARE. In other cases,
disruption (and in some cases cancellation) of private sector coverage
as a consequence of extended activation under TRICARE adversely affects
family morale and military readiness and discourages some from
reenlisting.
In 2001, DOD recognized this problem and announced a policy change
under which DOD would pay the premiums for the Federal Employee Health
Benefit Program (FEHBP) for DOD reservist--employees activated for
extended periods. However, this new benefit only affects about 10
percent of the Selected Reserve. The Coalition believes this philosophy
could be extended to pay health insurance premiums for activated G-R
members who are not federal civilian employees.
As a matter of morale, equity, and personnel readiness, the
Coalition believes more needs to be done to assist reservists who are
being called up more frequently in support of national security
missions. They deserve options that provide their families continuity
of care, without having to find a new doctor or navigate a new system
each time the member is activated or deactivated.
The Military Coalition urges the Subcommittee to appropriate
sufficient funds to make the TRICARE medical program available for
members of the National Guard and Reserve Component and their families
prior to activation on a cost-sharing basis in order to ensure medical
readiness and provide continuity of coverage to members of the Selected
Reserve. In addition, to further ensure continuity of coverage for
family members, the Coalition urges allowing activated Guard/Reserve
members the option of having the Department of Defense pay their
civilian insurance premiums during periods of activation.
CONCLUSION
The Military Coalition reiterates its profound gratitude for the
extraordinary progress this subcommittee has made in funding a wide
range of personnel and health care initiatives for all uniformed
services personnel and their families and survivors. The Coalition is
eager to work with the Subcommittee in pursuit of the goals outlined in
our testimony.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to present the Coalition's
views on these critically important topics.
Senator Stevens. The next witness is William Hawley, Dr.
Hawley, of the Board of Directors of the Public Policy
Committee for Lymphoma Research.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM HAWLEY, M.D., BOARD OF DIRECTORS,
PUBLIC POLICY COMMITTEE, LYMPHOMA RESEARCH
FOUNDATION
Dr. Hawley. Good morning, sir. Mr. Chairman and members of
the subcommittee, it is my pleasure to appear before you today
on behalf of the Lymphoma Research Foundation and a half-
million Americans suffering from lymphoma. The Lymphoma
Research Foundation is the Nation's largest lymphoma-focused
voluntary health organization devoted exclusively to
eradicating lymphoma and serving those touched with this
disease. To date the foundation has funded more than $9 million
in lymphoma-specific research.
Most people do not even realize that lymphoma is a cancer,
let alone that it is the most common blood cancer in Americans.
As I mentioned, over half-a-million Americans suffer from
lymphoma. This year yet another 61,000 of us will be diagnosed
and 25,000 will lose their lives to this very misunderstood
disease.
I say ``us'' because I am a survivor of non-Hodgkins
lymphoma. Seven years ago I was the chief of cardiac surgery
and department chairman at Integris Medical Center in Oklahoma
when I was diagnosed with Flickler lymphoma, a low-grade
indolent form of this incurable cancer. After over 30 years as
a practicing surgeon, I was now a patient. It was a difficult
adjustment, but I was determined to use my scientific
background as a physician combined with my new role as a
patient to help others suffering from this disease.
Thanks to research, I am here today, able to stand before
you and speak up for all my fellow patients, for those who will
be diagnosed in the future, and for those who were not as
fortunate and lost their lives in the battle with lymphoma
years ago. I have taken leave from my medical practice to
devote myself entirely to advocacy for lymphoma patients and I
think I am now the busiest unpaid physician in this country. My
fundamental goal is to advocate for both improved treatment and
new options for patients. I do a great deal of outreach to
patients with lymphoma and have found sharing the story of
personal involvement with the disease to be very rewarding.
As an advocate for my fellow patients, I am before you
today to ask that you expand the congressionally-directed
medical research program to include research on lymphoma,
leukemia, and multiple myeloma. Specifically, I respectfully
request that $25 million be provided for blood cancer research
efforts at the Department of Defense.
This subcommittee is to be commended for its leadership in
funding special research programs, with a particular emphasis
on cancer research. Over the past 2 years, this subcommittee
funded a special $10 million research initiative on chronic
myelogenous leukemia (CML) to date. We urge you to continue
this funding and expand the initiative to include all other
types of blood cancer research.
Many of you are probably familiar with the development of
Gleevec, originally developed as a treatment for chronic
myelogenous leukemia, now approved for the treatment of a solid
tumor gastrointestinal stromal tumor. Thanks to the investment
in Gleevec, we now have a possible cure for CML today. A $25
million investment would have the potential to enhance our
understanding of blood cancers and contribute to the
development of new treatments.
While the causes of blood cancers remain unknown, evidence
suggests that exposure to environmental carcinogens, radiation,
pesticides, herbicides, viruses, and bacteria may play a role.
It is therefore possible that any of our troops exposed to
chemical or biological weapons may be at increased risk of
developing lymphoma or other types of blood cancer. We know the
link of Agent Orange to non-Hodgkins and Hodgkins malignant
lymphoma.
Advances in blood cancer research will also be of great
benefit to those with other forms of cancer. Many chemotherapy
agents used to treat solid tumors now were originally used to
treat blood cancers. Lymphoma, for example, is often called the
Rosetta Stone of cancer research because it has helped to
unlock the mysteries of several other types of malignancy.
The concept of cancer staging to define disease severity
and target appropriate therapy began in lymphoma. The strategy
of combining chemotherapy and radiation was first used in
lymphoma and then applied to other malignancies. These are just
a few of the great benefits that blood cancer research can
bring to millions suffering from cancer throughout our Nation.
On behalf of all the patients living with lymphoma or other
blood cancers, the Lymphoma Research Foundation urges the
subcommittee to include a blood cancer research initiative in
the congressionally-directed medical research program. As a
physician, I can tell you that the time for investment is now
and, with your help, research-developed new treatments and
cures can be found. As a patient, I say, please act quickly
because so many lives hang in the balance.
Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, Doctor. I appreciate
your courtesy.
Dr. Hawley. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of William Hawley
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, it is my pleasure to
appear before you today on behalf of the Lymphoma Research Foundation
(LRF), the nation's largest lymphoma-focused voluntary health
organization devoted exclusively to funding research to cure all
lymphomas and providing patients and healthcare professionals with
critical information on the disease. LRF's mission is to eradicate
lymphoma and serve those touched by the disease. To date, LRF has
funded more than $9 million in lymphoma research.
This is an exciting time for new approaches to research on lymphoma
and other blood-related cancers and we are pleased to testify today to
request that you expand the Congressionally Directed Medical Research
Program to include research on these diseases. I am a physician and a
survivor of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), the most commonly diagnosed
hematological cancer. I have taken a leave of absence from my medical
practice, and during this time I am dedicating myself to advocacy for
lymphoma patients. My fundamental goal is to advocate for both improved
treatments and new options for patients currently living with the
disease and those who may be diagnosed in the future.
This Subcommittee is to be commended for its leadership in funding
several special research programs, with a particular emphasis on cancer
research. We realize that, at the time these programs were initiated,
they were a departure from the national defense programs generally
funded by the subcommittee. Over time, they have become model research
programs that complement the research efforts of the National
Institutes of Health and that are hailed by patient advocates because
they allow consumer input in the planning of the research portfolio.
The Lymphoma Research Foundation believes the current medical
research efforts of the Department of Defense (DOD) are appropriate
targets for funding, as they contribute to the national defense in
critically important ways. We think that, at this time in our history,
it is especially important that the DOD expand its research portfolio
to support research into the blood cancers, including leukemia,
lymphoma, and myeloma. I would like to provide some basic information
about the blood cancers, as well as some compelling reasons for the
expansion of the DOD research program to include blood cancer research.
The Blood Cancers
Each year, approximately 110,000 Americans are diagnosed with one
of the blood cancers. More than 60,000 will die from these cancers in
2003, and 700,000 Americans are living with these cancers. Taken as a
whole, the blood-related cancers are the 5th most common cancer, behind
lung, breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer.
There have recently been some significant advances in the treatment
of the blood cancers. In 2001, the targeted therapy called Gleevec was
approved for treatment of chronic myelogenous leukemia, and now this
drug is approved for use in gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). In
2002, a new radioimmunotherapy was approved for patients with
refractory NHL, and a new treatment for multiple myeloma is expected to
be approved this year. These treatments represent progress in the fight
against the blood cancers, but there is much work still to be done.
Although there are declines in the number of new cases and deaths
associated with many forms of cancer, the trend is different for non-
Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma. The incidence of non-Hodgkin's
lymphoma has nearly doubled since the 1970's, and the mortality rate
from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is increasing at a faster rate than other
cancers. One can see that, despite scientific progress, there is much
to be done to improve blood cancer treatments. We are pleased by any
step forward, but our goal is still a cure of the blood cancers. We
acknowledge that this is a scientifically difficult goal, but it must
remain our objective.
The Link Between Blood Cancers and Military Service
The causes of the blood cancers remain unknown. With regard to
Hodgkin's lymphoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, immune system impairment
and exposure to environmental carcinogens, pesticides, herbicides,
viruses, and bacteria may play a role. The linkage between exposure to
one particular herbicide--Agent Orange--and the blood cancers has been
established by the Committee to Review the Health Effects in Vietnam
Veterans of Exposure to Herbicides, a special committee of the
Institute of Medicine (IOM). This panel was authorized by the Agent
Orange Act of 1991 and has issued four reports on the health effects of
Agent Orange. The committee has concluded that ``there is sufficient
evidence of an association between exposure to herbicides'' and chronic
lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and Hodgkin's
lymphoma, and there is limited or suggestive evidence of an association
between herbicide exposure and multiple myeloma.
The IOM panel does not have responsibility to make recommendations
about Veterans Administration (VA) benefits, but the VA has in fact
responded to these reports by guaranteeing the full range of VA
benefits to Vietnam veterans who have the diseases that have been
linked to herbicide exposure, including CLL, Hodgkin's lymphoma, and
non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
These benefits include access to VA health care. There are now,
unfortunately, a number of Vietnam veterans who are receiving VA health
care for treatment of CLL, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, and Hodgkin's
lymphoma, and DOD-sponsored research on these diseases has the
potential to improve the survival and the quality of life for these
veterans.
Potential Risks of Blood Cancers in the Future
We all acknowledge that we live in a very complicated age, where
those in the military are at risk of exposure to chemical and
biological agents. The evidence suggests that immune system impairment
and exposure to environmental carcinogens, pesticides, herbicides,
viruses, and bacteria may play a role in the development of Hodgkin's
lymphoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. It is therefore possible that, if
our troops were exposed to chemical or biological weapons, they might
be placed at increased risk of development of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma,
Hodgkin's lymphoma, or one of the other blood cancers.
We strongly recommend that we invest now in research to understand
the potential links between pesticides, herbicides, viruses, bacteria,
and the blood cancers. The enhanced investment now may contribute to a
deeper understanding of these possible linkages and to the development
of strategies to protect those who suffer such exposures. A greater
commitment to the research and development of new blood cancer
therapies is also critically important if we anticipate that there may
be more individuals, including those in the military, who will suffer
from these cancers as a result of service-connected exposure.
The Current DOD Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia Program
In fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003, the Subcommittee funded a
research program at DOD that funds research on one particular kind of
leukemia, called chronic myelogenous leukemia, or CML. This form of
leukemia has been much in the news because of the development of
Gleevec, a drug that has been hailed as a possible cure for the
disease. We applaud the Subcommittee for its commitment to a program of
CML research. We would recommend that this program, which has received
total funding of slightly less than $10 million over the last two
years, be continued and that an initiative be launched that would fund
all other types of blood cancer research.
We believe that an investment of $25 million in a new Blood Cancer
Research Program would have the potential to enhance our understanding
of the blood cancers and their links to chemical, viral, and bacterial
exposures and to contribute to develop of new treatments. There are
several promising areas of therapeutic research on blood cancers,
including research about ways to use the body's immune system to fight
the blood cancers, research on the development of less toxic and more
targeted therapies than traditional chemotherapy agents, and research
that will allow physicians to diagnose the specific type and subtype of
blood cancers.
The Impact of Blood Cancer Research on Other Cancers
An investment in blood cancer research will be beneficial to those
diagnosed with these cancers, including members of the military. We
also believe that advances in blood cancer research will be of benefit
to those with other forms of cancer. Treatments for blood cancers are
often also used in the treatment of solid tumors. For example, many
chemotherapy agents that are now used in the treatment of a wide range
of solid tumors were originally used in the treatment of blood cancers.
The concept of cancer staging to accurately define disease severity and
target appropriate therapy began in lymphoma and is now used in all
cancers. The strategy of combining chemotherapy with radiation therapy
began in the treatment of Hodgkin's disease and is now widely used in
the treatment of many solid tumors. Many recently developed therapeutic
interventions, like monoclonal antibodies that target and disable
antigens on the cell surface thought to be responsible for cell
proliferation began in the blood cancers but hold promise for breast,
prostate, ovarian, and other forms of cancer. Work on vaccines for
lymphoma has been in the forefront of vaccine research. As you can see,
research on the blood cancers has had many positive benefits for cancer
research overall.
The Lymphoma Research Foundation urges the Subcommittee to consider
the expansion of the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program
to include a Blood Cancer Research Initiative.
We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal to you and
would be pleased to answer your questions.
Senator Stevens. We will now hear from Master Sergeant
Retired Morgan Brown, Legislative Assistant for the Air Force
Sergeants Association. Good morning, sir.
STATEMENT OF MASTER SERGEANT MORGAN D. BROWN, (RET.),
LEGISLATIVE ASSISTANT, AIR FORCE SERGEANTS
ASSOCIATION (AFSA)
Sergeant Brown. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. On behalf of
the 36,000 members of this association, I thank you for the
opportunity to present the views of the enlisted men and women
of the Air Force, Air National Guard, and Air Force Reserve. In
my written testimony I provided a variety of issues, but since
my time here is very brief I am going to restrict my comments
just to the military survivor benefit program.
Senator Stevens. We do ask the staff to go over completely
these statements and your full statements are all being placed
in the record.
Sergeant Brown. Thank you, sir.
Like our predecessor or previous veteran service
organizations, we also strongly hope that the offset presently
in place in the military survivor benefit plan is eliminated in
this session of Congress. However, there are a couple other
problems with the program. For instance, the DOD actuaries
confirm that the 40 percent government subsidy intended by
Congress has declined to a paltry 16.4 percent. That means
retirees are now paying 24 percent more than you intended.
I should point out that the DOD also continues to stress
the government subsidy as an enticement to get retirees to sign
up for this coverage. Clearly, this benefit has become more
beneficial and less costly to the Government and more costly
and less beneficial to the retirees and survivors that this
program was created to protect.
Legislation has already been introduced to correct the
offset and we are hopeful that you will support your colleagues
in implementing this change and providing the necessary funding
for this important survivor program.
We are also working to have the paid-up SBP provision start
as soon as possible. Authorized by Public Law 105-261 and set
to begin on October 1, this provision allows retirees who have
paid into SBP for at least 30 years and have reached 70 years
of age to stop making payments and still have their spouses
covered. As a practical matter, any SBP enrollee who retired on
or after October 1, 1978 would enjoy the full benefit of the
paid-up provision. However, members who enrolled in SBP when it
first became available in 1972 will have to continue paying
premiums for up to 36 years to secure paid-up coverage if they
survive that long. Acceleration of the SBP provision is needed
to simply ensure some measure of fairness for these
individuals.
In closing, AFSA requests that the subcommittee appropriate
the necessary funds to make these changes to the military SBP
program a reality. Mr. Chairman, that is all I will cover today
and I want to thank you for this opportunity to present what we
believe should be among this committee's funding priorities for
fiscal year 2004.
Senator Stevens. I appreciate your courtesy. Thank you very
much.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Morgan D. Brown
Mr. Chairman and distinguished committee members, on behalf of the
136,000 members of the Air Force Sergeants Association, thank you for
this opportunity to offer our views on the military personnel programs
that affect those serving our nation. AFSA represents active duty,
Guard, Reserve, retired, and veteran enlisted Air Force members and
their families. Your continuing effort toward improving the quality of
their lives has made a real difference for those who devote their lives
to service, and our members are grateful.
Although military members do not serve their nation to gain wealth,
we do owe them a decent standard of living. This is even more important
today because America's is an all-volunteer force, and because this
nation increasingly tasks military members and often separates them
(for greater lengths of time) from their families. This testimony
covers several issues in the areas of Military Pay and Compensation,
Education, Heath Care, Military Shipment, Guard and Reserve, and
Retiree/Survivor Programs. We simply ask this committee seriously
consider providing the necessary funding for these important programs.
MILITARY PAY AND COMPENSATION
Continue Enlisted Pay Reform.--We applaud your efforts in recent
years to ensure that all military members get the minimum annual pay
raise in accordance with congressional intent by formula (Employment
Cost Index [ECI] plus one-half percent). AFSA supports further raises
and targeting. However, we caution the committee on the perception
among the force that might be created if the lowest ranking enlisted
members receive below the congressional formula--so that dollars can be
transferred to the higher ranking members. We support higher NCO pay
raises, but believe that if a ``rob Peter to pay Paul'' approach is to
be used, it should not be by taking pay away from the lowest ranking
military members.
Resist Efforts to Change the Military Pay Formula.--This committee
was instrumental in protecting the troops by tying military pay growth
to the growth of wages in the private sector (by focusing on the ECI).
Recent Administration suggestions to tie future annual military pay
raises to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) alarm military members with
the prospect of significantly lower annual pay adjustments. AFSA urges
this committee to resist Administration efforts to lower military pay
raises by abandoning the current formula.
Reform the Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH).--There is room for
significant correction and improvement in the methodology used to
determine BAH. Enlisted members most significantly feel the brunt of
these problems. Currently, the only enlisted members whose BAH square-
footage/dollar amounts are based on stand-alone dwellings are E-9s. The
BAH amount for all enlisted grades below E-9 is based on apartments and
townhouses.
Provide those stationed in Korea the same tax advantages and
special pays afforded to those stationed in ``hostile'' areas.--With
the challenges and austere conditions servicemembers face in Korea, the
daily threat from North Korea, and the risks inherent in the
geopolitical situation relative to the Korean peninsula, it is only
fair to provide equitable tax and pay for these members who, in a real
sense, are serving on the tip of the sword. We urge this committee to
take action on this now in recognition of those stationed in Korea.
Reduce the threshold of eligibility for CONUS COLA from its current
level of 108 percent of the national median.--Several large city areas
(such as Washington, D.C.) do not receive CONUS COLA. We urge this
committee to take another look at which municipalities receive CONUS
COLA.
Provide Guard and Reserve members equity in Career Enlisted Flier
Incentive Pay (CEFIP).--It is unfair that members of the Guard and
Reserve receive a fractioned CEFIP (based on a 1/30 formula for each
day flying). CEFIP recognizes the extraordinary challenges and risks
associated with military flight. As such, Guard and Reserve fliers
should be paid on the same ``whole month'' basis as other military
fliers.
Establish a standard, minimum re-enlistment bonus for all re-
enlistments.--Air Force enlisted members tell us that there ought to be
a minimum re-enlistment bonus. Selective re-enlistment bonuses are paid
to those with between 21 months and 14 years of service. Those who re-
enlist after the 14-year point receive no re-enlistment bonus.
Remember, an enlisted member can serve as long as 30 years. Because we
want to keep leaders in critical skills and they must lead those who
are receiving these, sometimes lucrative, bonuses, it would help morale
to provide some type of re-enlistment bonus to all who re-enlist.
Pay Hazardous Duty Incentive Pay (HDIP) to military firefighters.--
Regardless of service, there is no military job inherently more
hazardous than firefighters. Civilian firefighters who serve side-by-
side with military firefighters already have this risk factored into
their federal civilian wage scale. Military firefighters get no such
additional compensation to recognize their extraordinary risk. At a
cost of about $9 million per year to cover the military firefighters
(those whose AFSA, MOS, or NEC is primarily as a firefighter) for all
services, this would be an equitable, relatively inexpensive addition
to those entitled to receive HDIP.
EDUCATION BENEFITS
Provide an enrollment opportunity for those who turned down the
Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) to enroll in the
Montgomery G.I. Bill.--Over 100,000 currently serving military members
(35,000 in the Air Force alone) turned down the VEAP program when it
was offered to them. VEAP was a relatively poor, insufficient, poorly
counseled educational program which preceded the Montgomery G.I. Bill
(MGIB). In contrast, the MGIB is a much more realistic, more-beneficial
program that would help these members in their transition back into
civilian life after their time in the military. Unfortunately, many of
those who turned down the VEAP program are now leaving service with no
transitional education program. The CBO has set the worst-case cost for
this offering at $143 million over a five-year period. We believe that
these members, many of whom brought us through conflicts including the
Wars in Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia, Kosovo, worldwide peacekeeping missions,
conflicts not publically reported, and the worldwide war on terrorism
deserve an opportunity to enroll in the MGIB.
Increase the value of the MGIB to cover the costs of tuition,
books, and fees at an average 4-year college or university.--Despite
the extremely commendable, recent increases in the MGIB which will
bring the value up to $985 per month for 36 months by October 1 of this
year, more needs to be done. If this nation is going to have a program
that sincerely intends to satisfy the purpose of the program, it
certainly should mirror civilian industry by providing a comprehensive
educational program and not an insufficient one. According to the
``College Report,'' an annual evaluative report published by the
education ``industry,'' average monthly educational costs are
approximately $1,400 at this time. This figure reflects the cost of
books, tuition, and fees at the average college or university for a
commuter student. Of course, that average cost will increase in the
future due to inflation. We ask that you fully fund the already-
authorized increase, but look toward further increases in the program.
Payment for full books, tuition, and fees for a four-year degree with
annual indexing to maintain the value of the benefit, at least, ought
to be provided for those who make the military a career.
Ensure that all MGIB enrollees have the same program with the same
benefits.--Due to changes and additions to the law, only some MGIB
enrollees may transfer a portion of their benefit to family members.
Similarly, only some MGIB enrollees may pay more into the program to
increase the value of their program. We urge this committee to exert
its influence to standardize the MGIB so that this becomes an equal
opportunity benefit.
Allow members to enroll in the MGIB at any time during their first
enlistment.--Regrettably, military members are given only one
opportunity to enroll in the MGIB. That opportunity occurs very quickly
during Basic Military Training when most would least appreciate the
opportunity and can least afford it. Additionally, they must ``pay'' to
have this educational benefit; to enroll in the MGIB they must agree to
give up $100 per month for the first 12 months of their career. Many
military members are surprised by this $1,200 fee and view it as an
insincere military benefit offering because of the one-time irrevocable
decision--when they are least prepared to take advantage of it. As long
as the $1,200 payroll reduction for each MGIB enrollee is part of the
program, we should provide young military members an opportunity to
enroll at any time during their first enlistment.
Provide military members and their families in-state tuition rates
at federally supported state universities.--Military members are moved
to stations around the world at the pleasure of the government. Yet,
they are treated as visitors wherever they go. Fairness would dictate
that, for the purposes of the cost of higher education, they be treated
as residents so that they can have in-state rates at federally
supported colleges and universities in the state where they are
assigned. We would ask this committee to exert the necessary influence
to require federally supported institution to consider military members
assigned in their state as ``residents,'' for the purposes of tuition
levels.
Ensure full Impact Aid funding.--We ask this committee to closely
scrutinize the funding levels for Impact Aid as presented in the
Administration's fiscal year 2004 Budget Plan which has submitted
levels that underfund needed Impact Aid by approximately $127 million.
This is a nine percent reduction from fiscal year 2002 levels. 15
million students in 1,331 school districts nationwide benefit from this
program. Funding is used for a variety of expenses, including teacher
salaries, text books, computers, after-school programs, tutoring,
advanced placement classes, and special enrichment programs. This money
is to compensate local school districts for the impact of military
bases in their communities. Local schools primarily are funded through
property taxes. However, those who reside on a military reservation do
not pay into the property tax base. This becomes a burden on local
schools if military dependent children attend local, off-base schools.
We ask this committee to ensure that sufficient Impact Aid is provided
so that the children of military members are not put at risk, or that
the military member be required to pay tuition.
HEALTH CARE
Improve the dependant and retiree dental plans.--We often hear that
the dependent dental insurance plan is a very, poor one. Additionally,
retirees complain that the retiree dental plan is overpriced, provides
inadequate coverage, and is not worth the investment. This is important
because military retirees were led to believe they would have free/low
cost, comprehensive, lifetime military dental care. We urge this
committee to appropriate additional funding to improve the quality and
adequacy of these two essential dental plans.
Increase provider reimbursement rates to ensure quality providers
in the TRICARE system.--Perhaps the greatest challenge this committee
faces toward keeping the military health care system viable is
retaining health care providers in the TRICARE networks. This challenge
goes hand-in-hand with that which is faced by Medicare. If we do not
allow doctors to charge a fair price for services performed, they will
not want to participate in our program. If they do not participate, the
program will fail. We urge this committee to consider increasing the
CHAMPUS Maximum Allowable Charge to higher levels to ensure quality
providers stay in the system.
Provide for a waiver of the Medicare Part B late enrollment penalty
to facilitate TRICARE For Life participation.--When Congress wisely
created the TRICARE for Life (TFL) program, it significantly enhanced
the quality of the lives of thousands upon thousands of military
retirees, families, and survivors. It, in effect, eliminated the need
for Medicare-eligible military retirees, family members, and survivors,
to carry a Medicare supplement policy. One requirement for
participation in TFL is that the member be enrolled in Medicare Part B.
While the basic Part B enrollment cost is not onerous, many military
retirees residing near bases declined Part B (some for many years). In
order for these retirees, family members, and survivors who did not
enroll in Part B when they were first eligible to participate in TFL,
they must pay a substantial penalty in order to enroll in Part B. We
urge this committee for a one-time enrollment period where those
eligible for TFL who are not enrolled in Medicare Part B may do so
without penalty.
Upgrade the dental benefit programs for active duty, Guard, and
Reserve members, retirees, and their families, especially in localities
where inadequate facilities and/or insufficient providers are
available.--While this committee has no control over the number of
providers in a particular locality, it can enhance the programs to
promote participation. This can be done by ensuring that providers are
treated fairly in terms of reimbursement for the care they provide and
by getting military beneficiaries to (i.e., providing travel
reimbursement to) caregiver locations when dental care (especially
specialized care) is needed.
Make all TRICARE enrollment fees and co-payments, TRICARE For Life
Medicare Part B payments, and military dental plan enrollment fees and
premium payments tax exempt (pre-tax dollars).--In those cases where
the military member, retiree, family member, or survivor has to pay co-
payments for medical care, the exemption of the amount they must pay
would be a great benefit enhancement. This would be particularly true
for those who are older and on fixed incomes.
Provide Guard and Reserve members and their families with a
comprehensive TRICARE benefit.--This is critical to ensure the
deployability of the member, and it is important that his/her family is
protected when the military member is away from home serving his/her
nation. We owe these patriots a comprehensive program.
GUARD AND RESERVE ISSUES
Provide full payment of lodging costs to a lodging facility for the
duration of a mobilization order when a Guardsman or Reservist is
called to active duty by section 12301, 12302, or 12304 of Title 10.--
This adjustment is needed because the payment of lodging per diem is
not authorized for members on Temporary Duty (TDY) during periods of
leave or a return to the Place from Which Called (or Ordered) to Active
Duty (PLEAD). When per diem is not paid, the reservist who departs the
area, however briefly, has to check out of lodging or pay lodging
expenses out-of-pocket. For example, we are penalizing them if they
want to briefly return home to address the concerns of the families
from which they have been separated by the mobilization. This has an
extremely negative financial impact, particularly for lower-ranking
members. It also could have an impact on the retention of mobilized
members following demobilization. Additionally, it is extremely
disruptive to lodging facility contractors with the members' constantly
checking in and out of quarters; this can cause financial problems for
the facility managers who have an expectation of continuous occupancy
for a finite period of time. Of special significance to this committee,
there would be no/negligible cost to implementing this suggestion since
all mobilization expenses are budgeted and set aside for the duration
of mobilization orders.
Reduce the earliest retirement age (with full annuity) for Guard
and Reserve members from 60 to 55.--These members are the only federal
retirees who have to wait until age 60 to enjoy retirement benefits.
These citizens who fight for our nation deserve to have a better
retirement program. Lowering the retirement age would more adequately
reward their service, and provide for upward mobility in the force (ANG
and Reserve members are primarily promoted by vacancy). Keep in mind
that reserve retirement is significantly lower than that provided to
active duty members. Reservists accumulate points based on their
service and training. They must accumulate sufficient points in a given
year for it to be a ``good year.'' They must achieve twenty (20) ``good
years'' to qualify for retirement. The amount of their retired pay is
based on the total points they have accumulated. AFSA believes that
these members ought to be able to retire upon completion of their
``good years'' requirements. However, considering funding limitations,
the least, fair thing that should be done is to provide them federal
retirement equity by letting them retire as soon as age 55. We urge
this committee to do so. Since DOD has conducted and contracted studies
of reserve compensation in recent years, we believe there is little to
be gained by the DOD study mandated in the fiscal year 2003 NDAA other
than to delay serious consideration of the issue. We urge this
committee to support the provisions in H.R. 742 and its pending Senate
companion legislation. Introduced last year as S. 2250 by Sen. Jon
Corzine, D-NJ, his staff tells us that he will soon reintroduce the
measure.
Reduce out-of-pocket expenses of those who serve.--We ask this
committee to restore full tax-deductibility of non-reimbursed expenses
related to military training and service for Guard and Reserve members.
The cost of military service for a Guardsman or Reservist should not be
financial.
Enhance Air Reserve Technician (ART) retirement eligibility.--ARTs
are both military members and civil servants. These unique patriot/
citizens need unique retirement criteria recognizing their singular
contribution to our military's success. We urge this committee to
provide the funding that would allow Air Reserve Technicians eligible
for an unreduced retirement at age 50 with 20 years of service, or at
any age with 25 years of service, if involuntarily separated.
Provide full Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) to TDY Guard and
Reserve members, and those activated (even if less than for 139
days).--Guardsmen and Reservists are generally removed from their
civilian employment when ``called up.'' Once deployed, their need to
protect their family does not go away. Nor does their obligation to
make their full house payments. This committee can greatly assist these
military members by ensuring that they can continue to provide homes
for their families through the provision of full BAH.
Eliminate the Commissary Privilege Card (CPC) requirement and
provide full, year-round commissary benefits for Guard and Reserve
members.--At the present time, members of the Guard and Reserve are
limited to 24 visits per year in military commissaries. Allowing full,
year-round access is a benefit long overdue. The CPC (a card to track
commissary visits) costs millions of dollars to administer each year.
These military members are critical members of this military nation's
team; it is time to treat them as such. We urge all members of Congress
to provide them full, year-round commissary benefits.
Expand the Soldiers and Sailors' Civil Relief Act (SSCRA) to fully
protect Guard and Reserve members who are activated.--Since members of
the Guard and Reserve are increasingly activated and sent away from
their primary civilian occupation and their home, they must be
adequately protected. Please expedite the protection of the rights of
Guardsmen and Reservists by their full inclusion in the SSCRA.
MILITARY SHIPMENT PROGRAMS
Improve the quality of the DOD household goods shipment program.--
The Military Traffic Management Command developed a test program that
was extremely successful. It protected the military member's goods,
held carriers more accountable, and had extremely high satisfaction
levels among military members. With that test project complete and time
passing without DOD implementation of an enhanced household goods
shipment program, it is time for Congress to act. Military members
should not be faced with having their goods destroyed, lost, or stolen
without adequate safeguards and/or compensation.
Increase the household goods weight allowance for professional
books, papers, and/or equipment to accommodate employment support for
military spouses.--Currently, only the military member is entitled to
an additional shipment weight allowance for professional books, papers,
and/or equipment. In recent NDAA's DOD has been tasked by Congress to
come up with ways to provide military spouses with education, training,
and employment assistance. Providing spouses some consideration by
giving them a shipment allowance to support their employment would be a
good step forward. For example, a dependent spouse (of a military
member who is being reassigned) who maintains supplies to support a job
as a government-certified family in-home day care provider, should not
have to sell, discard, or give away his/her supplies. Most likely they
will perform the same job at the next assignment. Similarly, a spouse
who is a message therapist, hairstylist, lawyer, etc., ought to be
given a shipment weight allowance to make them more employable at the
next military assignment location. This would be in keeping with the
congressional mandate to help spouses in their employment efforts.
Provide all military members being assigned to OCONUS locations the
option of government-funded POV shipment or storage.--Currently, DOD
will only store a POV for a member if DOD reassigns that member to a
location where DOD will not ship the member's POV. AFSA believes that
this shipment option should be extended to all members being stationed
anywhere outside of the continental United States (CONUS). We believe
that a significant part of such storage cost would be offset by DOD not
having to ship the vehicle.
RETIREMENT/SURVIVORS
Allow military members who are also receiving VA disability
compensation to fully collect their military retired pay.--AFSA
believes this is the right thing to do. Every member of this committee
is aware of the arguments on this issue, so we will not restate them
here.
Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA) Reform
(Public Law 97-252).--The members of this association strongly urge
this committee to conduct hearings on needed USFSPA changes, both to
gather all inputs needed for appropriate corrective legislation and to
guard against inadvertently exacerbating current inequities via well-
intended, piecemeal legislative action initiated outside of this
committee. A military member must serve 20 years to earn a lifetime
retirement annuity. However, under the USFSPA, any and all former
spouses of a military members have claim to a portion of the military
member's eventual retirement pay. Such a former spouse could have been
married to the military member only for a relatively short period of
time; yet he/she will have a lifetime annuity if the military member
goes on to retire. Our members have clearly communicated that this
anachronistic statute, specifically targeted at military members, is
not needed to protect former spouses. Provisions in law that apply to
all other U.S. citizens should apply to the former spouses of military
members. In that sense, full repeal of the USFSPA would be the fair
thing to do.
Reduce or Eliminate the Age-62 SBP Reduction.--Before age 62, SBP
survivors receive an annuity equal to 55 percent of the retiree's SBP-
covered retirement pay. At age 62, however, the annuity is reduced to a
lower percentage, down to a floor of 35 percent. For many older
retirees, the amount of the reduction is related to the amount of the
survivor's Social Security benefit that is potentially attributable to
the retiree's military service. For member who attained retirement
eligibility after 1985, the post-62 benefit is a flat 35 percent of
covered retired pay. Although this age-62 reduction was part of the
initial SBP statute, large number of members who retired in the 1970s
(or who retired earlier but enrolled in the initial SBP open season)
were not informed of the reduction at the time they enrolled. As such,
many still are very bitter about what they view as the government
changing the rules on them mid stream. Thousands of retirees signed up
for the program believing that they were ensuring their spouses would
receive 55 percent of their retired pay for life. They are ``stunned''
to find out that the survivor reduction attributed to the retiree's
Social Security-covered military earning applies even to widows whose
Social Security benefit is based on their own work history.
Additionally, the DOD actuary has confirmed that the 40-percent
government subsidy for the SBP program, which has been cited for more
than two decades as an enticement for retirees to elect SBP coverage,
has declined to less than 17 percent! Clearly, this benefit has become
more beneficial and less costly for the government, and more costly and
less beneficial for the retirees and survivors the program was created
to protect. We urge you to step in and correct some of these
inequities.
Accelerate the SBP provision so that enrollees aged 70 who have
paid into the SBP for at least 30 years be considered ``paid-up''.--The
paid-up SBP initiative enacted in 1998 set an implementation date of
2008. We urge this committee to change that implementation date to
``this year.'' As a practical matter, any SBP enrollee who retired on
or after October 1, 1978, would enjoy the full benefit of the paid up
provision. However, members who enrolled in SBP when it first became
available in 1972 will have to continue paying premiums for up to 36
years to secure paid-up coverage--if they survive that long.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, we thank you for this opportunity to
present the views of the Air Force enlisted community. As you work
toward your appropriations decisions, the Air Force Sergeants
Association and its 136,000 members urge you to ensure sufficient
funding to provide for the integrity of the entire DOD. Now, more than
ever, this funding and this nation's commitment to the members of our
Armed Forces should ensure, without delay, the full benefits,
entitlements and medical treatment that they have so rightfully earned.
On behalf of all AFSA members, we appreciate your efforts and, as
always, are ready to support you in matters of mutual concern.
Senator Stevens. Our next witness is Dr. Steve Elliot
Koonin, Provost at CAL Tech--oh, pardon me. I missed Joyce
Raezer, Director, Government Relations, National Military
Family Association.
STATEMENT OF JOYCE WESSEL RAEZER, DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT
RELATIONS, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY
ASSOCIATION
Ms. Raezer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The National Military Family Association (NMFA) endorses
the testimony of the Military Coalition. Our statement expands
on a few issues of special importance to active duty military
families and their Guard and Reserve counterparts.
We thank this subcommittee and Congress for providing the
pay and benefit improvements necessary to retain the quality of
force that is protecting our homeland and waging war against
terror. NMFA is especially appreciative for the $150 increase
in monthly family separation pay included in the fiscal year
supplemental, 2003 supplemental appropriations. When the
service member is away from home on military orders, the family
endures both emotional and financial costs. We encourage you to
continue funding this high level in family separation pay in
fiscal year 2004 for all service members on orders away from
their families. Whether a service member is deployed to Iraq,
on a ship in the Pacific, or on an unaccompanied tour in Korea,
to the family away is away.
Although many headlines and news programs now feature
service members coming home, we must not forget that many
service members still are deployed in far-flung locations
around the world. Others are working long hours at their home
station to support their deployed colleagues. Others are just
now leaving for deployments of indeterminant length.
I visited a community in Germany just last week where
almost all of the 950 service members in that community had
only just left for the Gulf the week before. They need to know
their families will have the support services they need,
especially when those families are so far from home themselves.
As they deal simultaneously with new deployments, continued
long-term employments, and the return of many of the units who
were engaged in the fighting in Iraq, military families and
their support programs will be taxed as never before. Because
family readiness is linked to mission readiness, the costs of
ensuring family readiness prior to deployment, during
deployment, and in that critical period following the
deployment must be factored into the costs of the mission.
Adequate funding and staffing of family support is necessary to
ensure a smooth reentry into home and community for the
returning service members, even as program staff also must
continue to assist with ongoing deployment issues and the
normal routine of military life.
Programs provided by military chaplains, the new parent
support program, mental health programs, and support for family
readiness groups are essential during deployments and will be
just as vital in easing service members' return and reunion.
Mission costs must also include the resources needed to help
our Guard and Reserve members and their families adjust to the
service members' transition back to civilian life, especially
when no military installation support services are available.
NMFA also asks that you help to ensure that military
children's schools have the funding they need to provide a
quality education in a safe environment, as well as the extra
help military children need in dealing with the deployment of a
parent to a dangerous location. DOD schools must be
sufficiently funded to perform their mission of educating
military children to the highest standards found in stateside
civilian school districts.
NMFA also requests that you not only continue, but
increase, the DOD funding to supplement impact aid for civilian
schools educating military children. For families with school-
aged children, the schools are on the front line of family
support during times of high operations tempo and deployment
stress. The military has made significant progress in
partnering with school districts to improve the education of
military children and to support both the schools and children
during deployments. Please help to ensure that the schools have
the resources they need to fulfil their obligation to all
children in their charge.
Service members look to the Nation to understand that their
families often drive retention decisions. The families' quality
of life is a readiness requirement. Quality of life is not just
about pay. It is about having a safe, well-maintained place to
live. It is about access to quality health care without
bureaucratic complexities. It is about a quality education for
their children. It is about meeting the aspirations of a spouse
for a career and a couple for a secure retirement. It is
respect for a job well done.
Senator Stevens. I must say thank you. I have got 2 minutes
to make my vote. Thank you very much.
Ms. Raezer. You are welcome.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joyce Wessel Raezer
Mister Chairman and Distinguished Members of this Subcommittee, the
National Military Family Association (NMFA) is, as always, appreciative
of the enhancements in quality of life that you have provided for
uniformed service families. We are particularly grateful for the
increase in Family Separation pay included in the Supplemental. We
anticipate permanent authority for the increase and strongly request
adequate funding for fiscal year 2004.
NMFA endorses the provisions included in the testimony provided by
The Military Coalition, of which we are a member. In this statement we
expand on that testimony with specific emphasis on the needs of
families.
Family Readiness
Since 9/11 active duty members and their National Guard and Reserve
peers have engaged in numerous duty assignments from homeland security
to armed conflict. At the same time, members have continued to serve in
various far-flung areas of the globe. The main message is, that they
are gone! Separations produce economic strain, psychological strain and
high levels of stress in the family. The lifeline of the military
family, the military community, is also feeling the strain. Family
services are important to an installation not pressured by high
Perstempo or conflict-related deployments. They are a critical
necessity when families are left behind. Family center personnel,
military chaplains, installation mental health professions and Morale,
Welfare and Recreation programs all provide needed assistance to
families. When spouses find themselves as the sole head of the family
and as the single parent, the services available to assist them and
their children with these challenges are truly lifelines. E-mail, video
teleconferencing centers, and special family activities ease the
strains and pains of separation. But none of these services are without
cost. Just as the deployed servicemember's readiness is dependent on
proper training, food, shelter, clothing and weapons systems, the
readiness of the family is dependent on accessing needed services. Both
must be adequately funded to assure a force ready to successfully carry
out its assigned mission.
NMFA applauds the Office of Military Community and Family Policy in
the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) for its creation of a
Joint Family Support Contingency Working Group to promote better
information-sharing and planning among OSD and the military Service
headquarters family support staff, including the Reserve Components.
NMFA appreciates the invitation to participate in this working group,
an innovative concept that grew out of the successful collaboration in
the operation of the Pentagon family assistance center after the attack
on the Pentagon. The working group recognized that most military
families live off-base and is encouraging new ways of helping families
that are not all centered on the installation. NMFA has long promoted
additional outreach into the civilian community by installation
personnel so that family members unable to get to an installation can
still receive needed assistance. The possibility of further incidents,
which could again restrict access to installations, makes this outreach
even more imperative.
One new vehicle for communicating with family members and helping
them access assistance when needed, wherever they are located, is being
tested by the Marine Corps Community Services (MCCS). The new program,
``MCCS One Source,'' provides 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, telephone
and online family information and referral, situational assistance, and
links to military and community resources. Since February 1, this
service has been available to active duty and Reserve Marines and their
family members. The Army has also made this service available to
solders and families at select installations. Employee Assistance
Programs such as ``One Source,'' provide an accessible source of
information for servicemembers and families and, if properly
coordinated with other support services, should allow Service family
support professionals to devote more time and attention to supporting
unit volunteers and to assisting families with more complex problems.
A program offered by Army Chaplains, ``Building Strong and Ready
Families'' is targeted at improving relationship skills and assisting
initial-entry soldiers and their families with making the transition
into the military culture. NMFA is very grateful that a clarification
on the use of appropriated funds to pay the expenses of soldiers and
their families to participate in these command-sponsored, chaplain-lead
training opportunities was included in the fiscal year 2003 Defense
Appropriations Act and requests, that if permanent authority has not
been granted, such clarification of the use of appropriated funds be
included again in this year's Act.
One very necessary improvement needed in the family support arena
is closer collaboration between all the various helping individuals and
agencies who assist in the development and maintenance of strong
emotional and mental health in both individuals and families of the
military community. As was seen in the Fort Bragg, North Carolina,
domestic violence cases during the summer of 2002, not all military
family members or servicemembers make use of the counseling and support
services available to them. While the TRICARE mental health benefits
are rich by the standards of many other plans, the program does not
have a preventive care component. For TRICARE to pay for services,
there must be a medical diagnosis, thus discouraging many family
members from seeking care. Many members and their families also believe
that seeking counseling services through military programs may harm
their careers or that these services are only intended for families
identified as having problems. The authors of the Fort Bragg
Epidemiological Consultation Report who examined the domestic violence
incidents, noted that the various agencies that could provide support
to the service members and families do not often coordinate their
activities. NMFA strongly believes that better coordination and
communication among all installation ``helping agencies'' as well as
with those in the civilian community is imperative to help families
deal with stress and promote better mental health. NMFA also believes
that TRICARE must cover preventive mental health services just as it
covers medical preventive services such as well-baby checks,
immunizations, PAP smears and mammograms. An emphasis on emotional
health rather than treatment may also make beneficiaries more likely to
seek appropriate services in a timely manner.
A significant element of family readiness is an educational system
that provides a quality education to military children, recognizes the
needs of these ever moving students and responds to situations where
the military parent is deployed and/or in an armed conflict. Since
approximately 80 percent of military children attend civilian public
schools, the DOD Impact Aid supplement is vital to both these children
and the school systems that educate them. No less than the stay at home
spouse, children are affected by the absence of a parent and experience
even higher levels of stress when their military parent is in a war
zone shown constantly on television. Addressing the needs of these
children and their classmates is imperative to lowering the overall
family stress level, and to achieving an appropriate level of family
readiness. But it does not come without cost to the local school
system.
This Subcommittee has consistently supported the needs of the
schools operated by the DOD Education Activity (DODEA). These schools
are located on military installations in the United States and in
overseas locations. The commitment of this Subcommittee to the
education of these military children has resulted in higher test
scores, minority student achievement, parent involvement programs and
partnership activities with the military community. It is significant
to note that the Commander of USAREUR states that over half of the
military members assigned to USAREUR are deployed away from their
permanent duty sites. Imagine the challenges facing a school system in
a foreign country where half of the student body has an absent parent!
Your continued commitment to and support of these schools is strongly
requested.
Military child care is another important element in family
readiness. Sergeant Major of the Army Jack Tilley noted that during
2002, twenty-seven percent of enlisted soldier parents reported lost
duty time due to a lack of child care. Deployments increase the need
for child care. Families, where the parents were previously able to
manage their work schedules to cover the care of their children, must
now seek outside child care as one parent deploys. Guard and Reserve
families most often do not live close enough to a military installation
to take advantage of either the Child Development Center or Family Day
Care homes. Since 2000, DOD has had the authority to increase the
availability of child care and youth programs through partnerships with
civilian agencies and other organizations. The Services set up pilot
programs to take advantage of this authority and obtain more care for
children off the installations; however, less than 10 percent of DOD
child care is provided off-base. NMFA is concerned that current funding
levels for the Military Child Development System may not be adequate to
meet both the routine demands for child care and to meet the increased
need due to deployments. We request additional funds to ensure the
provision of the high quality child care servicemembers and their
families need.
Finally, the ability of a military spouse to be employed and to
have career progression affects both the family's finances and the
self-sufficiency of the spouse when the member deploys. Studies after
the Persian Gulf War showed that spouses who were employed handled the
stressors of the deployment better than those who were not employed.
NMFA anxiously awaits the DOD report on the status of its spouse
employment programs requested by Congress in the fiscal year 2002 NDAA.
While we do not expect DOD to create a jobs program for every military
spouse, it does need to facilitate the transition of mobile military
spouses into already existing opportunities and to target efforts where
spouses are having the greatest difficulty accessing educational
programs or employment. Sixty-three percent of military spouses are in
the labor force. Eighty-seven percent of junior enlisted spouses (E-1
to E-5) are in the labor force. Very obviously, the financial health of
the military family is significantly dependent upon the employment of
the spouse. Family financial health is without question a family
readiness issue.
NMFA applauds the various initiatives to meet the needs of families
wherever they live and whenever they need them and requests adequate
funding to ensure continuation of current programs and implementation
of new ones. However, we are also very aware that the ``bedrock''
family support programs must not be shunted aside in order to fund only
the new initiatives. Since there appears little chance that the
increase in family separations will come to an end, the higher stress
levels caused by such separations require a higher level of community
support.
National Guard and Reserve Families
As of May 6th, 224,528 National Guard and Reserve members were on
active duty. While many of the challenges faced by their families are
similar to those of active component families, they must face them with
a less-concentrated and mature support network and, in many cases,
without prior experience with military life. Unlike active duty units
located on one installation with families in close proximity, reserve
component families are often miles from the servicemember's unit.
Therefore, unless they pay for their own travel expenses, families are
often unable to attend unit pre-deployment briefings. NMFA constantly
hears the frustrations family members experience when trying to access
information and understand their benefits. The lack of accurate benefit
information and unrelenting communication difficulties are common
themes among Guard and Reserve families.
DOD has developed several key initiatives that address the needs of
Guard and Reserve families. NMFA applauds this effort, but there is
still much to be done. For example, the OSD Reserve Affairs office
maintains an excellent website. Its Family Readiness Toolkit and
Deployment Guide provide practical information; however, many families
report it is difficult to use. Guard and Reserve families ask for
standardized materials that are appropriate to all services, so that if
an Army Reserve family happens to live close to a Navy installation
they would understand how to access services there. The establishment
of a joint Family Readiness program would facilitate the understanding
and sharing of information between all military family members.
NMFA thanks the state family readiness coordinators and unit
volunteers for helping to provide family members with basic
information. Unfortunately, some units do not have adequate programs
because of the lack of volunteers and paid family readiness
coordinators, whose sole job is to support the family. Additional
family readiness staffing and support for unit level volunteers could
ensure information is forwarded to families who are unable to attend
unit briefings. Guard and Reserve unit volunteers, even more than many
of their active duty counterparts, are stressed because of the numbers
of families they must assist and the demands placed upon them. At a
minimum, NMFA requests funding for child care to enable these dedicated
volunteers to more efficiently perform their expected tasks. Funding to
enable families to attend pre-deployment briefings would help
strengthen the ties between the units and the families and the families
with each other and assist in assuring that accurate information is
provided directly to the family members.
In addition to being geographically separated from the
servicemember's unit, families are often geographically separated from
each other. NMFA suggests that DOD also strengthen and perhaps
formalize partnerships with national organizations such as the American
Red Cross and U.S. Chamber of Commerce to enlist their assistance
through their local chapters in setting up community-based support
groups for military family members. The groups could include not only
spouses and significant others of all deployed members, no matter what
unit or Service the member is attached to, but also the parents of
servicemembers. Involving local community leaders in setting up these
support groups would address two of the most common concerns expressed
by some of these isolated families: the feeling that they are the only
families in town going through the strain of deployment, and the
sentiment that people not associated with the military do not
appreciate their sacrifices.
Through our contact with Guard and Reserve families and family
support personnel over the past year, NMFA has heard wonderful stories
of individual states, units and families caring for and supporting each
other. NMFA is aware of leadership involvement at all levels to help
ease the challenges faced by servicemembers and families. NMFA is
especially proud of the efforts of The National Committee for Employer
Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR) as an advocate for the reserve
component member facing employment issues. ESGR is encouraging
employers to set up their own family support programs and provides
information to employers and to their employees about the legal rights
of reserve component members. By providing this information in the
workplace, ESGR is helping civilian communities gain a better
understanding of the valuable role the Guard and Reserve play in the
defense of our nation.
Compensation issues continue to be of paramount concern among Guard
and Reserve families. Many members have taken a significant pay cut
upon activation. Families who initially financially prepared for a six
month activation now are faced with the devastating monetary
consequences of a one or two year loss in income. Some small business
owners and single practice professionals are facing the loss of their
businesses. NMFA is aware of the disaster the previous income
replacement program created, but believes that attention must be
directed to these problems or retention of these individuals may become
extremely problematic. In addition, some Guard and Reserve members
experienced problems with pay processing upon activation. This delay in
receiving the paycheck led to overdue payments on bills, and occasional
threats to foreclose on mortgages or to turn the family over to a
collection agency. Pay and personnel systems for activated Guard and
Reserve members must work in coordination so families do not have to
deal with bill collectors.
The cost of meeting unique family readiness needs for National
Guard and Reserve families must be calculated in Guard and Reserve
operational budgets and additional resources provided. DOD should
partner with other organizations and explore new means of communication
and support to geographically dispersed Guard and Reserve families.
Health Care
After a rocky start over several years, the TRICARE system is
providing most of the promised benefit for most families, particularly
those enrolled in Prime. Changes made in the Prime Remote program for
active duty families and ensuring access to Prime and Prime Remote for
the families of Guard and Reserve members, who have orders for 30 days
or more, have gone a long way to providing a truly uniform benefit for
all families of those on active duty.
NMFA is also pleased to report the continuation of the partnership
established between the DOD Office of Health Affairs, the TRICARE
Management Activity (TMA) and the beneficiary associations. This
collaboration benefits both beneficiaries and the Department. NMFA
appreciates the information received in these meetings and the
opportunity for dialogue with those responsible for managing DOD health
care policies and programs. Through this medium, NMFA and other
organizations have been able to raise areas of concern, provide
feedback on the implementation of new programs and benefits and to help
provide better information to beneficiaries about their health care
benefit.
However, despite these improvements, NMFA remains apprehensive
about several issues: funding, beneficiary access to health care, the
implementation of a new generation of TRICARE contracts and the ability
of National Guard and Reserve families to have reasonable access to
care and continuity of care.
Funding
The fiscal year 2004 budget request includes what DOD believes to
be an accurate level of funding for the Defense Health Program.
However, NMFA urges this Subcommittee to continue its efforts to ensure
full funding of the entire Defense Health Program, to include meeting
the needs for military readiness and of both the direct care and
purchased care segments of TRICARE. NMFA is particularly pleased with
the allocation of funds by TMA and the Services to support the new
Family Centered Obstetrical Care initiative. While the increased funds
for this program may well have been driven by the impending loss of
DOD's ability to force military family members to receive obstetrical
care in Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs), it has nonetheless been a
remarkable achievement. Many MTFs have instituted significant and
substantial improvements to their obstetrical programs and more are
constantly coming on line every day. NMFA assumes this initiative will
continue to be funded in a robust manner and hopes that the spirit of
Family Centered care, the innovations created by the program and the
funding provided will move into other specialties within the MTFs.
Access
Although recent TRICARE surveys highlight improvements in
beneficiary access to care, NMFA continues to field calls on almost a
daily basis from beneficiaries with access issues. Servicemembers and
families enrolled in Prime are promised certain standards for access to
care in providing appointments, wait times at a provider's office and
geographic availability. Yet the calls we receive tell another story.
Even servicemembers are told by the direct care system, ``Call back
next month, there are no more appointments this month.'' Family members
are routinely not informed that they can request an appointment with a
provider in the civilian sector if access standards cannot be met in
the direct care system. However, IF the member or family member
mentions the words, ``access standards,'' appointments that fall within
the guidelines magically appear. NMFA was also made aware that some in
the direct care system were telling family members that accepting
appointments outside of the access standards was a way for them to
``support the war in Iraq'' since medical personnel from the facility
had been deployed. TRICARE was designed so that care could be provided
in a timely manner within the civilian network when it was not
available in the direct care system. There is no reason, including the
deployment of medical personnel, that access standards should not
always be met.
When family members enrolled in Prime attempt to access care within
the civilian network they utilize the Managed Care Support Contractors
web pages or the Prime Booklet's list of providers. However, they often
feel as if they are ``letting their fingers walk through the yellow
pages,'' as they hear, telephone call after telephone call, ``The
doctor is not accepting any new TRICARE Prime patients.'' Lists of
providers must show who is and who is not accepting new patients. This
information is of prime importance to families arriving at a new duty
station. To their credit some, but not all, of the Managed Care Support
Contractors are providing this information.
As TRICARE Prime has improved, those who have remained in TRICARE
Standard often feel as if they are unwanted stepchildren. Managed Care
Support Contractors are required in the current contracts to assist
Standard beneficiaries in finding a provider who accepts TRICARE.
However, most Standard beneficiaries are not aware of this provision,
because no one is required to communicate with them. When new Managed
Care Support contracts came on line, contractors mailed brochures to
all eligible beneficiary households, but other than giving basic
information on the various choices with the TRICARE program, the
information was basically geared to enrollment in Prime. Contractors
are required to communicate regularly with Prime enrollees, but not
with Standard beneficiaries. In fact, most of the literature regarding
Standard states that it is the same as the old CHAMPUS program. No
mention is made of prior authorizations, which vary from Region to
Region, or of other region specific ``rules of the road.''
In many areas Standard beneficiaries have more difficulty than
Prime enrollees in finding providers. While Standard beneficiaries can
certainly utilize Prime network providers (if they know where to find
such a list), many have remained in Standard because there is no Prime
network where they live or they have elected to have a broader choice
of providers. Managed Care Support Contractors on the other hand are,
understandably, more interested in establishing and maintaining their
Prime networks. Anecdotal evidence provided to NMFA appears to indicate
that many providers are unaware that they may remain TRICARE providers
even if they decline to become Prime network providers. In addition,
many providers also complain of the ``new rules of the road'' on prior
authorizations and paper work, which were not required when they were
CHAMPUS providers. Low reimbursement rates and claims processing
continue to be cited by providers as reasons they do not seek to become
authorized TRICARE providers.
TRICARE Standard is an option in the TRICARE program and those who
are forced or desire to use that option should be supported as fully as
those who chose to enroll in Prime. Contractors must make significant
efforts to recruit Standard providers.
DOD and the contractors must be ever vigilant in identifying areas
where sufficient numbers of providers in certain specialties refuse to
accept TRICARE because of the reimbursement rates. DOD has the
authority (and has used it in Alaska and recently in Idaho) to increase
reimbursement rates to ensure a proper mix and number of providers.
Contractors must continue their strong effort to improve claims
processing and education of providers and their support staffs on the
unique requirements of the TRICARE claims process.
TNEX and other contracts
The next round of TRICARE Contracts (TNEX) would appear to place
significantly new levels of authority and responsibility on local MTF
Commanders. NMFA is concerned that this may actually increase the
differences in how a beneficiary accesses care rather than make it more
uniform. Currently, Managed Care Support Contractors in some Regions
have total responsibility for making appointments, and in all Regions
they have the responsibility for making appointments within the
civilian network. The new contracts would appear to leave this
responsibility to the local MTF Commander, either to arrange all of the
appointments or to opt into an as yet unknown national appointment
contract. All current Managed Care Support Contractors are required to
have a health information line. The new contracts leave the decision to
have one and/or which one to have up to the local MTF Commander.
TNEX also appears to blur lines of authority and accountability
rather than strengthening them. Beneficiaries need a clear line of
command and accountability for their problems with accessing care to be
fixed and for their concerns about quality of care to be appropriately
addressed.
If changes are made in how beneficiaries access care from the
current method, beneficiaries need to be educated and informed BEFORE
the fact.
Beneficiaries may not only face new ways of accessing care, but new
``rules of the road'' as a national contract is awarded for the retail
pharmacy benefit. The implementation of the new TRICARE mail order
pharmacy program contract (TMOP) was not without some significant
problems. Fortunately, most were transitory and have been or are being
addressed. However, a problem facing some beneficiaries could have been
avoided with proper education and information. TMOP is now tied into
both the retail pharmacies and the MTF pharmacies, so all pharmacy
providers are aware of prescriptions being filled at all other venues
in real time. Under the previous contractor such real time checking was
not done. If a provider ordered a new medication for a beneficiary and
wanted the medication started immediately, yet the beneficiary was to
be on the medication for a long time, the beneficiary probably used
both the retail and mail order pharmacy on the same or similar dates.
Under TMOP the mail order request of the beneficiary will be denied
until 75 percent of the retail prescription is consumed. This is not a
problem with receiving the medication in a timely manner, nor is it a
new DOD regulation, but it was a new wrinkle to beneficiaries that
caused concern and could have been avoided.
Guard and Reserve Health Care
While the ``rules of the road'' for using TRICARE, particularly
Prime, seem now to be well understood by most active duty and retired
family members, it is another story for National Guard and Reserve
families. Since many of these families do not live near an
installation, most of their information comes in printed form, on the
web or via telephone. In addition, many live in areas where providers
are unaware of TRICARE, as there are few if any other uniformed service
beneficiaries in the area. Lead Agents and TRICARE contractors
routinely conduct TRICARE briefings for members of units about to
mobilize; unfortunately, in most cases, families (those who will
actually have to navigate the system) live too far away to attend. If
the servicemember and family live in a different TRICARE Region from
the one where the unit is located, the information provided in the unit
setting may not be the same for the Region in which the family actually
lives. Decisions to enroll in Prime, use Standard or remain with an
employer provided plan need to be family decisions based on full and
accurate information provided to servicemembers AND their families.
NMFA has long believed that the approach to meeting the health care
needs of Guard and Reserve members and their families must be flexible
enough to ensure access to care and continuity of care. We believe S.
852, recently introduced by Senators DeWine, Daschle, Smith and Leahy,
addresses most of these issues. Provisions included in the legislation
would authorize Guard and Reserve members to enroll in TRICARE when not
on active duty and subsidize the cost of the program at approximately
the same level as the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP)
is for Federal Civilians. This would allow those who currently have no
insurance in civilian life to have access to an affordable program and
would provide continuity in both program and care when the member is
activated. Alternatively, the legislation would authorize DOD to pay
the premiums of an employer provided private sector plan up to the
level of what TRICARE would cost DOD if it were provided to the member
and his/her family. This would allow those with civilian provided
coverage to continue with their current plan and providers.
Funding must be adequate to meet readiness needs, provide for both
the purchased care segment of TRICARE and the direct care system to
include the Family Centered Obstetrical Care initiative. Access
standards were part of the promise DOD made to families when they
enrolled in TRICARE Prime. These access standards must be met either in
the MTF or the civilian network. Civilian networks must be robust
enough to support MTFs in meeting the access standards. Recruitment of
TRICARE Standard providers and education of Standard beneficiaries
should be as much a part of the TRICARE program as are these endeavors
for Prime providers and enrollees. The new round of contracts must
provide standardized ways to access health care across all Regions and
beneficiaries should have a clear picture of who can solve their access
problems and quality of care concerns. Families of Guard and Reserve
members should have flexible options for their health care coverage
that address both access to care and continuity of care. In addition,
accurate and timely information on their options and such things as
transitional health care must be provided to the families as well as
the servicemember.
NMFA thanks this Subcommittee and Congress for your advocacy for
pay and benefit improvements necessary to retain the quality force that
now protects our homeland and wages war against terror. Your actions
have helped to rebuild military members' trust and to ease the crisis
in recruiting and retention. We ask you to remember that mission
readiness is tied to servicemember readiness, which is tied to family
readiness. The stability of the military family and community and their
support for the forces rests on the Nation's continued focus on the
entire package of quality of life components. Military members and
their families look to you for continued support for that quality of
life. Please don't let them down.
Senator Stevens. Thank you for your patience, Doctor.
Yes, sir.
STATEMENT OF STEVEN ELLIOT KOONIN, Ph.D., PROVOST AND
PROFESSOR OF THEORETICAL PHYSICS,
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY; ON
BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN
UNIVERSITIES AND THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF STATE UNIVERSITIES AND LAND-GRANT
COLLEGES
Dr. Koonin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a pleasure to be
able to testify to you today. I am Steven Koonin. I am the
Provost and a professor of theoretical physics at the
California Institute of Technology. I am also a former member
of the Defense Science Board, on which I served for 4 years. My
remarks today are on behalf of the Association of American
Universities, which represents 60 of America's most prominent
public and private research universities. My testimony is also
submitted on behalf of the National Association of State
Universities and Land Grant Colleges. Together these two
associations include public and private universities and
colleges in every State that perform the science and technology
research funded by the DOD.
DOD is the third largest Federal sponsor of university-
based research. Nearly 350 universities and colleges conduct
DOD-funded research and development. Universities play the
largest role in basic defense research, receiving more than 53
percent of 6.1 funding. They also receive substantial funding
for applied defense research under the 6.2 program element.
With that background, I would like to bring to your
attention two issues important to universities related to the
fiscal year 2004 budget proposal for defense spending. The
first of these is to urge your support for an appropriation of
$11.4 billion, or 3 percent of the overall fiscal year 2004
budget proposed for DOD science and technology programs. This
request is consistent with recommendations contained in the
Quadrennial Defense Report and are made by the Defense Science
Board (DSB) as well as experts such as Mr. Pete Aldridge. All
of these have called for a DOD S&T budget that reflects 3
percent of the overall DOD budget.
Within defense S&T, the organizations I am representing
also request that $2.3 billion be appropriated for 6.1 research
and $4.6 billion be appropriated for competitive merit-based
6.2 research. There is growing concern that, while funding for
overall defense S&T has been increasing in recent years, much
of this growth has been in the 6.3 account, with much less
growth in the 6.1 and 6.2 accounts.
In fact, if one looks closely at the trends over the past
20 years, 6.1 funding has declined in constant dollars and has
significantly decreased as a share of total S&T, from over 20
percent in fiscal year 1983 to approximately 14 percent
currently. We encourage the committee to reverse this downward
trend in investments in the basic ideas that are going to lead
to tomorrow's advances in defense technology.
The second matter that I would like to bring to your
attention concerns the administration's budget proposal to
transfer funding or to devolve certain critical joint multi-
disciplinary DOD S&T programs, including the University
Research Initiative, from the Office of the Secretary of
Defense to the services. This proposed devolvement is a matter
over which our universities have great concerns. Such a move
could damage the unique nature and design of these programs and
could inhibit the types of cross-service integration and
coordination of S&T research that these programs have been
specifically designed to promote.
We are also concerned that, if moved out of the Office of
the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and into the services, the
services could direct these funds to service-oriented needs
rather than to the broader long-term research needs that cut
across the services. For these reasons, we urge your
subcommittee to consider carefully the implications of
devolvement of S&T programs from the OSD.
Let me conclude by thanking the committee, the
subcommittee, for its ongoing support of defense S&T. We hope
that you will continue the progress that has been made in the
past few years in supporting the critical S&T programs that
make such an important contribution to our national security.
Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, Doctor. We do support
very strongly the university research. The other item you
mentioned, though, is the Armed Services Committee. I hope you
are taking that message to them. That is a legislative
recommendation.
Dr. Koonin. Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Thank you for your testimony.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. Steven Elliot Koonin
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee: Thank you for the
opportunity to testify today. My name is Steven Koonin, and I am the
Provost and a Professor of Theoretical Physics at the California
Institute of Technology. I am also a former member of the Defense
Science Board (DSB) where I served for four years.
My remarks today are submitted on behalf of the Association of
American Universities (AAU), which represents 60 of America's most
prominent public and private research universities. This testimony is
also submitted on behalf of the National Association of State
Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC). These two associations
include public and private universities and colleges in every state
that perform the science and technology research that is funded by the
Department of Defense.
I want to specifically thank this subcommittee and you, Mr.
Chairman, for the ongoing support that you have shown for science and
technology research programs in the Department of Defense. As you know,
basic and applied research are funded under program elements 6.1 and
6.2 in the Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation (RDT&E)
section of the Department of Defense appropriation. The Army, Navy, Air
Force and the ``Defense-wide'' account under the Office of the
Secretary all receive separate appropriations for these programs.
Why do universities care about Defense Science and Technology
(S&T)? Today, DOD is the third largest federal sponsor of university-
based research (after the National Institutes of Health and the
National Science Foundation). Nearly 350 universities and colleges
conduct DOD-funded research and development. Universities play the
largest role in basic defense research, receiving more than 53 percent
of program element 6.1 funding. They also receive substantial funding
for applied defense research provided under program element 6.2.
With this as background, I would like to bring to your attention
two issues of importance to universities related to the fiscal year
2004 budget proposal for the defense spending. These are: (1) continued
growth in support for DOD Science and Technology (S&T) Programs, with
particular emphasis on basic 6.1 and applied 6.2 research, and (2)
concerns the university community has related to the proposed
``devolvement'' of certain S&T programs from the Office of the
Secretary of Defense (OSD) to the individual services.
Increasing Support for Defense Basic and Applied Research
On behalf of the AAU and NASULGC, I urge your support for an
appropriation of $11.4 billion, or 3 percent of the overall fiscal year
2004 Budget proposed for the Department of Defense (DOD) for science
and technology (S&T) programs (6.1 basic research, 6.2 applied
research, and 6.3 advanced technology development) in the Army, Navy,
Air Force, and Defense-Wide. This request is consistent with
recommendations contained in the Quadrennial Defense Report and made by
the Defense Science Board (DSB), as well as experts such as Pete
Aldridge, Under Secretary Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics, who
have all called for a DOD S&T budget that reflects 3 percent of the
overall DOD budget.
Within defense S&T, the AAU and NASULGC request that $2.3 billion
be appropriated for 6.1 basic research and $4.6 billion be appropriated
for competitive merit based 6.2 applied research. There is growing
concern that while funding for overall Defense S&T has been increasing
in recent years, much of this growth has been in the 6.3 account with
much less growth in 6.1 basic research and 6.2 applied research. In
fact, if one looks closely at the trends, over the last 20 years
funding for 6.1 basic research has declined in constant dollars and has
significantly decreased as a share of total S&T (from over 20 percent
in fiscal year 1983 to approximately 14 percent in fiscal year 2003
(See Attachments #1 and #2). We encourage the Committee to reverse this
downward trend in investments in the basic ideas that are going to lead
to tomorrow's advances in defense technology.
I need not tell the members of this subcommittee that successful
U.S. national defense policy is critically dependent on technological
superiority. New dangers, such as high technology terrorism,
information warfare, and the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction, now face the military and require new and more
sophisticated technologies. The knowledge required to generate these
technologies is dependent upon the long-term, high-risk, defense
oriented fundamental research that is conducted at U.S. universities.
Through their research, university-based scientists and engineers
are helping to prepare the U.S. military to be ready for the new
threats it faces in the 21st century, including nuclear, chemical,
biological, and other asymmetric threats such as terrorism and cyber
attacks. Past university-based basic and applied research discoveries
that have made major contributions to the nation's military and defense
efforts include inertial navigation, radar, the global positioning
system (GPS), precision guidance, advanced materials, and reduced radar
cross-section technology.
Indeed, the DOD's past investments in basic and applied research
helped the U.S. military to rewrite the rules of war in Afghanistan and
Iraq, with new technologies such as advanced laser-guided and precision
weapons, the Predator Unmanned Aerial Vehicle that circles and watches
for enemy activity, and the Rapid Multilingual Support Device that
helps to issue instructions and orders in targeted languages. These
investments were also critical in the development of the thermobaric
bomb that was rushed into use against al Queda and Taliban forces holed
up in Afghanistan's mountains and caves. Because of the past
investments made in basic and applied research, this weapon could be
developed and successfully deployed in only 67 days.
In addition to supporting new technologies, DOD's investment in
basic and applied research also plays a critical role in advancing
knowledge and in supporting and training a cadre of defense oriented
scientists and engineers that work not only at our universities, but
also in industry and the DOD's own national laboratories. DOD research
also provides students with hands-on research training experiences,
ensuring that we will have a long lasting supply of highly qualified
scientists and engineers to go on to work in academia, industry, and
federal laboratories in the future.
Finally, DOD sponsored university research is concentrated in
fields where advances are most likely to contribute to national
defense. DOD accounts for 70 percent of federal funding for university
electrical engineering, 40 percent of computer sciences funding, 41
percent of metallurgy/materials engineering funding, and 29 percent of
ocean sciences funding. DOD also sponsors fellowships and provides a
significant amount of support for graduate students in critical defense
fields such as computer science and aerospace and electrical
engineering (See Attachment#3 for an illustration of the amount of
research support that DOD provides to key engineering sub-disciplines).
Concerns Regarding the Proposed Devolvement of DOD S&T Programs
The second matter that I would like to bring to your attention
concerns the Administration's budget proposal to transfer funding, or
``devolve,'' certain critical, joint, and multidisciplinary DOD S&T
Programs--including the University Research Initiative (URI)--from the
Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to the services.
The proposed devolvement of S&T programs is a matter over which our
universities have great concerns. Specifically, such a move could
damage the unique nature and design of these programs and could inhibit
the types of cross-service integration and coordination of S&T research
that these programs have been specifically designed to promote. We are
also concerned that if moved out of OSD, and into the services, that
the services could direct these funds to service-oriented needs rather
than to the broader, long-term research needs that cut across the
services. For these reasons, we urge your subcommittee to consider the
implications of devolvement of S&T programs for the OSD.
The advantage that these S&T programs have enjoyed by being housed
within the OSD is that they have been insolated from the short-term
strategic demands that so often drive spending within the individual
services. As a result, they have able to maintain their focus on the
long-term S&T needs of the entire DOD. Moreover, because the services
have competed with each other for funding from OSD for programs such as
the URI, it has been ensured that the service most capable of meeting
the DOD's long-term S&T needs was, in fact, awarded the funding.
Programs such as the URI, from which researchers at Cal Tech and
many public and private academic institutions have received funding,
were specifically designed to support the development of new knowledge
and to build a critical mass of experts to address long-term defense
research needs that transcend the specific and immediate interests of
the individual services.
As a result, URI has been able to successfully support exciting new
advances in critical strategic research to the DOD in areas such as
nanoscience, smart materials and structures, information technology,
human centered systems, synthetic materials and processes, and compact
power systems. Over the past five years, funding provided by the URI
program has supported 859 graduate fellowships, 1,131 instrumentation
projects, and 166 new awards to research teams from institutions
located in most every state in the nation.
The university community believes that these programs, and the
goals for which they were established, have been well served by being
housed within OSD. To ensure that these programs meet their stated
objectives and best ensure that they continue to provide the knowledge
required to properly equip, train and protect the soldiers, sailors,
airmen and marines of the future, we ask that the subcommittee take a
serious look at the implication of devolving these programs to the
services.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, let me again thank the subcommittee for its ongoing
support of Defense S&T. We hope that you will continue the progress
that has been made in the past few years in support for the critical
S&T programs which make such an important contribution to our national
security.
Thank you again for permitting me to testify today.
[Attachment 1]
[Attachment 2]
[Attachment 3]
Senator Stevens. George Dahlman, Vice President for Public
Policy of the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, please.
STATEMENT OF GEORGE DAHLMAN, VICE PRESIDENT, PUBLIC
POLICY, THE LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA SOCIETY
Mr. Dahlman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity
to testify before you on behalf of the Leukemia and Lymphoma
Society. During its 53-year history, the society has been
dedicated to finding a cure for the blood cancers, the
leukemias, lymphomas, and multiple myeloma. A great deal of
progress has been made in the treatment of blood cancers and
over the last 2 decades there have been impressive strides in
the treatment and particularly in lymphoma and in childhood
leukemia.
But despite these advances, they pose a continuing risk to
Americans. In 2003 more than 100,000 will be diagnosed with a
blood-related cancer. Almost 700,000 Americans are currently
living with a blood cancer and some 60,000 this year will die
from them. Taken together, the blood cancers are fifth among
cancers in incidence and second in mortality.
Why are these diseases important to the Department of
Defense? They are important for a couple of reasons. First,
research on blood-related cancers has special relevance to the
Armed Forces because these are the cancers that appear among
individuals with chemical and nuclear exposure. Higher
incidences of leukemia have long been substantiated in extreme
nuclear incidents in both military and civilian populations and
recent studies have proven that individuals exposed to chemical
agents like Agent Orange in the Vietnam War cause an increased
risk of lymphoid malignancies.
As a matter of fact, a recent report by the Institute of
Medicine found that Agent Orange is also connected to chronic
lymphocytic leukemia, CLL, and the VA is now covering veterans
with that disease. So the Vietnam era defoliant itself is
credited with causing lymphomas, chronic myelogenous leukemia,
as well as CLL.
Consequently, in the current environment DOD medical
research needs to focus on the broader area of blood cancer
research as it affects our military and domestic preparedness.
Soldiers in the field, the domestic first response personnel,
and the civilian population all face blood cancer risks from
chemical or nuclear exposures. And as our Nation is
contemplating the threat of biological, chemical, or nuclear
terrorism, we need to better understand and prepare for the
malignancies that would inevitably result from these events.
Secondly, research into blood cancers, as has been
mentioned by colleagues, has traditionally pioneered treatments
in other cancers. Chemotherapy and bone marrow transplants are
two striking examples of treatments that were first developed
in the blood cancers and now are applied to other malignancies.
Their relevance and the opportunity was recognized over the
last 2 years when Congress appropriated $9.25 million for a
program of chronic myelogenous leukemia through the
congressionally-directed medical research program.
Since that program was launched, 11 proposals have been
recommended for funding and the quality of the proposals has
been rated very high and that there is more room for additional
research with more funding.
Unfortunately, $9.25 million does not go very far in
medical research and, recognizing that, a bipartisan group of
Members of Congress have requested that the program funding be
increased to $25 million and that the program be expanded to
all the blood cancers, the leukemias, the lymphomas, and
myelomas, and that it provide the research community with the
flexibility to build on this pioneering field.
DOD research on the other forms of blood-related cancer
addresses the importance of preparing for civilian and military
exposure to the weapons being developed by hostile nations and
to aid in the research for more effective treatment for all who
suffer from these diseases.
I would like to conclude by saying that the Leukemia and
Lymphoma Society, along with our partners the Lymphoma Research
Foundation and the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation,
strongly endorses and enthusiastically supports and
respectfully urges the committee to include funding of $25
million in the fiscal year 2004 defense appropriations bill.
Thank you very much.
Senator Stevens. Well, thank you very much. I am sure you
know we try our best on those diseases that you mentioned, and
we will again do our best.
Mr. Dahlman. Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of George Dahlman
Introduction
I am pleased to appear before the Subcommittee today and testify on
behalf of The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (LLS).
During its 53-year history, the Society has been dedicated to
finding a cure for the blood cancers--leukemia, lymphoma, and myeloma.
The Society has the distinction of being both the largest private
organization dedicated to blood-related cancers and the nation's second
largest private cancer organization.
Our central contribution to the search for a cure is providing a
significant amount of the funding for basic and translational research
in the blood cancers. In 2003, we will provide almost $40 million in
research grants. In addition to our role funding research, we provide a
wide range of services to individuals with the blood cancers, their
caregivers, families, and friends through our 60 chapters across the
country. Finally, we advocate responsible public policies that will
advance our mission of finding a cure for the blood cancers.
We are pleased to report that impressive progress is being made in
the treatment of many blood cancers. Over the last two decades, there
have been steady and impressive strides in the treatment of the most
common form of childhood leukemia, and the survival rate for that form
of leukemia has improved dramatically.
And two years ago, a new therapy was approved for chronic
myelogenous leukemia, a form of leukemia for which there were
previously limited treatment options, all with serious side-effects.
Let me say that more clearly, if three years ago your doctor told you
that you had CML, you would have been informed that there were limited
treatment options and that you should get your affairs in order. Today,
those same patients have access to this new therapy, called Gleevec,
which is a so-called targeted therapy that corrects the molecular
defect that causes the disease, and does so with few side effects.
The LLS funded the early research on Gleevec, as it has contributed
to research on a number of new therapies. We are pleased that we played
a role in the development of this life-saving therapy, but we realize
that our mission is far from complete. Many forms of leukemia, lymphoma
and myeloma present daunting treatment challenges. There is much work
still to be done, and we believe the research partnership between the
public and private sectors--as represented in many of the Pentagon
research programs--is an integral part of that effort and should be
strengthened.
The Grant Programs of The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society
The grant programs of the Society are in three broad categories:
Career Development Grants, Translational Research Grants for early-
stage support for clinical research, and Specialized Centers of
Research. In our Career Development program, we fund Scholars, Special
Fellows, and Fellows who are pursuing careers in basic or clinical
research. In our Translational Research Program, we focus on supporting
investigators whose objective is to translate basic research
discoveries into new therapies.
The work of Dr. Brian Druker, an oncologist at Oregon Health
Sciences University and the chief investigator on Gleevec, was
supported by a translational research grant from the Society. Dr.
Druker is certainly a star among those supported by the LLS, but our
support in this field is broad and deep. Through the Career Development
and Translational Research Programs, we are currently supporting more
than 400 investigators in 33 States and ten foreign countries.
Our new Specialized Centers of Research grant program (SCOR) is
intended to bring together research teams focused on the discovery of
innovative approaches to benefit patients or those at risk of
developing leukemia, lymphoma, or myeloma. The awards will go to those
groups that can demonstrate that their close interaction will create
research synergy and accelerate our search for new therapies,
prevention, or cures.
Impact of Hematological Cancers
Despite enhancements in treating blood cancers, there are still
significant research opportunities and challenges. Hematological, or
blood-related, cancers pose a serious health risk to all Americans.
These cancers are actually a large number of diseases of varied causes
and molecular make-up, and with different treatments, that strike men
and women of all ages. In 2003, more than 100,000 Americans will be
diagnosed with a form of blood-related cancer and over 60,000 will die
from these cancers. For some, treatment may lead to long-term remission
and cure; for others these are chronic diseases that will require
treatments on several occasions; and for others treatment options are
extremely limited. For many, recurring disease will be a continual
threat to a productive and secure life.
A few focused points to put this in perspective:
--Taken together, the hematological cancers are fifth among cancers
in incidence and second in mortality.
--Almost 700,000 Americans are living with a hematological malignancy
in 2003.
--More than 60,000 people will die from hematological cancers in
2003, compared to 40,000 from breast cancer, 30,200 from
prostate cancer, and 56,000 from colorectal cancer.
--Blood-related cancers still represent serious treatment challenges.
The improved survival for those diagnosed with all types of
hematological cancers has been uneven. The five-year survival
rates are:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hodgkin's disease............................................ 83
Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma....................................... 53
Leukemias (total)............................................ 45
Multiple Myeloma............................................. 29
Acute Myelogenous Leukemia................................... 14
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Individuals who have been treated for leukemia, lymphoma, and
myeloma may suffer serious adverse events of treatment,
including second malignancies, organ dysfunction (cardiac,
pulmonary, and endocrine), neuropsychological and psychosocial
aspects, and quality of life.
Trends
Since the early 1970s, incidence rates for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma
(NHL) have nearly doubled.
For the period from 1973 to 1998, the death rate for non-Hodgkin's
lymphoma increased by 45 percent, and the death rate for multiple
myeloma increased by more than 32 percent. These increases occurred
during a time period when death rates for most other cancers are
dropping.
Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma rank second and fifth,
respectively, in terms of increased cancer mortality since 1973.
Recent statistics indicate both increasing incidence and earlier
age of onset for multiple myeloma.
Multiple myeloma is one of the top ten leading causes of cancer
death among African Americans.
Despite the significant decline in the leukemia death rate for
children in the United States, leukemia is still one of the two most
common diseases that cause death in children in the United States.
Lymphoma is the third most common childhood cancer.
Causes of Hematological Cancers
The causes of hematological cancers are varied, and our
understanding of the etiology of leukemia, lymphoma, and myeloma is
limited. Chemicals in pesticides and herbicides, as well as viruses
such as HIV and EBV, play a role in some hematological cancers, but for
most cases, no cause is identified. Researchers have recently published
a study reporting that the viral footprint for simian virus 40 (SV40)
was found in the tumors of 43 percent of NHL patients. These research
findings may open avenues for investigation of the detection,
prevention, and treatment of NHL. There is a pressing need for more
investigation of the role of infectious agents or environmental toxins
in the initiation or progression of these diseases.
Importance To The Department of Defense
The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society believes this type of medical
research is particularly important to the Department of Defense for a
number of reasons.
First, research on blood-related cancers has significant relevance
to the armed forces, as the incidence of these cancers is substantially
higher among individuals with chemical and nuclear exposure. Higher
incidences of leukemia have long been substantiated in extreme nuclear
incidents in both military and civilian populations, and recent studies
have proven that individual exposure to chemical agents, such as Agent
Orange in the Vietnam War, cause an increased risk of contracting
lymphoid malignancies. In addition, bone marrow transplants were first
explored as a means of treating radiation-exposed combatants and
civilians following World War II.
The connection of blood cancers to military exposures was further
illustrated in a recent report by the Institute of Medicine, finding
that Agent Orange exposure is connected to cases of chronic lymphocitic
leukemia (CLL). Immediately after the determination, the Veterans
Administration announced that it will cover the medical expenses of
veterans with CLL. The Vietnam-era defoliant is now credited with
causing lymphomas, chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) as well as CLL.
Consequently, in the current environment DOD medical research needs
to also focus on the broader area of blood cancer research as it
affects our military and domestic preparedness. Soldiers in the field,
domestic first-response personnel, and the civilian population all face
blood cancer risks from chemical or nuclear exposures, such as a
``dirty bomb.'' Higher incidences of leukemia have long been
substantiated in extreme nuclear incidents in both military and
civilian populations. As our nation is contemplating the threat of
biological, chemical or nuclear terrorism, we need better understanding
of, and preparation for, the hematological malignancies that would
inevitably result from such events.
Secondly, additional funding would expedite the cure for other
cancers. Research in the blood cancers has traditionally pioneered
treatments in other malignancies. This research frequently represents
the leading edge in cancer treatments that are later applied to other
forms of cancer. Chemotherapy and bone marrow transplants are two
striking examples of treatments first developed in the blood cancers.
From a medical research perspective, it is a particularly promising
time to build a DOD research effort focused on blood-related cancers.
That relevance and opportunity were recognized over the last two years
when Congress appropriated a total of $9.25 million to begin initial
research into chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) through the
Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP). As members
of the Subcommittee know, a noteworthy and admirable distinction of the
CDMRP is its cooperative and collaborative process that incorporates
the experience and expertise of a broad range of patients, researchers
and physicians in the field. Since the CML program was launched, eleven
proposals were recommended for funding. The review panel found the
overall quality of the proposals was high and quality research from
this CMLRP would benefit from additional funding. Additionally,
innovative projects that have a high probability of finding new targets
for the development of future therapies and new medicines to treat CML
were recommended for funding.
Unfortunately, $9.25 million does not go very far in medical
research. Recognizing that fact and the opportunity this research
represents, bipartisan members of Congress have requested that the
program be modestly increased to $25 million and be expanded to include
all the blood cancers--the leukemias, lymphomas and myeloma. This would
provide the research community with the flexibility to build on the
pioneering tradition that has characterized this field.
DOD research on the other forms of blood-related cancer addresses
the importance of preparing for civilian and military exposure to the
weapons being developed by several hostile nations and to aid in the
march to more effective treatment for all who suffer from these
diseases. This request clearly has merit for inclusion in the fiscal
year 2004 legislation.
The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society strongly endorses and
enthusiastically supports this effort and respectfully urges the
Committee to include this funding in the fiscal year 2004 Defense
Appropriations bill.
We believe that building on the foundation Congress initiated over
the last two years would both significantly strengthen the CDMRP and
accelerate the development of cancer treatments. As history has
demonstrated, expanding its focus into areas that demonstrate great
promise; namely the blood-related cancers of leukemia, lymphoma and
myeloma, would substantially aid the overall cancer research effort and
yield great dividends.
Senator Stevens. Joan Goldberg, National Coalition for
Osteoporosis and Bone Diseases. Good morning.
STATEMENT OF JOAN GOLDBERG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR BONE AND MINERAL
RESEARCH; ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL
COALITION FOR OSTEOPOROSIS AND RELATED BONE
DISEASES
Ms. Goldberg. Good morning. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am
representing the American Society for Bone and Mineral
Research, also the National Coalition for Osteoporosis and
Related Bone Diseases, which includes the National Osteoporosis
Foundation, the Pagett Foundation, and Osteogenesis Imperfecta,
as well as my own society. Together we represent over 44
million Americans who have bone diseases or are at risk for
them, along with more than 5,000 scientists dedicated to
improving the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and
understanding of bone diseases and disorders.
Bone health, as you know, is integral to overall health.
Our bones support our muscles, protect our vital organs, and
store the calcium that is essential for bone density or mass,
end strength. What makes bones healthy? It is a complex
interaction involving many nutritional, hormonal, behavioral,
genetic, and environmental factors--what we eat and drink, the
type and duration of our exercise, our family history. These
are some of the pieces of the puzzle that fit together when we
address bone health.
Bone health is a critical component to consider when
evaluating military readiness and performance. Why is bone
health so critical to our military? Stress fractures occur in
up to 15 percent of military recruits. Stress fractures are
most common in legs and feet, but they also occur in the ribs
and upper extremities. For healing to occur, recruits need to
rest for approximately 3 months. Not only do these fractures
delay military readiness and performance, but they represent a
high cost, over $10 million a year.
Our recent engagement in Iraq highlights some additional
considerations when it comes to bone health. For example,
soldiers routinely carried packs that weighed 70 to 90 pounds
over rough terrain for miles on end in often a harsh climate.
For many, a fracture could spell an exit from the combat
theater as quickly as a shrapnel injury.
It is vitally important to understand how to prevent stress
fractures in recruits and in combat to reduce suffering,
minimize the time it takes to ready soldiers for combat, and to
prevent fractures in training situations and in combat, to
reduce the significant costs associated with the fractures.
The DOD has learned a great deal from research to improve
soldiers' bone health, but there is much more to be learned.
Recent research has examined the effects of impact forces such
as running and gait pattern on bone formation and strength. We
have also looked at the effect of specific nutritional regimens
and the effects of weight management behaviors. Ongoing
research is helping us to address the role and the effect of
non-steroidal inflammatory medication such as ibuprofen on bone
health and performance, the role of nutrition on bone quality,
the role of electrical fields to speed bone repair, the role of
new diagnostic tools.
But additional topics are also critical to our
understanding and to recruits' military health. They include
novel approaches, such as the possible use of low frequencies
to build high-quality bone, the exploration of how different
types of physical training affect bone at the cellular level,
and investigations aimed at identifying the best training and
nutritional regimens in terms of exercise type and duration,
intensity, and nutrient amounts of vitamin D, of protein,
etcetera, to optimize fitness, bone health, and prevent injury.
Mr. Chairman, stress fractures compromise the health,
military readiness, and performance of our recruits and our
troops. A strong, well-trained military proved to be crucial on
Iraq and will continue to be a vital component of our future.
We thank you for maintaining the 2003 funding for the bone
health and military readiness program. We also know there are
many worthy projects in need of funding, especially in the
Army's bone health and military medical readiness program.
Without additional support, not only are these in jeopardy, but
so are our future results that will save money, prevent
additional fractures, and further healing.
We respectfully request that you consider a $10 million
appropriation for fiscal year 2004 to help maintain an
aggressive and sustained bone research program. Thank you for
your commitment to the military's health and safety and thank
you for your attention and consideration.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much. Again, we will do our
best. That is an area of great interest to the committee. Thank
you.
Ms. Goldberg. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joan Goldberg
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, this testimony is
submitted by Joan Goldberg, Executive Director of the American Society
for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR), representing the National
Coalition for Osteoporosis and Related Bone Diseases, which includes
the National Osteoporosis Foundation, the Paget Foundation for Paget's
Disease of Bone and Related Disorders, the Osteogenesis Imperfecta
Foundation, and the ASBMR.
Together we represent over 44 million Americans who have bone
diseases or are at risk for them, along with the more than 5,000
scientists dedicated to improving the diagnosis, treatment and
understanding of bone diseases and disorders.
Bone health is integral to overall health. Our bones support our
muscles, protect vital organs, and store the calcium essential for bone
density or mass, and strength. What makes bones healthy? It's a complex
interaction involving many nutritional, hormonal, behavioral, genetic
and environmental factors. What we eat and drink, the type and duration
of our exercise, our family history--these are some of the pieces of
the puzzle that fit together when addressing bone health.
Bone health is a critical component to consider when evaluating
military readiness and performance. Why is bone health so critical to
our military? Stress fractures occur in up to 15 percent of military
recruits. Stress fractures are most common in the legs and feet, but
also occur in the ribs and upper extremities. For healing to occur,
recruits often need to stop running or marching for weeks. Not only do
these fractures delay military readiness and performance, but they
represent a cost of over $10 million per year. Our recent engagement in
Iraq highlights some additional considerations when it comes to bone
health. For example, soldiers routinely carried packs that weighed 70-
90 pounds over rough terrain for miles on end in a harsh climate. For
many, a fracture often spelled an exit from the combat theater as
quickly as a shrapnel injury.
It is vitally important to understand how to prevent stress
fractures in recruits and in combat to reduce suffering, minimize the
time it takes to ready soldiers for combat, prevent fractures in
training situations and in combat, and reduce the significant costs
associated with these fractures.
The DOD has learned a great deal from research to improve soldiers'
bone health, but there is more to be learned. Recent research has
investigated: the effects of impact forces, such as running, on bone
formation; the effect of specific nutritional regimens on bone health;
and the effects of weight management behaviors on bone health.
Ongoing research will help address: the role of and effect of non-
steroidal inflammatory medications on bone health and performance; the
role of remodeling and nutrition on bone quality; the role of
electrical fields to speed bone repair; and the role of new diagnostic
tools.
Additional topics critical to our understanding and our recruits'
military health include: novel approaches, such as the possible use of
low frequencies to build high quality bone; explorations of how
different types of physical training affect bone at a cellular level;
and investigations aimed at identifying the best training and
nutritional regimen in terms of exercise duration and intensity, and
nutrient amounts, to optimize fitness levels and bone health and to
prevent injury.
Mr. Chairman, stress fractures compromise the health, military
readiness and performance of our recruits and troops. A strong and
well-trained military proved to be crucial in Iraq and will continue to
be a vital component of our country's future. We thank you for
maintaining 2003 funding for the Bone Health and Military Medical
Readiness Program of the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel
Command located in Fort Detrick, Maryland. We know there are many
worthy projects in need of funding, especially in the Army's Bone
Health and Military Medical Readiness Program. Without additional
support not only are these in jeopardy--and future results that will
save money, prevent additional fractures, and further healing--but we
risk losing researchers who are dedicated to bone health and these
projects in particular.
We respectfully request that you consider an appropriation of $10
million to maintain an aggressive and sustained DOD bone research
program in fiscal year 2004. Thank you for your commitment to the U.S.
military's health and safety.
Senator Stevens. Our next witness is Retired Major General
Paul Weaver, for Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. Good
morning, sir.
STATEMENT OF MAJOR GENERAL PAUL A. WEAVER, JR., USAF
(RETIRED), ON BEHALF OF THE JUVENILE
DIABETES FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL
ACCOMPANIED BY:
CATHY LEE WEAVER
JULIA WEAVER
General Weaver. Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
That is number eight, sir.
Senator Stevens. You do not need to testify if you bring
her.
Go ahead.
General Weaver. Sir, I would like to thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today on behalf of the
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF) International in
support of $10 million in funding for the Technologies in
Metabolic Monitoring (TMM), better known as the Julia Weaver
Fund Initiative. As you know, I have had the privilege of
appearing before this subcommittee numerous times in the past
in my capacity as the Director of the Air National Guard. But I
am before you today as a civilian who retired after 35 years of
military service, to thank you for the funding you have
provided for the TMM, Julia Weaver Fund Initiative, and to
respectfully request your continued support.
I also want to thank Senator Inouye for bestowing the title
of ``the Julia Weaver Fund'' to the TMM program in honor of my
4-year-old daughter, who is here with my wife Cathy Lee and
myself. One month after my retirement from military service,
sir, my wife and I took our 2\1/2\-year-old daughter then,
Julia, to the emergency room at Mary Washington Hospital in
Fredericksburg, Virginia, a day that truly changed our lives.
Prior to that day, we had been told that Julia had the flu.
Her condition continued to worsen. On New Year's Day
morning, we noticed a severe degradation of her overall health.
She had lost 10 pounds in one week and was losing mental
awareness of her surroundings. We proceeded to the emergency
room at Mary Washington Hospital, where we were told after her
blood was tested that she had diabetic ketoacidosis. Simply
put, she had juvenile diabetes.
The attending physician stated that her condition was grave
and that he was not sure that she was going to make it. Julia,
whom we call our ``Precious,'' was transported by helicopter
ambulance to the pediatric intensive care unit at Walter Reed
Army Medical Center. As the chopper lifted off, I could never
explain the feeling in our hearts that we may never see our
little girl alive again.
She was in intensive care for approximately 2 days and then
moved to a regular ward after her condition became stable. The
great medical staff of Walter Reed saved her life, and for that
my wife and I will be eternally grateful.
My daughter's daily regimen with juvenile diabetes consists
of having her finger pricked six to eight times a day and
receiving two to four shots a day. I made a commitment to God
that if I could ever do anything to help cure diabetes I
certainly would do it. So I am here, sir, before you today to
help my daughter and the many other children and adults with
diabetes who endure four to six finger pricks a day and try to
regulate and maintain their blood glucose levels.
Anyone who has a loved one with the disease or has the
disease him or herself knows the difficulties of controlling
ever-fluctuating glucose levels within insulin and diet. With
our current technology, it is extremely difficult to maintain
tight control of glucose levels over long periods of time and
devastating complications such as blindness, kidney failure,
amputation, heart disease, and nerve damage are often the
inevitable result of a lifetime with this disease.
Largely as a result of these complications, diabetes costs
our economy in excess of $132 billion per year and its
financial impact is so severe that one out of every four
Medicare dollars is spent on individuals with this disease.
Technologies that would noninvasively monitor diabetics'
metabolism, coupled with an ability to provide information
remotely or wirelessly, would allow individuals with the
disease to monitor their blood sugar levels accurately,
constantly, and noninvasively, which would ultimately improve
the control of fluctuations in their blood glucose levels and
potentially reduce the severe debilitating complications.
Sir, in this way this technology could offer a significant
and immediate quality of life of 17 million Americans who
suffer from this disease and relieve much of the economic
burden of this disease on our Nation.
More broadly, sir, however, the development of wireless,
remote, noninvasive technologies that could measure the state
of metabolism in an individual would have a significant
application in protecting the men and women of our Armed
Forces. The subcommittee is undoubtedly aware of the risks that
our men and women of the Armed Forces face while in harm's way,
but may not be aware of the risks just due to everyday medical
problems. Technologies for metabolic monitoring could
potentially determine health status and accurately communicate
this information. This technology could be used to track key
personnel in remote areas and monitor their metabolic changes
to determine and prevent distress due to stress or illness.
Furthermore, it would provide an ability to respond quickly
in the field by providing technology able to deliver antidotes
and drug treatments that may be required by sick or injured
personnel, as well as nutritional supplements.
The Technologies in Metabolic Monitoring, the Julia Weaver
Fund, sir, is helping to develop better technologies that will
benefit those with diabetes while at the same time benefiting
the men and women of our Armed Forces. The program was
established in 2001 by Congress, JDRF, the Department of
Defense, National Institutes of Health, and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
Mr. Chairman, JDRF and I thank you, Mr. Chairman and
members of the subcommittee, for your generous funding for this
program, which has allowed us to prosper to a truly unique and
successful initiative. Sir, I respectfully ask that you
continue your support for this initiative by providing $10
million in fiscal year 2004.
Sir, I understand that this subcommittee is faced with
difficult choices and limited resources. But think about the
return that you are getting on this investment in medical
research. Seventeen million people in this country have it;
$132 billion per year.
Senator Stevens. General, I have got to stop you. I
understand and we have supported you and we will continue to
try to support you. We appreciate very much your testimony.
General Weaver. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Major General Paul A. Weaver, Jr.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today on behalf of the Juvenile
Diabetes Research Foundation International and in support of $10
million in funding for the Technologies in Metabolic Monitoring/Julia
Weaver Fund (TMM/JWF) Initiative.
As you know, I have had the privilege of appearing before this
Subcommittee numerous times in the past in my capacity as the Director
of the Air National Guard. But I am before you today as a civilian, who
retired after 35 years of military service, to thank you for the
funding you have provided for the TMM/Julia Weaver Fund Initiative and
to respectfully request your continued support. I also want to thank
Senator Inouye for bestowing the title ``Julia Weaver Fund'' to the TMM
program in honor of my four year old daughter who is here with my wife
Cathylee and me today.
One month after my retirement from military service, my wife and I
took our two and a half year old daughter Julia to the emergency room
at Mary Washington Hospital in Fredericksburg, Virginia, a day that
truly changed our lives. Prior to that day, we had been told Julia had
had the flu. Her condition continued to worsen. On New Years Day
morning, we noticed a severe degradation with her overall health. She
lost 10 pounds in one week and was losing mental awareness of her
surroundings. We proceeded to the emergency room at Mary Washington
Hospital where we were told, after her blood was tested, that she had
diabetic ketoacidosis--simply put she developed juvenile diabetes. The
attending physician stated that her condition was grave and that he was
not sure she was going to make it. Julia, whom we call ``The
Precious'', was transported by helicopter ambulance to the Pediatric
Intensive Care Unit at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. As the chopper
lifted off, I could never explain the feeling in our hearts that we may
never see our little girl alive again.
She was in the Intensive Care Ward for approximately two days and
then moved to a regular ward after her condition became stable. The
great medical staff at Walter Reed saved her life and for that, my wife
and I will be eternally grateful. My daughter's daily regimen with
juvenile diabetes consists of having her finger pricked 6-8 times a day
and receiving 2-4 shots a day. I made a commitment to God that if I
could ever do anything to help find a cure for diabetes, I would do it.
So I am here before you today to help my daughter and the many
other children and adults with diabetes who must endure four to six
finger pricks a day to try to regulate and maintain their blood glucose
levels. Anyone who has a loved one with this disease, or has the
disease him or herself, knows the difficulties of controlling ever-
fluctuating glucose levels with insulin and diet. With our current
technology, it is extremely difficult to maintain tight control of
glucose levels over long periods of time and devastating complications,
such as blindness, kidney failure, amputation, heart disease, and nerve
damage, are often the inevitable result of a lifetime with this
disease. Largely as a result of these complications, diabetes costs our
economy in excess of $132 billion per year, and its financial impact is
so severe that one out of four Medicare dollars is spent on individuals
with the disease.
Technologies that would non-invasively monitor diabetes metabolism,
coupled with an ability to provide information remotely (or
wirelessly), would allow individuals with the disease to monitor their
blood sugar levels accurately, constantly, and non-invasively, which
could ultimately improve the control of fluctuations in their blood
glucose levels and potentially reduce the severity of debilitating
complications. In this way, this technology could offer a significant
and immediate improvement in the quality of life of 17 million
Americans who suffer from this disease and relieve much of the economic
burden of this disease on our nation.
More broadly, however, the development of wireless, remote, non-
invasive technologies that could measure the state of metabolism in an
individual would have a significant application in protecting the men
and women of the armed forces. The Subcommittee is undoubtedly aware of
the risks that our men and women of the armed forces face while in
harm's way, but may not be aware of their risk due to everyday medical
problems. Technologies for metabolic monitoring could potentially
determine health status and accurately communicate this information.
This technology could be used to track key personnel in remote areas
and monitor their metabolic changes to determine and prevent distress
due to stress or illness. Furthermore, it would provide an ability to
respond quickly in the field by also providing technology able to
deliver antidotes and drug treatments that may be required by sick or
injured personnel, as well as nutritional supplements.
The Technologies in Metabolic Monitoring/Julia Weaver Fund
Initiative is helping to develop better technologies that will benefit
those with diabetes, while at the same time benefiting the men and
women of the armed forces. This program was established in 2001 by the
direction and with the support of Congress and close involvement of
JDRF and several agencies including the Department of Defense (DOD),
the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and NASA. Now in its third
year, the program has high-level recognition in the metabolic
monitoring community as a program that will foster innovation.
Just to demonstrate how this program has grown over the past three
years, in fiscal year 2001 the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel
Command (USAMRMC), which manages this initiative, received 16
applications and supported 5 novel metabolic monitoring research
projects and a highly successful workshop. In fiscal year 2002, the
program received $2.5 million in appropriations and was expanded to
include academic, industry, civilian and defense researchers. As a
result, 48 applications were received and following a highly
competitive review, an additional 12 novel metabolic monitoring
research projects received seed grants for one year. These grants
should allow researchers to generate enough data to be well placed to
seek funding from other established research sources. The USAMRMC is
currently accepting applications for the $4.3 million in fiscal year
2003 funding as provided by this Subcommittee.
JDRF and I thank you Mr. Chairman and Members of this Subcommittee
for your generous funding for this program, which has allowed it to
prosper into a truly unique and successful initiative. The attached
research summaries demonstrate the high level of innovation that has
been pursued with these funds. I respectfully ask that you continue
your strong support for this initiative by providing $10 million in
fiscal year 2004. This funding would allow the USAMRMC to capitalize on
the opportunities provided by the fiscal year 2002 and 2003 funding. In
addition, it will enable the USAMRMC to expand this initiative in order
to support more of the high-quality research, in particular to support
promising military-academia-industry partnerships and continue to
stimulate communication between these groups.
I understand that this Subcommittee is faced with difficult choices
and limited resources, but think about the return that you are getting
on the investment in this medical research. Diabetes currently affects
about 17 million people and cost this country $132 billion per year.
One out of every four Medicare dollars is spent on caring for people
with diabetes. Continued and substantial funding for the Technologies
in Metabolic Monitoring/Julia Weaver Fund Initiative could help to
ultimately save the United States billions of dollars in health care
costs, improve the quality of life for those with diabetes, and better
protect the lives of our men and women in the armed forces in the
field.
I thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. You
give my family and I great hope that the daily burden of diabetes will
some day be eased as a result of the innovation arising from the TMM/
Julia Weaver Fund Initiative.
FISCAL YEAR 2001 RESEARCH SUMMARIES
Interstitial Metabolic Monitoring During Hemorrhagic Shock is a
plan to assess variations in interstitial concentrations of potassium,
lactate, pyruvate, glucose, calcium, and magnesium with the progression
of hemorrhagic shock. A method of microdialysis in an animal model is
used to provide continuous monitoring of tissue composition in skeletal
muscle and liver. Parameters are compared to their corresponding serum
concentrations and to hemodynamic parameters, cardiac contractility,
tissue levels of Na+, K+, ATPase and vascular smooth muscle membrane
potentials. The effects of fluid resuscitation in both early and late
stages of shock are being examined to evaluate the hypothesis that
decompensation results from potassium-mediated vasodilation and/or loss
of cardiac contractility.
Non-Intrusive Method of Measuring Internal Metabolic Processes is
developing a mathematical model describing the non-intrusive transfer
and collection of cortisol from cutaneous capillaries, a membrane based
microvolume cortisol assay, and a prototype sampling system to enable
transfer of sample to the detection membrane. After developing this
system they will evaluate the performance of the prototype sample
collection/sample detection system.
The Warfighter's Stress Response: Telemetric and Noninvasive
Assessment proposes to provide evidence for a noninvasive, objective
assessment of operational performance under highly stressful training
situations by developing baseline psychological and biological profiles
that predict superior performance under highly stressful training
situations. To accomplish this, the investigators plan to develop and
further refine models that characterize stress-induced psychological
and biological responses that are associated with superior performance
under highly stressful training situations and to develop and further
refine a telemetric device for the measurement of Heart Rate
Variability.
Integration and Optimization of Advanced, Non-invasive, Ambulatory
Monitoring Technologies for Operational Metabolic Monitoring is
developing a wireless monitoring platform that can accept information
from a variety of physiologic, environmental, and appropriate external
sensors that can be coupled to mathematical models that permit feedback
to the individual on the status of their physiological status.
Measurement of IGF-I During Military Operational Stress via a
Filter Paper Spot Assay is studying the Insulin-like Growth Factor-I
(IGF-I) to test the hypothesis that the filter paper blood spot method
will be an inexpensive and field-expedient method for monitoring the
metabolic and health status of soldiers during field and combat
situations. The aim of this study is to determine whether the filter
paper blood spot collected in a field environment can accurately
measure IGF-1 and IGF-I binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) and subsequent
changes during stressful training.
FISCAL YEAR 2002 RESEARCH SUMMARIES
Metabolic Rate Monitoring and Energy Expenditure Prediction Using a
Novel Actigraphy Method, (Principle Investigator, Daniel S. Moran) has
proposed to develop a new, simple, non-invasive method based on
actigraphy data for monitoring metabolic rate and predicting energy
expenditure.
Portable Physical Activity Monitors for Measuring Energy Metabolism
in ROTC Cadets, (Principle Investigator, Kong Y. Chen) has proposed to
develop and validate non-invasive, portable techniques for monitoring
detailed physical activity, to accurately predict EE, and to determine
specific PT-related energy costs and physiological responses in ROTC
cadets for short and long-term periods.
Skin Bioengineering: Non-invasive, Transdermal Monitoring,
(Principle Investigator, Richard H. Guy) has proposed to develop and
optimize a novel, non-invasive, iontophoretic approach for metabolic
monitoring via the skin.
Fluorescent Polymer Implant for Continuous Glucose Monitoring and
Feedback, (Principle Investigator, Ralph Ballerstadt) has proposed
develop and characterize a minimally invasive near-infrared fluorescent
polymer sensor designed for transdermal glucose monitoring in
interstitial fluid in dermal and subdermal skin tissue. The sensor is
designed to be implanted by injection just beneath the superficial
layers of the skin. Simple and inexpensive instrumentation can be used
to interrogate the fluorescent properties of the sensor that will vary
in response to local glucose concentrations. The concept of the
proposed implant device is one of most promising technologies currently
pursued in glucose-sensor research.
Towards Miniturized, Wireless-Integrated, and Implantable Glucose
Sensors, (Principle Investigator, Diane J. Burgess) has proposed to
develop autonomous sensory devices, using low-power CMOS
microelectronics architecture interfaced with an inductively coupled
power supply and with logic and communication functions, thus allowing
for total implantation. Integrate a glucose oxidase-based
electrochemical sensor with the above microelectronic device and
further equip it with recently developed coatings geared to improve
sensor stability.
Implantable Multi-Sensor Array for Metabolic Monitoring, (Principle
Investigator, David A. Gough) has proposed to develop a disc version of
the multi-sensor array and demonstrate its feasibility as a tissue
implant in hamster and pig models with signals conveyed by wire, and to
develop preliminary signal processing and data management strategies.
Improved Metabolic Monitoring and Hyperspectral Methods for Wound
Characterization, (Principle Investigator, Stuart Harshbarger) has
proposed to provide new tools and methods for monitoring metabolic
activity in the region of a wound, and to improve the ability to
predict the healing response of the wound to external stimuli such as
dietary intake and patient metabolic activity.
Evaluation and Refinement of a System and a Method for the Use of
Hyperspectral Imaging for Metabolic Monitoring, (Principle
Investigator, James Mansfield) has proposed to refine a prototype HSIMM
system and to characterize its ability to quantify local changes in
cutaneous hemoglobin saturation during a variety of types of metabolic
stress. The relationship of these changes to several factors
influencing cutaneous physiology will also be determined.
Non-Invasive Monitoring of Insulin-like Growth Factor-I During
Differential Physical Training Programs in Warfighters, (Principle
Investigator, Bradley C. Nindl) has proposed to non-invasively monitor
insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) during physical training in
Warfighters by employing a novel, patented method of sampling
interstitial fluid (ISF) via a non-invasive, continuous vacuum pressure
via micropores in the stratum corneum.
A Minimally-Invasive Dual-Analyte Miniturized Continuous Sensor for
Glucose and Lactate, (Principle Investigator, W. Kenneth Ward) has
proposed to develop a miniature (300 m) wire sensor for continuous and
simultaneous amperometric monitoring of interstitial glucose and
lactate.
A Hydrogel-Based, Implantable, Micromachined Transponder for
Wireless Glucose Measurement, (Principle Investigator, Babak Ziaie) has
proposed to develop a hydrogel-based, implantable, micromachined
transponder for wireless glucose measurement.
Senator Stevens. The next witness is General, Major General
Retired Robert McIntosh, Executive Director, Reserve Officers
Association.
STATEMENT OF MAJOR GENERAL ROBERT McINTOSH, USAFR
(RETIRED), EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, RESERVE
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES
General McIntosh. Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the members of
the Reserve Officers Association----
Senator Stevens. Thank you for bringing her in here,
General.
General Weaver. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Stevens. We all like to see your daughter. Thank
you.
Yes, go ahead.
General McIntosh. On behalf of the members of the Reserve
Officers Association (ROA) from each of the uniformed services,
I thank you for your generous support in the past and for the
opportunity to present the association's views and concerns
relating to the Reserve components in the National Defense
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2004.
While the transformation process proposed by the Department
of Defense is visionary and bold, ROA is concerned about a
number of its provisions. We believe that there are
appropriations implications that have not been directly
addressed in the appropriations process, that there is a lack
of specificity regarding operating authority, and that there is
a ``one size fits all'' approach to some problems that are
raised on these difficult and complex budgeting issues.
In the interest of time, I will only cover two of our
concerns. The first is the address of the integrity of Reserve
component appropriations. The fiscal year 2004 defense budget
request was predicated in part upon a major change in the way
the services' active duty and Reserve component appropriations
are structured. Assuming congressional acquiescence, the
Department combined the personnel appropriations into a single
appropriation for each service. This was ostensibly done to
enhance funding efficiencies in management.
Unfortunately, it also undermines the Reserve chiefs'
authority as their component's funding directors and impairs
their accountability for preparing their components for
mobilization. It also, in our view, seriously compromises and
diminishes the Congress' constitutionally mandated
responsibility to provide oversight to the Armed Forces. It is
not in our view a good idea.
In the recent DOD transformation proposal, the Department
has requested authority to call reservists to active duty for
training for up to 90 days in preparation for mobilization.
This training would take place before issuance of mobilization
orders and thus would be in addition to, not a part of,
congressionally-mandated limitations on activation authorities.
Family and employer support could suffer. ROA believes that
any such training, particularly of significant length, should
be a part of the mobilization process and start the clock for
tour length and associated benefits. The question of when this
training begins is also significant. If it begins before the
mobilization process, it is a Reserve cost, which could
jeopardize other essential training. After mobilization, it is
an active duty cost that could deter gaining commanders from
including the Reserve component assets in war plans. The 90-day
activation for training proposal as written is in our view not
a good idea.
In conclusion, our Reserve forces have consistently
demonstrated their worth as combat multipliers and as a
critical link to the civilian community. They are the litmus
test and enabler of the Nation's resolve. With your continued
support, they will continue to perform in a superb manner as
essential elements of the total force.
We thank you, Senator.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Major General Robert A. McIntosh
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: On behalf of the
members of the Reserve Officers Association from each of the uniformed
services, I thank you for the opportunity to present the association's
views and concerns relating to the Reserve components and the National
Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2004.
To say that this is an extraordinary year, a year like no other in
recent history has become a truism that belies the harsh reality of
September 11th and its aftermath in Afghanistan and now Iraq. So much
has changed so obviously in our outlook, our way of living, and our
approach to doing the nation's business that it is requires no further
enumeration.
In the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1991, the
Congress stated that ``the overall reduction in the threat and the
likelihood of continued fiscal constraints require the United States to
increase the use of the Reserve components of the Armed Forces. The
Department of Defense should shift a greater share of force structure
and budgetary resources to the Reserve components of the Armed Forces.
Expanding the Reserve components is the most effective way to retain
quality personnel as the force structure of the Active components is
reduced . . . The United States should recommit itself to the concept
of the citizen-soldier as a cornerstone of national defense policy for
the future.'' One can argue about the reduction of the threat, but the
increased use of the Reserve components is clearly upon us.
Greater Reliance on Reserve Components
The 50 years of reliance on a large, Cold War, standing military
have ended. Confronted with sizeable defense budget reductions, changes
in the threat, and new missions, America's military answer for the
future must be a return to the traditional reliance on its Minutemen--
the members of the Reserve components. Can America's Reservists fulfill
their commitment to the Total Force--can they meet the challenge?
Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm proved that the Reserve
components were ready and able. During the Gulf War, more than 265,000
Reservists were called to active duty. Of the total mobilized, 32
percent were from the National Guard and 67 percent from ``the
Reserve.'' More than 106,000 Reservists were deployed to Southwest
Asia. About 20 percent of the forces in the theater were members of the
Reserve components.
In Bosnia and Kosovo, more than 48,000 Reservists have again
demonstrated their readiness and their capability to respond to their
nation's call. For the past several years, the Reserve components have
provided approximately 12.5 million support days to the Active
components annually. That equates to some 35,000 support-years
annually, the equivalent of two Army divisions. Thus far, Operation
Iraqi Freedom has seen nearly 230,000 Reservists called to active duty.
The demobilization has already begun for many; but many Reservists will
continue to serve on active duty in the theater of operations and here
in the United States and overseas.
A strong, viable Reserve force is an inseparable part of America's
military, a cost-effective augmentation to the Active force and the
marrow of the mobilization base. Ultimately, mobilizing Reserve forces
is the litmus test and the enabler of public support and national will.
The early and extensive involvement of the Guard and Reserve in the
Gulf War was instrumental in achieving the strong public support of the
military and our national objectives. However transformation plays out,
our Reserve forces will continue to have a major role.
Reserve Components' Cost-Effectiveness
ROA has long maintained that a proper mix of Active and Reserve
forces can provide the nation with the most cost-effective defense for
a given expenditure of federal funds. Reservists provide 55 percent of
the Total Force, but cost only 8.0 percent of the fiscal year 2004 DOD
budget. They require only 23 percent of active-duty personnel costs,
even when factoring in the cost of needed full-time support personnel.
We need only consider the comparable yearly personnel (only) costs for
100,000 Active and Reserve personnel to see the savings. Over a 4-year
period, 100,000 Reservists cost $3 billion less than 100,000 Active
duty personnel. If the significant savings in Reserve unit operations
and maintenance costs are included, billions more can be saved in the
same period. ROA is not suggesting that DOD should transfer all
missions to the Reserve, but the savings Reservists can provide must be
considered in transformation-driven force-mix decisions. It is
incumbent upon DOD to ensure that the services recognize these savings
by seriously investigating every mission area and transferring as much
structure as possible to their Reserve components.
Transformation Concerns
While the transformation process proposed by the Department of
Defense is visionary and bold, ROA is concerned about a number of its
provisions. We believe that there are appropriations implications that
have not been directly addressed in the appropriations process; that
there is a lack of specificity regarding operating authority; and that
there is a one-size-fits-all approach to some problems that raises more
difficulties than it resolves. Here we will mention only three:
--Integrity of Reserve Component Appropriations.--The fiscal year
2004 defense budget request was predicated in part upon a major
change in the way the services' active duty and Reserve
component appropriations are structured. Assuming congressional
acquiescence, the department combined the personnel
appropriations into a single appropriation for each service.
This was ostensibly done to enhance funding efficiency and
management. Unfortunately it also undermines the Reserve
chiefs' authority as their components' funding directors, and
impairs their accountability for preparing their components for
mobilization. It also, in our view, seriously compromises and
diminishes the Congress's constitutionally mandated
responsibility to provide oversight to the Armed Forces. It is
not a good idea.
--Term Limits.--The Department of Defense very recently requested
sweeping changes in the way it manages its workforce. No doubt
much of what was requested needs doing, but we are asked to
take a great deal on faith, and at least some of the changes
requested appear to us to be flawed. One proposal would
eliminate the congressionally established term limits for
specific key officials in the department's leadership. ROA is
concerned that eliminating such defined tour lengths (minimum
and maximum) will have a very negative impact on the ability of
Reserve component senior leaders to speak their minds freely
and to contribute meaningfully during the policy-making
process. In other words, the proposal to eliminate
congressionally mandated tour lengths for the Reserve component
chiefs would have a chilling effect on their ability to
represent the needs of the people they command--the Reserve
forces. The removal of minimum tour lengths would open the door
for early dismissal or retirement when what was expressed by
Reserve component leaders was not necessarily the desired
department solution. The proposal to eliminate mandated tour
lengths for Reserve component chiefs is not a good idea.
--Skill Training.--In the same proposal, the department has requested
authority to call reservists to active duty for training for up
to 90 days in preparation for mobilization. This training would
take place before issuance of mobilization orders, and thus
would be in addition to, not a part of, congressionally
mandated limitations on activation authorities. Family and
employer support could suffer. ROA believes that any such
training, particularly of significant length, should be a part
of the mobilization process and start the clock for tour length
and associated benefits. The question of when this training
begins is also significant. If it begins before the
mobilization process, it is a Reserve cost, which could
jeopardize other essential training; after mobilization, it is
an active duty cost that could deter gaining commanders from
including Reserve component assets in their war plans. The 90-
day activation for training proposal, as written, is not a good
idea.
I will now address service-specific issues.
ARMY RESERVE
We thank the Congress for its support of the Army and its approval
of the Army's Reserve component fiscal year 2003 budget request. These
funds will significantly improve the quality of life and training
capabilities of the Army Reserve and the Army National Guard as they
meet the challenges of the 21st century. While the Army is undergoing a
major transformation it is also engaged in the Global War on Terrorism
and in a major ground conflict in Iraq. While current operations
receive the major share of resources and attention we must also fund
the legacy force, modernization and fielding of equipment, the
education and training of today's and tomorrow's leaders, family
support programs to support the spouses and families left behind, the
evolving needs of homeland defense, and needed maintenance and repair
and recapitalization of the facility infrastructure.
For fiscal year 2004 the expected Army's total obligation authority
(TOA) for its Active, Guard, and Reserve components is $93.9 billion,
an increase of $3 billion over fiscal year 2003 but still only 24
percent of the total $379.9 billion defense budget. The fiscal year
2004 budget request, as have previous budgets, critically underfunds
the Army Reserve personnel, operation and maintenance, equipment
procurement, and military construction accounts. These resourcing
shortfalls will adversely affect readiness and training and ultimately
the quality of life, the morale, and the retention of these highly
motivated and patriotic citizen-soldiers.
The Army Reserve's projected share of the Army budget request in
the fiscal year 2004 DOD budget request is $5.3 billion or 5.8 percent
of the entire $94 billion Army request--a tremendous force structure
and readiness bargain for the investment. Separated into the Reserve
Personnel, Army (RPA) and the Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve
(OMAR) accounts, the request is for approximately $3.62 billion RPA and
$1.9 billion OMAR. With the large number of Army Reservists mobilized
and receiving pay from the active duty pay accounts, initial
projections suggest that the fiscal year 2004 RPA account, with a few
exceptions, will adequately fund the majority of the RPA accounts.
However the OMAR, MILCON, and equipment accounts still require
considerable plus-ups to fully fund known requirements--requirements
that were identified during the development of the president's budget,
but because of insufficient funding fell below the line and were not
resourced.
Critical/executable funding shortfalls identified in the RPA and
OMAR areas alone are expected to exceed $248 million. Not included in
this $248 million shortfall is the Army Reserve's estimate that it will
require $1 billion to modernize and transform its aging equipment
inventory. Also not included in the overall shortfall of funding is the
estimated $1 billion backlog in required Army Reserve military
construction.
Reserve Personnel, Army (RPA)
The fiscal year 2004 requested end strength for the Army Reserve is
205,000. Reliance on the Guard and Reserve for involvement in real
world operations and domestic contingencies increased considerably
during the last decade and significantly in response to the events of
September 11 at the World Trade Center and at the Pentagon. The Army
Reserve is a full partner in the Army's real world operations, the war
against terrorism, and the ongoing war in Iraq. Adequate RPA funding to
support the training of the Reserve to enable it to support the Army
and our national military strategy remains critical. The most visible
funding shortfall for RPA in the fiscal year 2004 $3.62 billion RPA
budget request is funding for professional development training.
Professional Development Education.--Funding for this program
provides formal professional education programs of varying lengths
which qualify Reservists for promotion and train them to meet the
challenges of leadership and the ever evolving modernization and Army
transformation. Without the required funding Army Reservists will not
be educationally qualified for promotion and possibly be denied
continuation in the Army. The fiscal year 2004 $108.7 million program
has been funded at $72.4 million leaving an executable/critical
shortfall $36.3 million
Operations and Maintenance, Army Reserve (OMAR)
The fiscal year 2004 DOD budget request for the Army Reserve
Operations and Maintenance (OMAR) account is $1.9 billion. We believe
there is at least a $212.6 million executable/critical OMAR shortfall
in the fiscal year 2004 budget request that will force the Army Reserve
to compensate by further reducing equipment and facility maintenance,
and supply purchases.
Currently the expected OMAR appropriation is experiencing serious
resourcing shortfalls in force protection and anti-terrorism,
environmental programs, secure communications, network service, BASOPS,
depot maintenance, and family support programs. Some critical
shortfalls are shown below:
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Force Protection/Anti-Terrorism............................ 36.5
Environmental Programs..................................... 22.8
Secure Communications...................................... 23.9
Network Service/Data Center................................ 9.0
BASOPS to 95 percent....................................... 93.8
Depot Maintenance.......................................... 22.7
Family Support Programs.................................... 3.9
------------
Total................................................ 212.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Secure Communications
There are insufficient resources to fund Army Reserve secure
communications needed to secure DOD's integrated world-wide common-user
network for exchanging secure and non-secure data, voice and video
information. The Army Reserve $49.4 million program is underfunded by
$23.9 million or 48 percent of its validated requirement. The $49.4
million program has been funded at $25.5 million (52 percent) leaving
an executable/critical shortfall of $23.9 million.
Army Reserve Base Operations (BASOPS)
BASOPS programs provide essential services at Army Reserve
controlled installations (including two of the Army's power projection
platforms) and USAR regional support commands. Services include the
operation of utilities; real estate leases; municipal services, to
include pest control, refuse handling operations, snow and ice removal,
public works management, master planning, fire and emergency services,
real property exchanges; information management; logistics services,
including maintenance of material transportation, supply, laundry and
dry cleaning and food services.
This shortfall could adversely affect physical security, logistical
support and the Army Reserve's ability to make payments for leases and
utilities. The Army's goal is to fund the program at the 95 percent
level. The $340.3 million program has been funded at $229.5 million (68
percent) leaving an executable/critical shortfall of $93.8 million at
the 95 percent funding level.
Army Reserve Fiscal Year 2004 Depot Maintenance
The Army has insufficient TOA to fully resource all depot level
maintenance required to meet wartime readiness levels. The lack of
funding will exacerbate the degradation of aging equipment and
negatively affect USAR unit readiness, specifically the tactical
wheeled vehicle fleet, and hinder the USAR's ability to provide combat
support/combat service support (CS/CSS) to Active Army combat forces.
Failure to fund this requirement delays the deployment of forces from
CONUS to the theater of operation as well as limits the Army Reserve's'
ability to respond to civil authorities in support of homeland
security. The $77.7 million program has been funded at $55.0 million
(71 percent) leaving an executable/critical shortfall of $22.7 million.
OMAR Summary
ROA urges the Congress to add $212 million to support these
neglected and critically underfunded Army Reserve OMAR programs.
National Guard and Reserve Equipment Request (USAR)
The Office of the Secretary of Defense in its February 2002
``National Guard and Reserve Equipment Report for fiscal year 2003'',
states that the Army Reserve has 93 percent of its Equipment Readiness
Code A (ERC A) equipment items on-hand for all of its units. Currently
the Army Reserve is short $1.75 billion of mission essential equipment
and a large portion of the equipment is nearing, or already past, its
Economical Useful Life (EUL). Realistically, the equipment on hand
(EOH) includes substituted equipment--some that is not compatible with
newer equipment in the Active Army, Army National Guard, and Army
Reserve equipment inventory and may not perform as required.
Substituted equipment continues to cause equipment compatibility
problems that degrade Army Reserve readiness and its ability to support
its CS and CSS mission.
The greatest source of relief to Army National Guard and Army
Reserve equipment shortfalls is the National Guard and Reserve
Equipment Appropriation (NGREA) that funds equipment requirements
identified by the services but not resourced due to funding shortfalls
in the FYDP. Since 1981 the Army Reserve has received, through the
oversight of Congress, over $1.5 billion in equipment through the
NGREA. Without the appropriation the Army Reserve would still be
struggling to reach 50 percent EOH. The NGREA works, and works well.
ROA urges the Congress to continue the NG&REA and to fund a minimum
$200 million of the Army Reserve's $866 million fiscal year 2004
Equipment Modernization Requirement.
AIR FORCE RESERVE
In the past three decades, Air Force Reserve members have seen the
lines blur between their being a part time force and a full time force
as they have increased their mission areas and proven that their
knowledge, experience, and diversity are important contributors to our
nation's security. The Air Force Reserve has built a force that can
reshape itself into quick responders or peace maintainers.
The Air Force Reserve is the fourth largest major command in the
Air Force and provides 20 percent of the Air Force capability for only
3.25 percent of the total Air Force budget. These remarkable numbers
are possible in part to the command leading the way in leveraging the
costs of forces by partnering with active duty in associate units, in
which reservists share flying and maintenance responsibilities by
augmenting active duty forces without additional physical structure.
The mobilizations for Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation
Noble Eagle have shown us that many of the problems, which occurred
during Desert Shield/Desert Storm, were not peculiar to that effort
because they are reoccurring. The increased utilization of Reservists
underscores the need to reduce policy differences between active and
reserve, reduce the reservist out-of-pocket costs and maintain their
readiness.
From 1953 to 1990 the Air Force Reserve contributed forces to 11
contingency and real world operations during that 38-year period
compared to over 50 operations in 11 years from 1991 to now.
The ROA urges the Congress of the United States to appropriate
funds for the following:
MISSION SUPPORT
[Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement Cost Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFR BMT Increases..................... $10.0 Adds 275 BMT and 3-level
technical training
quotas due to projected
increase in non-prior
service recruits.
Current accession
quotas do not sustain
force requirements--
brings BMT total to
2,434 annual accessions
across FYDP.
AFR Recruit Advertising............... 4.3 Past and current AFRC
advertising budget has
not kept pace with
increases in marketing
costs or with other
services.
AFR BMT Increase (Long Haul).......... 0.8 Adds 1,566 BMT and 3-
level tech training
quotas doe to projected
increases in non-prior
recruits. Current
accession quotas do not
sustain force
requirements--brings
BMT total to 4,000
annual accessions
across FYDP.
AFR Security Forces Manpower.......... 14.5 Provides Long Haul
growth of 588 total
authorized (548 enl.
AGRs, 38 civilian, 2
off. AGRs); plus 576 A/
B MoBags, weapons,
LMRs, vehicles and
other FP equip. 12 of
the AGRs require no
equipment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to Lieutenant General James E. Sherrard, Chief of Air
Force Reserve, ``The first bombs fell from Reserve aircraft on 7
October, day one of Operation Enduring Freedom. Of the 75,000 members
in the command, 13,000 were activated with an additional 20,000
positions filled through volunteerism.'' As part of this, approximately
4,500 reservists continue to serve in a second year of mobilization.
Now as our country faces the challenges of Iraq, the Air Force Reserve
has contributed 13,000 members as of 20 March 2003.
The ROA urges the Congress of the United States to appropriate
funds for the following:
MODERNIZATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft Location Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-5............................. Wright-Patterson Modernize C-5s for
AFB OH. Avionics
Lackland AFB TX Modernization
Westover AFB MA Program (AMP) and
Dover AFB DE Reliability
Travis AFB CA Enhancement Re-
engining Program
(RERP) to
increase
operational
ability and
reduce
maintenance
costs.
C-17............................ March ARB, CA..... Replace C-141s
being phased-out
of service by
fiscal year 2006.
WC-130J......................... Keesler AFB, MS... Complete upgrade
of aircraft for
the ``Hurricane
Hunters'' mission
and continue as a
Reserve mission.
C-40............................ Scott AFB, IL..... Replace C-9s being
phased out of
service by fiscal
year 2006.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2002, the Air Force Reserve Command simultaneously met their
mission requirements in Aerospace Expeditionary Force (AEF) rotations,
global exercises, ongoing operations and readiness training. While
balancing these demands, specialty missions for weather, aerial spray
and firefighting were also completed.
The ROA urges the Congress of the United States to appropriate
funds for the following:
EQUIPMENT
[Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement Cost Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-130J Radar.......................... $50.0 Upgrade will correct
display inconsistencies
range, minimize startup
attenuation errors, and
add capability to
increase range distance
for identification of
hazards for 10
aircraft.
C-17 Aircrew Training System.......... 20.0 Procures aircrew
training system for
March ARB.
F-16 LITENING II AT Upgrade 16.2 LITENING II is a multi-
Modification. sensor pod providing a
precision strike
capability.
F-16 LITENING II AT POD Procurement... 14.4 Additional targeting
pods are needed for the
Air Force Reserve to
support ONE, OEF, local
training, pod
replacement and future
contingencies.
F-16 Color Display.................... 16.0 Hi-definition color
multifunction displays
will enable the F-16 to
display more precise,
informative pictures
improving
interpretation,
situational awareness,
and increasing visual
acuity for target
recognition with
electro-optical weapons
and targeting systems.
A-10 Targeting Pods................... 48.0 Additional targeting
pods are needed for the
AFRC to support ONE,
OEF, local training and
future contingencies.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAVAL RESERVE
The Naval Reserve has mobilized over 17,500 Selected Naval
Reservists in direct support of Operations Noble Eagle, Enduring
Freedom, and, most recently, Operation Iraqi Freedom. The majority of
these Naval Reservists have been recalled individually based on
specific skills. They include significant numbers of law enforcement
officers and augmentees to combatant commands. Entire units of the
naval coastal warfare commands were activated. Medical, supply, mobile
construction force, intelligence and other specialties have been
heavily tasked. Naval Reserve pilots are maintaining the flow of
personnel and materiel to the theater of operations.
Funding for fiscal year 2003 enabled the Naval Reserve to resource
peacetime contributory support, bonuses, a substantial pay raise, real
property maintenance, base operating support, and recruiting
advertising/support. It is clearly evident that Congress has given full
recognition to the significant and well-recognized compensating
leverage offered by today's Naval Reserve, which represents 19 percent
of the Navy, yet expends only 3 percent of the budget.
Although funding levels appropriated for fiscal year 2003 and
proposed for fiscal year 2004 sufficiently provide for the operation,
maintenance, and training of the Naval Reserve, continued Naval Reserve
force structure reductions represent a disturbing trend. Whether
structural reductions are accomplished in a good-faith effort toward
transformation or simply to provide a financial offset for a higher
priority active program, the net effect is a reduction in the
capability of the Naval Reserve to provide both peacetime contributory
support and a war time surge capability.
Structural reductions in the fiscal year 2004 budget include the
decommissioning of VFA-203, all eight NMCB augment units, one naval
construction force support unit and one of four Naval Reserve fleet
hospitals. Additionally, the Navy budget for fiscal year 2005 calls for
the decommissioning of VAW-78, as part of the elimination of much of
CAG-20, and the conversion of 3 of 7 VP squadrons to augment units. The
Navy has indicated that it intends to deconstruct the entire Reserve
helicopter wing in fiscal year 2005, to include decommissioning the
only two currently mobilized combat search air rescue (CSAR) squadrons,
HCS-4 and HCS-5, in the entire Navy.
ROA strongly urges the Congress to hold the line against these
major structural reductions. As a policy, it appears that the Navy is
embarking on the complete deconstruction of the Naval Reserve force
structure. ROA requests that the Congress hold hearings with the
objective of discovering the Navy's strategy, goals and anticipated
benefits of this deconstruction. Moreover, ROA strongly urges the
Congress to provide full funding as described below for the hardware
procurement and modernization required to maintain the Naval Reserve as
a viable and cost-effective force multiplier.
Equipment Modernization
Over the past years, much of the progress made in improving the
readiness and capability of Naval Reserve units has been the direct
result of congressional action. Specifically, the willingness of the
Congress to designate new equipment for the Naval Reserve in the
National Guard and Reserve Equipment Appropriation (NGREA) and to
earmark funding for the Naval Reserve in the traditional procurement
appropriations was instrumental in maintain equipment currency and
operational readiness. In fiscal year 2004, the Navy included
additional funding in its budget request to support Naval Reserve
equipment modernization. Specifically, funding for one C-40A aircraft,
C-130T aircraft upgrades naval coastal warfare boats and equipment
upgrades and Naval Construction Force equipment procurement was
included in the budget submission to Congress. Although a major step in
the right direction, additional funding is urgently required to support
Naval Reserve equipment modernization unfunded requirements that exceed
$350 million in fiscal year 2004 alone.
As the number one equipment funding priority of the Naval Reserve,
the Boeing C-40A transport aircraft, which is replacing the Naval
Reserve's 27 C-9B and DC-9 aircraft, is of vital importance to
operational commanders, because the Naval Reserve provides 100 percent
of the Navy's organic lift capability in support of Naval Component and
Fleet Commanders logistics requirements. The average age of Naval
Reserve C-9 aircraft is nearly 30 years. Aircraft obsolescence is being
reached because of deficiencies in the avionics suite, power plant, and
the overall aging of the airframe. In addition, existing C-9 engines do
not meet current international environmental and noise abatement
requirements that eventually could result in the exclusion of C-9
aircraft from airspace in specific regions of the world. Finally, the
cost of maintaining the C-9 fleet increases annually as the aircraft
get older. The Navy has contracted for seven C-40A's and six have been
delivered. The balance of the Naval Reserve's requirement is for an
additional 20 C-40s.
Equipment modernization is a critical priority for the Naval
Reserve. ROA strongly urges the Congress to provide $330 million to
support the vital and continuing Naval Reserve unfunded equipment needs
in fiscal year 2004.
Marine Corps Reserve
With over 20,000 Marine Corps Reservists mobilized for Operations
Iraqi Freedom, Enduring Freedom and Noble Eagle, over 50 percent of the
Marine Corps Reserve have been recalled under the partial mobilization
declared by the President. As we write, the 1st Marine Expeditionary
Force is streaming toward Baghdad, with approximately 15,000 Marine
Corps Reservists in the CENTCOM Area of Responsibility (AOR) and in the
battle. Marine Corps Reservists are integrated at every level of joint
operations, force structure and forward support, in theater and in the
United States. Marine Corps Reservists are in every theater of the war
on terrorism. In Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, they continue guarding Al Qaeda
detainees and in Afghanistan securing the heartland of the Taliban.
Every Marine, whether Active or Reserve, is first and foremost a Marine
and a rifleman.
ROA urges the Congress to maintain Selected Marine Corps Reserve
end-strength at 39,600 (including 2,261 Active Reservists).
Funding Shortfalls
The request to support the Marine Corps Reserve appears to be
underfunded in the Aircraft Procurement, Navy (APN), Operation and
Maintenance, Marine Corps Reserve (O&MMCR), Reserve Personnel, Marine
Corps (RPMC) and Procurement, Marine Corps (PMC) appropriations.
Maintaining the necessary funding to pay, educate, and train our Marine
Reservists, and to enable the units of the Marine Forces Reserve to
conduct appropriate training and operations with current fleet
compatible equipment is the vital first step to combat readiness and
sustainability.
Additional O&MMCR funds are needed for initial issue of equipment,
replenishment and replacement of equipment, exercise support, and
organizational and depot maintenance. Only by equally equipping and
maintaining both the Active and Reserve forces will Total Force
integration be truly seamless. Foremost is the maintenance of aging
equipment. The Marine Corps Reserve armored vehicles' age, coupled with
increased use, contribute to this requirement. The Initial Issue
Program also continues to be a top priority. This program provides
Reserve Marines with the same modern field clothing and personal
equipment issued to their Regular Marine counterparts: improved load
bearing equipment, all purpose environmental clothing systems (APECS)/
3rd generation Gortex, small arms protective inserts, outer tactical
vests, light weight helmets, modular general purpose tent systems,
modular command post systems, and lightweight maintenance enclosures.
Modern equipment continues to be critical to the readiness and
capability of the Marine Corps Reserve. Although the Marine Corps
attempts to implement fully the single acquisition objective philosophy
throughout the Marine Corps Total Force (Active and Reserve), there are
some unfilled Reserve equipment requirements that have not been met
because of funding shortfalls.
To achieve the readiness necessary to quickly mobilize and augment
the Active Marine Forces in time of national emergency, Marine Forces
Reserve units must be equipped in the same manner as their Active force
counterparts. The top modernization requirement of Marine Corps Reserve
continues to be Engineering Change Proposal 583 (ECP-583), which will
make its F/A-18A aircraft compatible with the F/A 18 Cs utilized by the
Active force. As part of a complete modernization to achieve complete
Force interoperability and support compatibility, this initiative will
upgrade the aircraft to state of the art avionics and weapons systems.
A safe and consistent fielding of the V-22 Osprey tilt rotor flight
system is critical to the future readiness of Marine Corps aviation.
Reserve CH-46Es will not be replaced for at least another 10 years at
the current planned production rate. Further, until the V-22 is fielded
to the Reserve, the Marine Corps Reserve will not be able to take full
advantage of the skills of V-22-trained Marines who separate from the
Active forces. The increasing cost of CH-46E maintenance and this
potential loss of V-22 expertise can be avoided by earlier fielding of
the V-22 across the Total Force. As current operations in Iraq
highlight, the CH-53 helicopter night vision system is critical to
success. This system provides an improved night and adverse weather
capability for this helicopter, a mainstay of forward deployed combat
operations. It provides aircrews and embarked ground force commanders
video displays with infrared imagery overlaid with flight information
and navigational data.
With network-centric warfare, it is vital that Marine Corps Reserve
units and individual Reservists be able to communicate securely and
robustly. Two major shortfalls are in the area of radio communications:
the PRC 117 multi-band radio for counterintelligence HUMINT Equipment
Program (CIHEP) and the PRC 148 handheld radio. The full purchase of
the PRC 148 will enable the consolidation of a half a dozen radio
systems into one Marine Corps-wide system.
AVIATION EQUIPMENT FUNDED THROUGH AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT NAVY
APPROPRIATION
[Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number
Item Cost Req.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MARINE CORPS RESERVE FISCAL YEAR 2004 UNFUNDED
EQUIPMENT NEEDS
F/A-18A ECP-583 (16 USMCR aircraft)................. $69.0 36
CH-53E Helicopter Night Vision System (HNVS) ``B'' 45.0 ........
Kits...............................................
MARINE CORPS RESERVE FISCAL YEAR 2004 UNFUNDED
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
Initial Equipment Issue (Reserves).................. 13.5 ........
Depot Level Maintenance Program..................... 7.5 ........
FISCAL YEAR 20O4 RESERVE PROCUREMENT, MARINE CORPS
(PMC)
PRC 117 Multi Band Radio for Counterintelligence 2.1 59
HUMINT Equipment Program (CIHEP)...................
PRC 148 Handheld Radio.............................. 4.0 527
FISCAL YEAR 2004 RESERVE PERSONNEL, MARINE CORPS
(RPMC)
Active Duty for Special Work (ADSW) for Marine for 9.1 125
Life Program--funds 125 Reserve Marines............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROA recommends that the Congress appropriate $150.2 million for
these critical unfunded Marine Corps Reserve priorities.
COAST GUARD
We are aware that this committee is not responsible for the direct
funding of the Coast Guard or the Coast Guard Reserve. Nevertheless, a
fully funded Coast Guard is vital to ensuring the security and safety
needs of America through the performance of its traditional core
missions and its increased homeland security posture. Similarly,
funding for the Department of Defense and the Department of the Navy
remains constrained. The Coast Guard transferred from the Department of
Transportation to the Department of Homeland Security on March 1, 2003.
Therefore, it is vital to be farsighted as we cross into the 21st
century to ensure a continued robust sea power.
Homeland Security
The Coast Guard's homeland security efforts prior to September 11th
were directed toward executing and enhancing maritime safety and
security, environmental protection, and homeland defense in addition to
other normal peacetime missions. Through the NAVGUARD Board and other
mechanisms, the Coast Guard worked closely with the Department of the
Navy to address domestic force protection for naval assets. Jointly,
they were also preparing for the future by developing a methodology to
conduct initial domestic Port Vulnerability Assessments to identify
critical infrastructure and high-risk activities in our ports and to
target their limited resources against the greatest threats. In
addition, the Coast Guard promoted the concept of Maritime Domain
Awareness in cooperation with members of the National Security Council.
They were also planning for the establishment of domestic active-duty
Maritime Safety and Security Teams that will possess specialized law
enforcement and force protection capabilities to meet emerging port
security requirements in normal and heightened threat conditions.
Deepwater Capability
Beginning in 2002, the Coast Guard has undertaken the Integrated
Deepwater System Program in order to recapitalize its aging and
technologically obsolete cutters and aircraft over the next twenty
years. The Deepwater Program will provide the Coast Guard with the
capabilities it needs to operate effectively and efficiently in the
coming decades. From the Coast Guard's perspective, ``deepwater''
refers to any operation that requires an extended on-scene presence or
long transit to the operating area. They can be conducted in port, near
the coast or offshore.
The Coast Guard's current fleet has high personnel and maintenance
costs. Some ships have been in service for more than 50 years. The
continued protection of the public, at a lower cost, requires further
investment to enable the Coast Guard to design more capable and less
labor-intensive ships and aircraft. Without the necessary investment,
operations and maintenance costs will continue to increase rapidly and
performance will continue to erode. Adequate investment in the
Deepwater Program will sustain the Coast Guard's capability for
providing services critical to America's public safety, environmental
protection, and national security for the next 40 years--through the
replacement of assets that are at, or fast approaching, the end of
their service lives.
The Integrated Deepwater System Program will also strengthen the
Coast Guard's already close relationship with the Navy. The Coast
Guard's National Security Cutter, as well as other major cutters
acquired through the Deepwater program, will be readily available to
support critical Department of Defense operations such as maritime
surveillance and interception, convoy escort, search and rescue, and
enforcement of maritime sanctions. Such options allow Navy ``high end''
ships to be more effectively employed in higher threat/combat
operations.
The Reserve Officers Association urges the Congress to fully
support the Coast Guard's Integrated Deepwater System Program, its new
start authority, and the Navy's acquisition of assets for the Deepwater
program. In addition, the ROA strongly urges the Congress to examine
the desirability and feasibility of accelerating the Deepwater Program
in order to achieve the desired acquisition objectives within ten years
instead of the current estimated completion period of twenty years. The
Coast Guard Reserve The events of 11 September and their aftermath have
affected the Coast Guard Reserve more, perhaps, than the other Reserve
components. The Coast Guard Reserve was the first Reserve component
mobilized. On the afternoon of 11 September, the Secretary of
Transportation exercised his unique domestic recall authority and
authorized the largest recall of Coast Guard Reservists in history. By
week's end, over 1100 reservists were on duty throughout the nation
helping to ensure the security of the nation's seaports and waterways.
Eventually nearly one third of the entire Selected Reserve (SELRES) was
mobilized, proportionally far more than any other Reserve Component.
Without its Reserve, the Coast Guard could not have surged so rapidly
to increase the physical security of our vital ports and waterways.
Coast Guard Selected Reserve End Strength
ROA strongly urges congressional approval to increase the
authorized and appropriated end strengths of the Active and Reserve
Coast Guard. Specifically, the Coast Guard Reserve should be increased
from 9,000 to 10,000 in fiscal year 2004.
Coast Guard Reserve Funding
It is estimated that the administration has requested $115 million
for the support of reserve training and support for fiscal year 2004.
With the consolidation of the Operating Expenses (OE) and the Reserve
Training (RT) appropriation accounts, visibility is lost on the amount
of support provided to the Coast Guard Reserve. Given the present
procedures for reimbursement for operating expenses and direct payments
by the Coast Guard Reserve, this is the minimum needed to fund a
training program and to increase the force from 9,000 to 10,000. Given
the events of September 11th and the national priority on homeland
defense, we need a strong and vibrant Coast Guard Reserve, perhaps more
than ever before. Providing the adequate funding will help ensure
qualified and experienced members are available and prepared for the
next surge requirement.
As noted above, ROA objects to the loss of visibility of the amount
of support provided to the Coast Guard Reserve. ROA believes that the
Congress, in its capacity of providing constitutional oversight of the
execution of the Budget of the United States, must have the ability to
sufficiently review the documented Coast Guard Reserve program.
CONCLUSION
Thank you for the opportunity to represent the Reserve Officers
Association's views on these important subjects. Your support for the
men and women in uniform, both Active and Reserve is sincerely
appreciated. I'll be happy to answer any questions that you might have.
Senator Burns [presiding]. General McIntosh, did you--in
your testimony did you give us any--how would you solve this
problem of the 90-day callup training period?
General McIntosh. I think if in law it was tied to starting
the mobilization clock, in other words if it was under a
partial mobilization contingency that was the reason they had
to be called for training, then the 2-year, maximum of 2 years
for recall under partial mobilization, that clock should start
the day they show up for training. And we believe that the 90
days should tie to the use of those forces in an actual
contingency or conflict.
Senator Burns. Okay, thank you very much. We will make note
of that and we thank you for your testimony. Sorry you have to
be handed off through this. This is a terrible way to run a
hearing, I will tell you. We thank you.
Now we will call Rodney Lester, CRNA with the American
Association of Nurse Anesthetists. In other words, you put
people to sleep.
STATEMENT OF RODNEY C. LESTER, CRNA, Ph.D., PRESIDENT,
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSE ANESTHETISTS
Dr. Lester. Yes, sir.
Senator Burns. You would run out of work up here because we
do it naturally.
Thank you for coming today.
Dr. Lester. Senator Burns, good morning and thank you for
the opportunity to testify today. We appreciate it. My name is
Rodney Lester. I am a Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist
(CRNA) and President of the American Association of Nurse
Anesthetists (AANA). In addition, I recently retired from the
Army after 5 years of active duty and 24 years as a reservist.
The AANA represents more than 30,000 CRNAs, including the
516 who are on active duty. Currently there are more than 360
CRNAs deployed in the Middle East providing anesthesia care.
That includes both active and reserve components.
To ensure modernization military medical readiness, we must
have anesthesia providers that can work independently and be
deployed at a moment's notice. For this reason, the AANA is
concerned over the recently proposed rule to include
anesthesiologist's assistants (AAs) as authorized providers
under the Tricare program. Before the rule was published, there
should have been full congressional review of the AA's safety
record, cost effectiveness, and limited scope of practice.
AAs are trained to assist the anesthesiologist in providing
anesthesia care and cannot act independently. Immediate and
independent action is required when providing anesthesia. AAs
are not recognized anesthesia providers in any branch of the
military and do not practice in all 50 States. There are only
five States that have separate licensure for AAs. If most of
the country does not recognize the AA practice, why should
Tricare have AAs providing anesthesia care to our military and
their dependents?
Since the introduction of AAs to the health care system 30
years ago, there are two schools in the country and only about
700 AAs practicing. This is in contrast to nurses, who have
been providing anesthesia care since prior to the Civil War.
Today we have 85 nurse anesthesia schools, with over 30,000
CRNAs practicing. AAs will not lower the anesthesia provider
vacancy rate within the DOD.
AANA urges members of the subcommittee and the full
committee to contact the DOD to urge their reconsideration of
the AA proposal.
Incentives for recruitment and retention of CRNAs in the
military are essential to make sure that the armed services can
meet their medical manpower needs. We would like to thank this
committee for funding the critical skills retention bonus,
CSRB, for fiscal year 2003. Sixty-six percent of the 516 active
duty CRNAs enjoy this benefit.
In addition, we would like to thank this committee for its
continued support in funding the incentive special pay (ISP)
for CRNAs in the military. As you know, there continues to be a
considerable gap between civilian and military pay, which was
addressed in the fiscal year 2003 Defense Authorization Act
with an ISP increase authorized from $15,000 to $50,000. The
AANA is requesting that this committee fund that increase in
the ISP at $50,000 for all services, enabling them to recruit
and retain CRNAs.
In conclusion, the AANA believes that the recruitment and
retention of CRNAs in the military service is of critical
concern in maintaining the military's ability to meet its
wartime and medical mobilization needs. The funding of the CSRB
and an increase in ISP will assist in meeting these challenges.
Also, we believe that the inclusion of AAs in the Tricare
system would not improve military medical readiness of any of
the services and therefore should not be approved.
I thank the committee members for their consideration of
these issues and would be happy to answer any questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Rodney C. Lester
The American Association of Nurse Anesthetists (AANA) is the
professional association representing over 28,000 certified registered
nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) in the United States, including 516 active
duty CRNAs in the military services. The AANA appreciates the
opportunity to provide testimony regarding CRNAs in the military. We
would also like to thank this committee for the help it has given us in
assisting the Department of Defense (DOD) and each of the services to
recruit and retain CRNAs.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON NURSE ANESTHETISTS
The practice of anesthesia is a recognized specialty within both
the nursing and medical professions. Both CRNAs and anesthesiologists
administer anesthesia for all types of surgical procedures, from the
simplest to the most complex, either as single providers or in a ``care
team setting.'' Patient outcome data has consistently shown that there
is no significant difference in outcomes between the two providers.
CRNAs and anesthesiologists are both educated to use the same
anesthesia procedures in the provision of anesthesia and related
services.
In the administration of anesthesia, CRNAs perform the same
functions as anesthesiologists and work in every setting in which
anesthesia is delivered including hospital surgical suites and
obstetrical delivery rooms, ambulatory surgical centers, health
maintenance organizations, and the offices of dentists, podiatrists,
ophthalmologists, and plastic surgeons. One of the differences between
CRNAs and anesthesiologists is that prior to anesthesia education,
anesthesiologists receive medical education while CRNAs receive a
nursing education. However, the anesthesia part of the education is
similar for both providers, and both professionals are educated to
perform the same clinical anesthesia services.
Today CRNAs administer approximately 65 percent of the anesthetics
given to patients each year in the United States. They are masters
prepared and meet the most stringent continuing education and
recertification standards in the field, helping make anesthesia 50
times safer now than 20 years ago according to the Institute of
Medicine's 1999 Report, ``To Err is Human.''
NURSE ANESTHETISTS IN THE MILITARY
Nurse anesthetists have been the principal anesthesia providers in
combat areas in every war in which the United States has been engaged
since World War I. Military nurse anesthetists have been honored and
decorated by the United States and foreign governments for outstanding
achievements, resulting from their dedication and commitment to duty
and competence in managing seriously wounded casualties. In World War
II, there were 17 nurse anesthetists to every one anesthesiologist. In
Vietnam, the ratio of CRNAs to physician anesthetists was approximately
3:1. Two nurse anesthetists were killed in Vietnam and their names have
been engraved on the Vietnam Memorial Wall. During the Panama strike,
only CRNAs were sent with the fighting forces. Nurse anesthetists
served with honor during Desert Shield, Desert Storm, and ``Operation
Enduring Freedom.'' Military CRNAs provide critical anesthesia support
to humanitarian missions around the globe in such places as Bosnia and
Somalia. Currently, there are approximately 364 nurse anesthetists
deployed in the Middle East for the military mission for ``Operation
Iraqi Freedom'' and ``Operation Enduring Freedom.''
Data gathered from the U.S. Armed Forces anesthesia communities'
reveal that CRNAs have often been the sole anesthesia providers at
certain facilities, both at home and while forward deployed. For
decades CRNAs have staffed ships, isolated U.S. Bases, and forward
surgical teams without physician anesthesia support. The U.S. Army
Joint Special Operations Command Medical Team and all Army Forward
Surgical Teams are staffed solely by CRNAs. Military CRNAs have a long
proud history of providing independent support and quality anesthesia
care to military men and women, their families and to people from many
nations who have found themselves in harms way.
When President George W. Bush initiated ``Operation Enduring
Freedom,'' CRNAs were immediately deployed. With the new special
operations environment new training was needed to prepare our CRNAs to
ensure military medical mobilization and readiness. Brigadier General
Barbara C. Brannon, Assistant Surgeon General, Air Force Nursing
Services, testified before this Senate Committee on May 8, 2003, to
provide an account of CRNAs on the job overseas. She stated, ``Lt. Col
Beisser, a certified registered nurse anesthetist (CRNA) leading a
Mobile Forward Surgical Team (MFST), recently commended the seamless
interoperability he witnessed during treatment of trauma victims in
Special Forces mass casualty incident.''
In the most recent mission, ``Operation Iraqi Freedom,'' CRNAs were
deployed on both ships and ground. For example, Lt. Col. Steven
Hendrix, CRNA was in the Delta Force, U.S. special operations forces
that rescued Private Jessica Lynch.
This committee must ensure that we retain and recruit CRNAs for now
and in the future for the ever-changing military operation deployments
overseas.
INCLUSION OF AAS UNDER THE DOD HEALTH SYSTEM
The U.S. Department of Defense has proposed authorizing
anesthesiologist assistants (AAs) as providers of anesthesia care under
the TRICARE health plan for military personnel and dependents, in a
proposed rule published in the Federal Register April 3 (68 FR 16247,
4/3/2003). In addition, the Director of Anesthesia Services of the
Veterans Affairs (VA) Department is apparently in the process of adding
AAs as a new anesthesia provider as well. There has been no
congressional review about adding these new providers, and no
assessment of their safety record or cost-effectiveness.
--There are only two AA schools in the entire country (Ohio and
Georgia) since AA introduction to the healthcare system over 30
years ago;
--AAs are not required to have any healthcare training or experience
before they enter AA training. This differs from Certified
Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs) who must have a
bachelor's degree, be a registered nurse and have at least one
year of acute care training prior to beginning the program;
--AAs have a very limited scope of practice, as they are required by
law to administer anesthesia only under the close supervision
of an anesthesiologist. Since AAs must work under the close
supervision of an anesthesiologist, they cannot act
independently and quickly in an emergency situation. Immediate
and independent action is required when providing anesthesia,
especially for those patients in the TRICARE and VA systems.
AAs cannot be deployed in military situations without
anesthesiologists; by contrast, CRNAs are predominantly the
anesthesia provider in military situations & need not be
anesthesiologist supervised.
--Only five states provide separate licensure for AAs (Alabama,
Georgia, New Mexico, Ohio, and South Carolina). Some
anesthesiologists in these states actually have opposed AA
recognition. If most of the country does not specifically
recognize their practice, why would TRICARE and the VA allow
AAs to administer anesthesia to our nation's veterans and
military families?
--The scope of training for AAs is severely limited. For example, the
Emory program in Georgia does not provide clinical instruction
in the administration of regional anesthesia. The AA curriculum
is characterized by training that allows them to ``assist'' the
anesthesiologist in technical functions. By contrast, nurse
anesthetists are capable of high-level independent function and
receive instruction in the administration of all types of
anesthesia including general and regional anesthesia, conscious
sedation, and monitored anesthesia care. The ability to make
independent judgments and provide multiple anesthetic
techniques are critical to meeting an array of patient and
surgical needs.
--The use of AAs is bad healthcare policy. This attempt to introduce
AAs into federal programs sets the stage for anesthesiologists
to control the entire anesthesia market since they will have
substantial control of AA practice, including education,
accreditation, certification, practice, payment, and
employment. This degree of control is intended to eliminate any
chance of competition in the anesthesia market and to allow
only anesthesiologists to bill for anesthesia services, even if
provided by a technical assistant.
--The AA certification examination process emphasizes employability
over thorough testing: The National Commission for
Certification of Anesthesiologist Assistants (NCCAA) allows AA
students to take the AA certification examination up to 180
days before graduation. Scores can be released immediately
after the NCCAA has received documentation of the student's
graduation. Given that an AA student can take the exam six
months before he or she graduates (i.e., after only 18 months
of being in an AA program), the rigors of the exam appear
questionable. How can an AA (with no required healthcare
training prior to entering an AA program) be tested when six
months remain in an AA's education? Nurse anesthetists are not
eligible to take their certification exam until they have
graduated from their nurse anesthesia program.
COMPARE ANESTHESIOLOGISTS, CRNAS, AND ANESTHESIOLOGIST ASSISTANTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue Anesthesiologists CRNAs AAs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Educated in all aspects of anesthesia?........................... Yes Yes No
Authorized to practice in all 50 states?......................... Yes Yes No
Serves in U.S. military settings?................................ Yes Yes No
May practice without anesthesiologist supervision?............... N/A Yes No
Mandatory prior healthcare experience before anesthesia training? Yes Yes No
Recertified every 2 years?....................................... No Yes Yes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AAs may not be the solution to address anesthesia vacancies in
these programs since they need to practice under the direct supervision
of an anesthesiologist. Including AAs under TRICARE would indeed add to
the current anesthesia provider problem within the military, because
there is a current shortage of anesthesiologists in the military to
supervise the AAs, to say nothing of the additional cost.
AANA urges this subcommittee and full committee members to contact
the DOD to urge their reconsideration of this DOD proposal.
CRNA RETENTION AND RECRUITING HOW THIS COMMITTEE CAN HELP DOD
In all of the Services, maintaining adequate numbers of active duty
CRNAs is of utmost concern. For several years, the number of CRNAs
serving in active duty has consistently fallen short of the number
authorized by DOD as needed providers. This is further complicated by
the shortage of CRNAs in the nation. A letter dated March 14, 2002 from
the Asst. Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, William
Winkenwerder, Jr., MD, to the former AANA President, Debbie A.
Chambers, CRNA, MHSA, stated that, ``The Nurse Anesthetist specialty
has been identified by the Department as a critical wartime shortage
for the last several years.''
Recruitment of nurse anesthetists for the military becomes
increasingly difficult when the civilian sector faces such critical
shortages, too. Currently, the number of nurse anesthetist vacancies
increased 250 percent from 1998-2001, according to CRNA managers'
surveys. Health professions staffing firms report CRNA recruitment
rising by up to ten-fold from 1997-2000, making nurse anesthesia the
second most recruited health professional specialty. In addition, this
is compounded by the impact of baby boomers retiring. As the number of
Medicare-eligible Americans climbs, it compounds the number of surgical
procedures requiring anesthetics. Indeed, among those retiring
Americans are CRNAs themselves.
In addition, the AANA cited a decline in anesthesiology resident
positions, as well as an increase in office-based surgery and surgery
in places other than hospitals as driving the increased need for CRNAs.
Additionally, with managed care continuing to pursue cost-cutting
measures, coverage plans are recognizing CRNAs for providing high-
quality anesthesia care with reduced expense to patients and insurance
companies. The cost-efficiency of CRNAs helps keep escalating medical
costs down.
This Committee can greatly assist in the effort to attract and
maintain essential numbers of nurse anesthetists in the military by
their support of increasing special pays.
Critical Skills Retention Bonus
Last year on May 8, 2002, Brigadier General Barbara C. Brannon,
Assistant Surgeon General, Air Force Nursing Services, testified before
this Senate Committee requesting the expansion of the critical skills
retention bonus, authorized in the fiscal year 2001 Defense
Authorization Act, to health professionals with critical skills.
Brigadier General Brannon stated:
``Currently, the Secretary of Defense is evaluating whether health
professions will be designated as a critical skill. In anticipation,
the TriService Health Professions Special Pay Working Group is
evaluating future funding, and we have identified our critical nursing
specialties. These specialties include obstetrical nurses, mental
health, medical-surgical, neonatal intensive care, CRNAs and Women's
Health Nurse Practitioners.''
In the fall of 2002, CRNAs were designated as health professions
with critical skills in the military, and were given a $10,000 critical
skills retention bonus (CSRB) to stay in the military for an additional
year after their service obligation. Brigadier General Brannon thanked
this committee for their help in granting a CSRB to CRNAs in her recent
testimony to this committee on April 30, 2003:
``The TriService Health Professions Special Pay Working Group
Identified Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists as critically manned
and therefore eligible for the retention bonus. The program was
enthusiastically welcomed with 66 percent of the eligible CRNAs
applying for a CSRB in exchange for a one year service commitment.''
The AANA also thanks this committee for their hard work. The CSRB
for fiscal year 2003 was funded by this committee, and is assisting
each of the service branches to both retain and recruit CRNAs. We hope
you will continue to fund the CSRB for fiscal year 2004.
The AANA thanks the committee for funding the Critical Skills
Retention Bonus (CSRB) for fiscal year 2003 to ensure the retention of
CRNAs in the military services. We hope you will support continued
funding for CSRB for fiscal year 2004.
The Incentive Special Pay for Nurses
According to a March 1994 study requested by the Health Policy
Directorate of Health Affairs and conducted by DOD, a large pay gap
existed between annual civilian and military pay in 1992. This study
concluded, ``this earnings gap is a major reason why the military has
difficulty retaining CRNAs.'' In order to address this pay gap, in the
fiscal year 1995 Defense Authorization bill Congress authorized the
implementation of an increase in the annual Incentive Special Pay (ISP)
for nurse anesthetists from $6,000 to $15,000 for those CRNAs no longer
under service obligation to pay back their anesthesia education. Those
CRNAs who remain obligated receive the $6,000 ISP.
Both the House and Senate passed the fiscal year 2003 Defense
Authorization Act Conference report, H.Rept. 107-772, which included an
ISP increase to $50,000. The report included an increase in ISP for
nurse anesthetists from $15,000 to $50,000. There had been no change in
funding level for the ISP since the increase was instituted in fiscal
year 1995, while it is certain that civilian pay has continued to rise
during this time. The AANA is requesting that this committee fund the
new increase for the ISP at $50,000 for all the branches of the armed
services to retain and recruit CRNAs now and into the future.
There still continues to be high demand and low supply of CRNAs in
the health care community leading to higher incomes widening the gap in
pay for CRNAs in the civilian sector compared to the military. The
fiscal year 2002 AANA Membership survey measured income in the civilian
sector by practice setting. The median income in a hospital setting is
$110,200, MDA group $100,534, and self-employed CRNA $130,000 (includes
Owner/Partner of a CRNA Group). These median salaries include call pay,
overtime pay, and bonus pay. These salaries are still higher than the
median salary of $74,000 across all military service branches.
In civilian practice, all additional skills, experience, duties and
responsibilities, and hours of work are compensated for monetarily.
Additionally, training (tuition and continuing education), health care,
retirement, recruitment and retention bonuses, and other benefits often
equal or exceed those offered in the military.
Rear Admiral Nancy Lescavage, Director of the Navy Nurse Corps, and
Commander of the Naval Medical Education and Training Command testified
before this Senate Committee at the April 30, 2003 hearing:
``The increase of the maximum allowable compensation amount for
Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist Incentive Special Pay (CRNA ISP)
and the Nurse Accession Bonus (NAB) in the fiscal year 2003 National
Defense Authorization Act will further enhance our competitive edge in
the nursing market.''
Salaries in the civilian sector will continue to create incentives
for CRNAs to separate from the military, especially at the lower grades
without a competitive incentive from the military to retain CRNAs.
Therefore, it is vitally important that the Incentive Special Pay (ISP)
be increased to $50,000 to ensure the retention of CRNAs in the
military
AANA thanks this Committee for its support of the annual ISP for
nurse anesthetists. AANA strongly recommends the continuation and an
increase in the annual funding for ISP from $15,000 to $50,000 for
fiscal year 2004, which recognizes the special skills and advanced
education that CRNAs bring to the DOD health care system.
Board Certification Pay for Nurses
Included in the fiscal year 1996 Defense Authorization bill was
language authorizing the implementation of a board certification pay
for certain non-MD health care professionals, including advanced
practice nurses. AANA is highly supportive of board certification pay
for all advanced practice nurses. The establishment of this type of pay
for nurses recognizes that there are levels of excellence in the
profession of nursing that should be recognized, just as in the medical
profession. In addition, this pay may assist in closing the earnings
gap, which may help with retention of CRNAs.
While many CRNAs have received board certification pay, there are
many that remain ineligible. Since certification to practice, as a CRNA
does not require a specific master's degree, many nurse anesthetists
have chosen to diversify their education by pursuing an advanced degree
in other related fields. But CRNAs with master's degrees in education,
administration, or management are not eligible for board certification
pay since their graduate degree is not in a clinical specialty. Many
CRNAs who have non-clinical master's degrees either chose or were
guided by their respective services to pursue a degree other than in a
clinical specialty. Many feel that diversity in education equates to a
stronger, more viable profession. CRNAs do utilize education and
management principles in their everyday practice and these skills are
vital to performance of their duties. To deny a bonus to these
individuals is unfair, and will certainly affect their morale as they
work side-by-side with their less-experienced colleagues, who will
collect a bonus for which they are not eligible. In addition, in the
future this bonus will act as a financial disincentive for nurse
anesthetists to diversify and broaden their horizons.
AANA encourages DOD and the respective services to reexamine the
issue of awarding board certification pay only to CRNAs who have
clinical master's degrees.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the AANA believes that the recruitment and retention
of CRNAs in the Services is of critical concern. The efforts detailed
above will assist the Services in maintaining the military's ability to
meet its wartime and medical mobilization through the funding of the
Critical Skills Retention Bonus and an increase in ISP. Also, we
believe that the inclusion of Anesthesiologists Assistants (AAs) in the
TRICARE system would impair the military medical readiness capability
of the services, and should not be approved. In addition we commend and
thank this committee for their continued support for CRNAs in the
military.
Senator Burns. Thank you very much, Dr. Lester. Would you
tell me, just real briefly, the difference in training between
a CRNA and an AA?
Dr. Lester. A CRNA is based--first, to be a CRNA you have
to be a registered nurse first and to have critical care
experience.
Senator Burns. AA does not?
Dr. Lester. No, sir. They have to have a bachelor's degree
and may be required to have some basic science courses, but
there is no requirement in any of their programs, their two
programs, that they have any medical background at all prior to
entering the AA training program.
Senator Burns. Do you know if my State of Montana is one of
those States that you mentioned, one of the five?
Dr. Lester. I do not believe so.
Senator Burns. No?
Dr. Lester. I do not believe so.
Senator Burns. The reason I ask you the question is that
this has come up in conversation. I have a daughter that is a
medical doctor. She is a family physician, but she used to
deliver babies until the insurance became prohibitive and so
she decided to drop that part of her practice. And this kind of
came up in a conversation.
So I appreciate your testimony today and thank you for
coming forward.
We would like to call Dr. John Sommerer, Chief Technology
Officer for the Applied Physics Lab at Johns Hopkins
University, Coalition for National Security Research. Dr.
Sommerer, thank you for coming this morning.
STATEMENT OF JOHN SOMMERER, Ph.D., CHIEF TECHNOLOGY
OFFICER, APPLIED PHYSICS LAB, JOHNS HOPKINS
UNIVERSITY; ON BEHALF OF THE COALITION FOR
NATIONAL SECURITY RESEARCH
Dr. Sommerer. Thank you, Senator. My name is John Sommerer
and I am the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) for the Johns
Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab. I am here today on
behalf of the Coalition for National Security Research, a
broadly based group of over 50 scientific, engineering,
mathematical, behavioral societies, universities, and
industrial associations committed to a stronger defense science
and technology base.
First, I would like to thank this committee for your strong
support of defense science and technology. Without the
appropriated funding levels for the past few years, we would
not be working on some very important national security
technology today.
This year we have concerns in three areas of the S&T budget
that your committee should consider. First, its overall
investment level. The budget request is $600 million less than
last year's appropriations. Various studies and recommendations
suggest that to remain competitive DOD should invest about 3
percent of its budget every year in science and technology, or
about $11.4 billion total. That proposition has been repeatedly
endorsed by the administration.
In order to continue important research already in
progress, about $11 billion will be required, which would move
closer to the administration's goal of 3 percent. We urge your
support in achieving this goal within the next several years.
Second, we want to express some concern with DOD's plan to
transfer the S&T programs presently under Office of Secretary
of Defense management to the individual services. The purpose
of such a move appears to be to remove OSD staff from the day-
to-day program management of individual programs and allow a
better focus on long-term planning and oversight, and we agree
with such management efficiencies. But our concern is what
happens to the science and technology products that need a
broader management perspective than that provided by the
individual services.
We urge caution to ensure that these programs will continue
to address the fundamental cross-cutting technologies
originally intended and we would suggest that OSD retain
oversight of the University Research Initiative and other
critical research initiatives until management plans are in
place to ensure that critical work remains on track.
Finally, in the area of basic research, let me urge that
DOD's 6.1 basic research program be provided stable funding
over many years. I cannot derive a specific number for you, but
we do know that it must be gradually increased each year as the
national needs for technology change. We also know that lack of
stability in this account significantly impedes the progress of
research as well as the transition of that research to
practical application.
In closing, Senator Burns, let me cite some of the Applied
Physics Laboratory's (APL) science and technology work that is
making a difference in national security. We saw during
Operation Iraqi Freedom the tremendous military advantages
offered by precision guided weapons. As it turns out, the road
to that capability started in the very office where I work
every day. One of my predecessors, Dr. Frank McClure, invented
satellite navigation there in 1958.
Notwithstanding the genius of his vision, it took many
years of research in areas as diverse as computing,
electronics, atomic clocks, and space physics to come to
fruition. Satellite navigation now makes it possible for our
military forces to reliably hit a target whose coordinates are
known day or night, in any weather.
Today the Applied Physics Laboratory continues to advance
the concept of precision engagement, but the challenge now
focuses on rapidly identifying the targets, locating them, and
engaging them before they can move. In one project we are
developing the capability for groups of uninhabited air
vehicles to operate in a coordinated way to locate, confirm,
and relay coordinates, all without operator intervention.
Another S&T program is developing the propulsion technology
to enable next-generation strike weapons to reach targets in
minutes after launch rather than the hours now taken by our
most advanced cruise missiles.
Thank you for this opportunity to discuss the Department of
Defense science and technology program. It would be a pleasure
to welcome you, other members of the committee, and your staff
to APL to see first-hand some of the exciting research being
done with the support of DOD and this subcommittee.
I would be happy to answer any questions, sir.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. John Sommerer
Good morning Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. I am
here to testify today on behalf of the Coalition for National Security
Research, a broadly based group of scientific, engineering,
mathematical and behavioral societies, universities and industrial
associations committed to a stronger defense science and technology
base.
There are three issues of primary importance in looking at the
defense Science and Technology (S&T) budget this year: overall
investment levels, appropriate balance among the accounts, and the
department's proposal to devolve--or transfer--programs currently under
the Office of the Secretary (OSD) to the services.
On funding, we urge the subcommittee to approve robust and stable
funding for Department of Defense (DOD) basic (6.1), applied (6.2) and
advanced technology development (6.3) elements in fiscal year 2004.
Specifically, CNSR joins many other organizations in urging the
subcommittee to increase the S&T program to $11.4 billion in fiscal
year 2004, or 3 percent of the overall departmental budget, as
recommended by the Defense Science Board, the Quadrennial Defense
Review, the House and Senate Armed Services Committees and numerous
departmental officials. These programs are the foundation of the
Department's Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (RDT&E)
activity. They feed our procurement needs, enhance our readiness and
modernization efforts, provide technologies to protect our forces, and
contribute to the most technologically advanced, best trained, lethal,
fighting force in the world. As we have seen in numerous recent news
reports, investments made in innovative research over the last 30 years
have yielded impressive and flexible technological results and tools to
address the current challenges we face. I want to express deep
appreciation for the Committee's past support and for the fiscal year
2003 funding approved for these programs.
With consideration of the fiscal year 2004 budget, it is important
to recognize the critical role DOD S&T plays in ensuring the future
national security of the United States and the safety and effectiveness
of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. Simultaneously, these
defense science programs contribute to the research enterprise of the
country and to the education of tomorrow's scientists, engineers and
policy makers. The Department provides a critical investment in several
disciplines--including engineering, physical, math, computer and
behavioral sciences--vital to our future national security.
As you are aware, previous investments in defense science and
technology have led to breakthrough developments in areas such as
thermobaric bombs, distributed networking, advanced materials, global
navigation, precision guidance, and stealth technology that have
equipped America's men and women in uniform with the finest
technologies in the world.
As we have seen in recent operations in Iraq and Afghanistan,
research in remotely-operated mini-robots, unmanned air, land and sea
vehicles, remote medicine, chemical and mechanical sensors, large scale
battlefield simulations and advanced data memory systems protect the
warfighters of the future by removing them from harm's way, providing
on-site emergency medical care, identifying dangerous environments,
improving training and speeding data availability and usability.
The support of this subcommittee is critical to ensuring that we
maintain a viable S&T base to meet our future security needs on land,
in the air, and at sea.
A second issue related to funding, I would like to mention deals
specifically with support for the department's most basic and
innovative research programs. Diversion of funds from 6.1 accounts to
meet shortages in other accounts undermines the long-term goal of
defense transformation and future capabilities development. As our
nation's leaders address future challenges and the transformation of
our national defense, long-term 6.1 projects must again become a
centerpiece of the department's S&T program and must remain focused on
real frontiers of discovery.
The final issue on which I want to touch briefly concerns the
department's plans to transfer about $500 million in S&T programs from
the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to the services. CNSR
supports the Department of Defense's goal of moving resources from the
``bureaucracy to the battlefield'' and plans by OSD to focus activities
on long term strategic planning. Nevertheless, we are concerned that
some proposals for implementation of this worthy goal will negatively
impact transformation efforts, the long term technological superiority
of the United States military, and the science and engineering
workforce on which it relies.
The fiscal year 2004 budget request to Congress for the department
would transfer--or devolve--a group of critical, joint,
multidisciplinary programs from OSD to the services. Given the results
of previous, similar reorganization proposals, we believe such a move
could damage the unique nature and design of these programs and would
inherently inhibit cross-service integration and coordination, while
placing additional burdens on the services and offering very little
benefit toward stated goals.
CNSR is confident that an increased focus on long-term strategic
needs of the armed services would highlight the important role S&T
programs, like the University Research Initiative, play in training the
needed scientific and engineering workforce required by this nation,
and in assuring that the latest technology is always available to meet
changing threats and evolving challenges. Given the long-term nature of
basic research, any damage to the programs, though it may not be easily
spotted in the near term, will result in the loss of the U.S.
technology lead and will require an even greater corrective investment
in the future.
In order to continue moving toward stated overall investment goals
for S&T and to carry out strategic decisions most effectively, OSD--as
the most appropriate entity to facilitate jointness--will need
controlling authority over basic research programs and budgets. OSD
should retain current oversight and management of the University
Research Initiative and other critical research initiatives until
management plans are detailed and tested.
I have provided some additional information below to highlight some
examples of the results of DOD S&T investments, which have both
national security and domestic applications. Thank you for your time,
Mr. Chairman. I would be happy to answer any questions.
The Applied Physics Laboratory of the University of Washington,
Seattle, has developed under U.S. Navy sponsorship, a high resolution,
imaging sonar for underwater mine detection and identification in poor
visibility waters such as those commonly encountered in ports and
harbors. The unique sonar, based on acoustic technology that mimics the
optical lens and retina of the human eye, produces a picture-like
image. One version of the sonar is designed to be the eyes' of the
unmanned, autonomous, underwater vehicles being developed for mine
clearance and special operations. A hand-held version enables a diver
to easily and accurately distinguish between mines and false targets
such as mine-like debris, and to identify specific mine types in zero-
visibility water. It is intended to assist Special Forces and Explosive
Ordnance Disposal teams and has been used in Bahrain.
In response to the need to deter and counter the use of biological
and chemical weapons of mass destruction, the Applied Physics
Laboratory of the Johns Hopkins University is working under DARPA
sponsorship to develop and test new technologies that will protect both
military and civilian populations. Advanced Time-of-Flight Mass
Spectrometer instruments are being tested to rapidly detect a broad
range of biological pathogens and chemical warfare agents. Background
Environmental Characterization and Biosurviellance networks are being
tested to measure anomalous behavior that could signal the terrorist
use of biological and chemical warfare agents. These developments will
give us the capability to deal with today's threat spectrum and future
emerging threats.
The University of South Carolina, through its DEPSCoR supported
Industrial Mathematics Institute (IMI), has developed algorithms and
software that enable the rapid display, querying and registration of
Digital Terrain Maps. This software is of potential value in mission
planning, autonomous and semi-autonomous navigation, rapid targeting
and post battlefield assessment.
A DOD-funded researcher at the University of California at
Berkeley, using a pair of Plexiglas wings he called ``Robofly,'' for
the first time provided a comprehensive explanation of how insects fly.
The research could lead to the development of tiny flying devices that
could be dispatched in swarms to spy on enemy forces.
Improved energy efficiency throughout the Defense Department and
its mission activities--testing, training, operations, facilities--has
the potential to save the federal government, and in turn the taxpayer,
millions per year. Fuel cells are among the most promising sources of
clean energy needed for numerous civil and military devices. The
development of efficient electrocatalysts is essential to the
improvement of fuel cell performances. Researchers at the University of
South Carolina, supported by DOD S&T funding, are applying theoretical
and computational methods to the understanding of electrocatalysis,
focusing on the electron reduction of oxygen on platinum electrodes.
No one foresaw the enormous range of applications and whole
industries that have evolved from the Defense-sponsored discovery of
lasers. The basic concepts leading to the development of the laser were
discovered in a microwave research program at Columbia University
funded by the three Services. Lasers were combined with transistors and
the billion-dollar fiber optic industry resulted. Fiber optic
communications, compact disk players, laser printers, procedures to
reattach eye retinas and new cancer surgeries all exist because of
these breakthroughs, the result of Defense Basic Research.
In response to threats due to inadequate or outdated mission
terrain mapping tools, the Georgia Institute of Technology developed
Falcon View, a laptop-mapping software. Designed for the U.S. Air
Force, U.S. Special Operations Command and the U.S. Navy, Falcon View
integrates aeronautical charts, satellite images and other data to
provide detailed, up-to-date data imagery to flight crews conducting
mission planning using relatively simple laptop computers. The system
is credited with reducing typical mission planning time from seven
hours or more down to twenty minutes.
DARPA and ONR-sponsored researchers at Duke University Medical
Center and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have tested a
neural system in animals that utilizes implanted electrodes to assist
brain signals in controlling robotics. Scientists transmitted the brain
signals over the Internet, remotely controlling a robot arm 600 miles
away. The recording and analysis system could form the basis for a
brain-machine interface that would allow paralyzed patients to control
the movement of prosthetic limbs. The finding also supports new
thinking about how the brain encodes information, by spreading it
across large populations of neurons and by rapidly adapting to new
circumstances.
In the late 1960's, DOD-initiated research to explore linking
computers in different geographical locations to improve communication
between their users. The research produced the world's first packet-
switched network, the ARPANET, which connected major universities. As a
result, more and more people gained access to more powerful computers.
Innovation in network design and improved research spawned a new breed
of information scientists who expanded the network to every corner of
the country and the world. Electronic mail, which was considered
earlier to be of minor interest to users, has become the most used
service of computer networks. Through ARPANET, Defense Basic Research
made it possible to launch the National Information Infrastructure.
Senator Burns. Dr. Sommerer, you hit on an area that I
worked very hard on over on the Commerce Committee, which is
R&D and the work that we have done especially in science and
technology. I have made many speeches and there has been one
invention in the last 50 years that has completely been the
bridge to everything that we have ever done electronically
since. I do not think there are very many people in the world
that understand how big the invention of the transistor was to
electronics and everything that we do now, especially with the
smart equipment that we are using now. That could never have
been done had that invention never happened.
The ramifications it has had in the last--well, I guess it
will be 50 years.
Dr. Sommerer. Yes, sir.
Senator Burns. Gosh, that was--I remember when it happened.
I am getting pretty damned old here.
But the ramifications that that has had have been enormous.
So your end of this world is a very important one to us and we
appreciate your testimony today and we thank you for coming.
Dr. Sommerer. Thank you, sir.
Senator Burns. You bet.
We now call Captain Robert C. Hurd, Headquarters Liaison to
Congress, the United States Naval Sea Cadet Corps. Thank you
for coming, Captain.
STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN ROBERT C. HURD, USN (RETIRED),
HEADQUARTERS LIASION TO CONGRESS, UNITED
STATES NAVAL SEA CADET CORPS
Captain Hurd. Well, thank you for having me, sir. The Naval
Sea Cadet Corps is a congressionally-chartered youth
development and education program sponsored by the Navy League,
supported by the Navy and Coast Guard, with over 10,000 cadets,
run by 2,000 adult volunteers. Our goals are development of
young men and women ages 11 through 17 by promoting interest
and skill in seamanship and aviation, instilling a sense of
patriotism, courage, self-reliance, confidence, and those
qualities which mold strong moral character and self-discipline
in a drug-free and a gang-free environment.
Cadets attend boot camp and in the following summers they
train on board Navy and Coast Guard ships or, in specific areas
of advanced disciplines, ashore. They drill one weekend a month
and they take Navy correspondence courses, the basis for
accelerated promotion of a cadet who decides to enlist in the
Navy or the Coast Guard.
There are now 466 ex-Sea Cadets attending the U.S. Naval
Academy. Annually between 400 and 600 ex-cadets enlist in the
services, pre-screened, highly motivated, and well prepared.
Prior Sea Cadet experience has been proven to be an excellent
indicator of a potentially high career success rate. Navy
annual accession recruiting costs average over $11,000 per
person, which, applied to the number of Sea Cadet accessions,
represents a significant financial benefit to the Navy.
Whether or not they choose a service career, all Sea Cadets
carry forth learned values of good citizenship, leadership, and
moral courage that will ultimately benefit themselves and our
country.
The major difference between this and all the other
federally-chartered military youth programs is that Sea Cadets
pay for all their own expenses, including their uniforms, their
travel, insurance, and training costs, which can run $400 to
$500 a year. We are also particularly sensitive to the fact
that no young person be denied access to the program because of
his or her social or economic background.
Federally funded at only half of the $2 million requested
to fill the unfunded Navy budget requirement for the past 3
years, all of these funds are used to help offset cadets' out
of pocket costs and to conduct background checks for the adult
volunteers. With the Federal funding received, training
participation has increased by over 30 percent, 37 percent.
However, for a variety of reasons the current level of funding
can no longer sustain this program. They include inflation,
all-time high cadet enrollment, base closures, reduced base
access due to the terrorism alerts, reduced afloat training
opportunities due to the Iraq War, and nonavailability of
previously provided space A transportation, on-base open bay
berthing, and transportation.
It is therefore considered to be a matter of extreme
importance to us that the full requested $2 million be
authorized and appropriated for fiscal year 2004 and we
respectfully request your consideration and support to this
end. Unfortunately, time precludes my sharing stories with you
about, such as the State of Washington recently honoring an 11-
year-old Sea Cadet for singlehandedly putting out a major
restaurant fire, or for the Ohio unit fulfilling a World War II
veteran's dying wish to be buried in uniform, which the cadets
purchased and then followed through by providing military
graveside honors for the family, or the post-9/11 story of the
Sea Cadets volunteering to be buried in the rubble of Ground
Zero so that the body-sniffing dogs could maintain their
proficiency by seeking them out.
These and many more stories like them are the stories that
you do not read about in the press, and we really think our
kids are worthy of all the support we can give them.
Thank you for this opportunity to speak to you today, sir.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Captain Robert C. Hurd
REQUEST
Funded in fiscal year 2001, fiscal year 2002 and again in fiscal
year 2003, continued Congressional appropriation in the Navy Recruiting
Budget (Operations and Maintenance Navy--Title II, Budget Activity 3)
is essential to expand the Naval Sea Cadet Corps into more communities.
Unlike all other federally chartered military youth groups, the Sea
Cadets themselves pay almost all program costs, including uniforms,
training costs, insurance and transportation to/from training. Funding
to offset Cadet out-of-pocket training costs at a level commensurate
with that received by other federally chartered military related youth
programs, as well as adult volunteer training costs, is needed to
increase program access by America's youth, regardless of economic or
social background, and develop the fine citizens our country needs and
deserves.
Request fiscal year 2004 authorization and appropriation of the
full requested amount of $2 million for the Naval Sea Cadet Corps.
BACKGROUND
At the request of the Department of the Navy, the Navy League of
the United States established the Naval Sea Cadet Corps in 1958 to
``create a favorable image of the Navy on the part of American youth.''
On September 10, 1962, the U.S. Congress federally chartered the Naval
Sea Cadet Corps under Public Law 87-655 as a non-profit civilian youth
training organization for young people, ages 13 through 17. A National
Board of Directors, whose Chairman serves as the National Vice
President of the Navy League for Youth Programs, establishes NSCC
policy and management guidance for operation and administration. A
full-time Executive Director and small staff in Arlington, Virginia
administer NSCC's day-to-day operations. These professionals work with
volunteer regional directors, unit commanding officers, and local
sponsors. They also collaborate with Navy League councils and other
civic, or patriotic organizations, and with local school systems.
In close cooperation with, and the support of, the U.S. Navy and
U.S. Coast Guard, the Sea Cadet Corps allows youth to sample military
life without obligation to join the Armed Forces. Cadets and adult
leaders are authorized to wear the Navy uniform, appropriately modified
with a distinctive Sea Cadet insignia.
There are currently over 338 Sea Cadet units with a program total
of 11,577 participants (2,107 adult Officers and Instructors and 9,470
Cadets (about 33 percent female). This is an all time high enrollment
for the program.
NSCC OBJECTIVES
Develop an interest and skill in seamanship and seagoing subjects.
Develop an appreciation for our Navy's history, customs, traditions
and its significant role in national defense.
Develop positive qualities of patriotism, courage, self-reliance,
confidence, pride in our nation and other attributes, which contribute
to development of strong moral character, good citizenship traits and a
drug-free, gang-free lifestyle.
Present the advantages and prestige of a military career.
Under the Cadet Corps' umbrella is the Navy League Cadet Corps
(NLCC), a youth program for children ages 11 through 13. While it is
not part of the federal charter provided by Congress, the Navy League
of the United States sponsors NLCC.
NLCC was established ``. . . to give young people mental, moral,
and physical training through the medium of naval and other
instruction, with the objective of developing principles of patriotism
and good citizenship, instilling in them a sense of duty, discipline,
self-respect, self-confidence, and a respect for others.''
BENEFITS
Naval Sea Cadets experience a unique opportunity for personal
growth, development of self-esteem and self-confidence. Their
participation in a variety of activities within a safe, alcohol-free,
drug-free, and gang-free environment provides a positive alternative to
other less favorable temptations. The Cadet Corps introduces young
people to nautical skills, to maritime services and to a military life
style. The program provides the young Cadet the opportunity to
experience self-reliance early on, while introducing this Cadet to
military life without any obligation to join a branch of the armed
forces. The young Cadet realizes the commitment required and routinely
excels within the Navy and Coast Guard environments.
Naval Sea Cadets receive first-hand knowledge of what life in the
Navy or Coast Guard is like. This realization ensures the likelihood of
success should they opt for a career in military service. For example,
limited travel abroad and in Canada may be available, as well as the
opportunity to train onboard Navy and Coast Guard ships, craft and
aircraft. These young people may also participate in shore activities
ranging from training as a student at a Navy hospital to learning the
fundamentals of aviation maintenance at a Naval Air Station.
The opportunity to compete for college scholarships is particularly
significant. Since 1975, 141 Cadets have received financial assistance
in continuing their education in a chosen career field at college.
ACTIVITIES
Naval Sea Cadets pursue a variety of activities including
classroom, practical and hands-on training as well as field trips,
orientation visits to military installations, and cruises on Navy and
Coast Guard ships and small craft. They also participate in a variety
of community and civic events.
The majority of Sea Cadet training and activities occurs year round
at a local training or ``drill'' site. Often, this may be a military
installation or base, a reserve center, a local school, civic hall, or
sponsor-provided building. During the summer, activities move from the
local training site and involve recruit training (boot camp),
``advanced'' training of choice, and a variety of other training
opportunities (depending on the Cadet's previous experience and
desires).
SENIOR LEADERSHIP
Volunteer Naval Sea Cadet Corps officers and instructors furnish
senior leadership for the program. They willingly contribute their time
and effort to serve America's youth. The Cadet Corps programs succeed
because of their dedicated, active participation and commitment to the
principles upon which the Corps was founded.
Cadet Corps officers are appointed from the civilian sector or from
active, reserve or retired military status. All are required to take
orientation, intermediate and advanced Officer Professional Development
courses to increase their management and youth leadership skills.
Appointment as an officer in the Sea Cadet Corps does not, in itself,
confer any official military rank. However, a Navy-style uniform,
bearing NSCC insignia, is authorized and worn. Cadet Corps officers
receive no pay or allowances. Yet, they do derive some benefits, such
as limited use of military facilities and space available air travel in
conjunction with carrying out training duty orders.
DRUG-FREE AND GANG-FREE ENVIRONMENT
One of the most important benefits of the Sea Cadet program is that
it provides participating youth a peer structure and environment that
places maximum emphasis on a drug and gang free environment. Supporting
this effort is a close liaison with the U.S. Department of Justice Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA). The DEA offers the services of all
DEA Demand Reduction Coordinators to provide individual unit training,
as well as their being an integral part of our boot camp training
program.
Among a variety of awards and ribbons that Cadets can work toward
is the Drug Reduction Service Ribbon, awarded to those who display
outstanding skills in he areas of leadership, perseverance and courage.
Requirements include intensive anti-drug program training and giving
anti-drug presentations to interested community groups.
TRAINING
Local Training Local training, held at the unit's drill site,
includes a variety of activities supervised by qualified Sea Cadet
Corps officers and instructors, as well as Navy and Coast Guard
instructors.
Cadets receive classroom instruction in basic military
requirements, seamanship, water safety, core personal values, social
amenities, drug/alcohol abuse, cultural relations, Navy history,
customs and traditions and other nautical skills. Training may be held
aboard ships, small boats or aircraft, depending upon the availability
of a platform. Cadets also learn about civilian and military career
opportunities during special career counseling sessions such as fire
fighting and law enforcement.
Special presentations by military and civilian officials are part
of the local training as are educational tours, briefings and
attendance at special events. Participation in parades, social work and
other civic activities are encouraged as part of the whole-person-
training concept.
During the Cadets' first several months, they receive basic
indoctrination to the Sea Cadet program at their local training site in
preparation for summer recruit training.
The Navy League Cadet Corps training program teaches younger Cadets
the virtues of personal neat-ness, loyalty, obedience, courtesy,
dependability and a sense of responsibility for shipmates. In
accordance with a Navy-oriented syllabus, this education prepares them
for the higher level of training they will receive as Naval Sea Cadets.
SUMMER TRAINING
First-year Sea Cadets attend a two-week recruit training period at
the Navy's Recruit Training Command or at a regional recruit training
site. Instructed by Navy or NSCC Recruit Division Commanders, Cadets
receive a condensed version of the basic training which Navy enlistees
receive. Recruit training occurs at a number of regional sites to
handle the overflow from the Recruit Training Command, Great Lakes and
to reduce travel costs to the Cadet as well as the adult volunteer
staff.
A Cadet who successfully completes recruit training is eligible for
advanced training in various fields of choice. Cadets can experience
the excitement of ``hands-on'' practical training aboard Navy and Coast
Guard vessels, ranging from tugboats and cutters to the largest
nuclear-powered aircraft carriers. Female Cadets may also train aboard
any ship that has females assigned as part of the ship's company.
Qualified Cadets choose from such Sea Cadet advanced training as
basic/advanced airman, SEAL training, amphibious operations,
leadership, submarine orientation and training in occupational
specialties, including health care, music, master-at-arms and
construction.
The Cadet Corp programs excel in quality and diversity of training
offered, with more than 7,250 training orders carried out for the 2002
summer training program. Cadets faced a myriad of challenging training
opportunities designed to instill leadership and develop self-reliance,
enabling them to become familiar with the full spectrum of Navy and
Coast Guard career fields.
The positive results of federal funding for both 2001 and 2002,
were that for each summer the NSCC has experienced increased recruit
training attendance of about 1,500 cadets per summer over those years
in which federal funding was not available.
While recruit training acquaints cadets with Navy life and Navy
style discipline, advanced training focuses on military and general
career fields and opportunities, and also affords the cadets many
entertaining, drug free, disciplined yet fun activities over the
summer. The popularity of the training continues to grow not with just
overall numbers but also as evidenced with over 500 cadets performing
multiple two week training sessions during the summer of 2002.
Advanced training highlights for 2002
With federal funding available in 2002, the NSCC's focus was
continuing and/or expanding many of the initiatives started in 2001
with a few new advanced training opportunities added.
They included:
--Continued keeping Cadet costs for summer training at a reduced
price of only the deposit ($25 or $50, same as 2001) plus
transportation.
--Accommodated 9/11 required adjustments through training relocations
and/or alternate arrangements to maintain cadet training
opportunity and quotas at above 2001 levels.
--Maintained expanded recruit training and advanced training
opportunity with a grand total of over 7,500 orders issued, a
record high.
--Expanded adult professional development participation.
--Increased total cadet participation in summer and winter training
evolutions to over 6,000 cadets.
--Added two classes in legal (JAG) training.
--Expanded SEAL Orientation under the sponsorship of the UDT-SEAL
Association and Museum Association with the sponsorship of the
Okeechobee County, Florida Sheriff's Department. Maintained
SEAL Orientation training at NAB, Little Creek, VA.
--Maintained East and West Coast sailing training at NAS, Pensacola,
and NAB, Coronado, with expanded classes at each.
--Nearly doubled class size for seamanship training at the State
University of New York Maritime Academy at Fort Schuyler, and
for the second summer in a row maintained seamanship training
aboard USNS merchant ships, homeported on the West Coast.
--Continued 2001 initiative for Honor Guard training in Texas.
--Maintained expanded YP training on the Great Lakes at participation
levels above 2001.
--Placed 4 cadets onboard USCG Barque Eagle for two, three week
underway orientation cruises.
--Maintained placement of cadets aboard USCG stations, cutters, and
tenders for what many consider among the best of the training
opportunities offered in the NSCC.
--Once again filled all quotas for the popular, merit based,
International Exchange program, with 72 cadet participants and
20 escorts for 2002.
--Kept all quotas filled to all the NSCC Petty Officer Leadership
Academies, (POLA) graduating over 270 cadets at 10 training
sites.
--Maintained SCUBA training opportunities with two classes in 2002.
--Increased MAA and police science from 4 classes to 5.
--Maintained placement of cadets onboard USN ships under local orders
as operating schedules and opportunity permitted.
--As was the case in 2001 and all prior years, once again enjoyed
particularly outstanding support from members of the United
States Naval Reserve, whose help and leadership remains
essential for summer training.
INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE
NSCC operates an international exchange program with Naval Sea
Cadet units in Australia, Belgium, Bermuda, Canada, Hong Kong, Japan,
Korea, the Netherlands, South Africa, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.
Each summer, outstanding Cadets are selected to serve as young
ambassadors and train with their global counterparts. The NSCC
continued in 2002 its' redesigned, highly competitive, merit based, and
very low cost to the cadet, International Exchange Program and placed
cadets in Australia, Korea, Hong Kong, United Kingdom, Sweden,
Netherlands, and Bermuda to train with fellow cadets in these host
nations. The NSCC and Canada maintained their traditional exchanges in
Nova Scotia and British Columbia, and the NSCC hosted visiting cadets
in Norfolk for two weeks of U.S. Navy style training.
NAVY LEAGUE CADET TRAINING
In 2002, over 1,185 Navy League Cadets and escorts attended
orientation training at 15 different sites. This diversity in location
made training accessible and reasonably available to each Cadet who
wished to attend. Over 373 League Cadets and escorts attended advanced
training at several sites. The advanced program was developed in
recognition of the need to provide follow-on training for this younger
age group to sustain their interest and to better prepare them for the
challenges of Naval Sea Cadet Corps training. Navy League Cadets who
attend recruit orientation training are exceptionally well prepared for
Sea Cadet ``boot camp.'' The number of NLCC Cadets who participated in
summer training was a third higher than normal. Again, this was
directly attributable to the federal funding received.
TRAINING GRANTS
Through contributions from Douglas and Christine Peterson, the
Donner Foundation, and the federal funds, every Cadet who desired to
attend summer training had that opportunity. Approximately 1500 more
Cadet orders were written than in previous years. This milestone is a
direct result of funds received for NSCC/NLCC to participate in the
Corps' summer training.
SCHOLARSHIPS
The Naval Sea Cadet Corps Scholarship program was established to
provide financial assistance to deserving Cadets who wished to further
their education at the college level. Established in 1975, the
scholarship program consists of a family of funds: the NSCC Scholarship
Fund; the Navy League Stockholm Scholarship; the San Diego Gas &
Electric Fund; grants from the Lewis A. Kingsley Foundation; and the
NSCC ``named scholarship'' program, designed to recognize an
individual, corporation, organization or foundation. Under this latter
program two new funds have been established to commence scholarships.
The estate of June Howell has forwarded funds to establish a
scholarship in the name of her parents--Harry and Rose Howell. Also,
from the estate of Robert C. Hutton, an aviation orientation
scholarship has been established. Since the inception of the
scholarship program, 149 scholarships have been awarded to 141 Cadets
(includes some renewals) totaling over $160,000.
SERVICE ACCESSIONS
The Naval Sea Cadet Corps was formed at the request of the
Department of the Navy as a means to ``enhance the Navy image in the
minds of American youth.'' To accomplish this, ongoing presentations
illustrate to Naval Sea Cadets the advantages and benefits of careers
in the armed services, and in particular, the sea services.
While there is no service obligation associated with the Naval Sea
Cadet Corps program, many Sea Cadets choose to enlist or enroll in
Officer training programs in all the Services.
Annually, the NSCC conducts a survey to determine the approximate
number of Cadets making this career decision. This survey is conducted
during the annual inspections of the units. The reported Cadet
accessions to the services are only those that are known to the unit at
that time. There are many accessions that occur in the 2-3 year
timeframe after Cadets leave their units, which go unreported. For
example, for the year 2000, with about 83 percent of the units
reporting, the survey indicates that 510 known Cadets entered the armed
forces during the reporting year ending 31 December 2000. Of these, 30
ex-Sea Cadets were reported to have received appointments to the U.S.
Naval Academy. Further liaison with the USNA indicates that in fact,
there are currently 466 Midshipmen with Sea Cadet backgrounds--almost
10 percent of the entire Brigade. Navy accession recruiting costs have
averaged over $11,000 per person, officer or enlisted, which applied to
the number of Sea Cadet accessions represents a significant financial
benefit to the Navy. Equally important is the expectation that once a
more accurate measurement methodology can be found, is, that since Sea
Cadets enter the Armed Forces as disciplined, well trained and
motivated individuals, their retention, graduation and first term
enlistment completion rates are perhaps the highest among any other
entry group. USNA officials are currently studying graduation rates for
past years for ex-Sea Cadets as a group as compared to the entire
Brigade. Their preliminary opinion is that these percents will be among
the highest. It is further expected that this factor will be an
excellent indicator of the following, not only for the USNA, but for
all officer and enlisted programs the Sea Cadets may enter:
--Extremely high motivation of ex-Cadets to enter the Service.
--Excellent background provided by the U.S. Naval Sea Cadet
experience in preparing and motivating Cadets to enter the
Service.
--Prior U.S. Naval Sea Cadet Corps experience is an excellent pre-
screening opportunity for young men and women to evaluate their
interest in pursuing a military career. This factor could
potentially save considerable tax-payer dollars expended on
individuals who apply for, then resign after entering the
Academy if they decide at some point they do not have the
interest or motivation.
--U.S. Naval Sea Cadet experience prior to entering the Service is an
excellent indicator of a potentially high success rate.
Data similar to the above has been requested from the United States
Coast Guard Academy and the United States Merchant Marine Academy.
Whether or not they choose a service career, all Sea Cadets carry
forth learned values of good citizenship, leadership and moral courage
that will benefit themselves and our country.
Program Finances
Sea Cadets pay for all expenses, including travel to/from training,
uniforms, insurance and training costs. Out-of-pocket costs can reach
$400-$500 each year. Assistance is made available so that no young
person is denied access to the program, regardless of social or
economic background.
Federally funded at the $1,000,000 level (of the $2,000,000
requested) in fiscal years 2001, 2002, and 2003, all of these fund were
used to offset individual Cadet's individual costs for summer training,
conduct of background checks for adult volunteers and for reducing
future enrollment costs for Cadets. In addition to the federal fund
received ($1 million), NSCC receives under $700,000 per year from other
sources, which includes around $226,000 in enrollment fees from Cadets
and adult volunteers. For a variety of reasons, this current level of
funding can no longer sustain this program:
--All time high in number of enrolled Sea Cadets (and growing).
--General inflation of all costs.
--Some bases denying planned access to Sea Cadets for training due to
increased terrorism threat level alerts and the associated
tightening of security measures--requiring Cadets to utilize
alternative, and often more costly training alternatives
--Reduced availability of afloat training opportunities due to the
Navy's high level of operations related to the Iraq war.
--Reduced training site opportunities due to base closures.
--Non-availability of open bay berthing opportunities for Cadets due
to their elimination as a result of enlisted habitability
upgrades to individual/double berthing spaces.
--Lack of available ``Space Available'' transportation for group
movements.
--Lack of on-base transportation, as the navy no longer ``owns''
busses now controlled by the GSA.
Because of these factors, Cadet out-of-pocket costs have
skyrocketed to the point where the requested $2,000,000 alone is
insufficient to handle cost increases, not to mention the impact if, as
in past years, only $1,000,000 is approved and appropriated.
It is therefore considered a matter of urgency that the full amount
of the requested $2,000,000 be authorized and appropriated for fiscal
year 2004.
Senator Burns. Thank you. Thank you, Captain Hurd. Not only
are the kids good kids, but they have got a great advocate,
too.
Captain Hurd. Thank you, sir.
Senator Burns. Thank you for coming today.
Captain Hurd. Thank you.
Senator Burns. We now call Dennis Achgill, Director of
Public Affairs, American Society of Mechanical Engineers. I may
have to run here. Does anybody know where Stevens is?
Thank you for coming today, by the way, and I apologize for
the conditions under which you have to testify.
STATEMENT OF DENNIS ACHGILL, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
AFFAIRS, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL
ENGINEERS
Mr. Achgill. Thank you very much. I appear before you today
as a representative of a committee of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers (ASME) International, concerned with
Federal funding of research and development. ASME International
has 125,000 members, including 20,000 students.
Mechanical engineers are a major part of the Nation's
technology base, a base that is essential for the Nation's
defense. The DOD's science and technology program contains
elements incorporating significant mechanical engineering
research. DOD has been the dominant source of Federal research
funding, 70 percent and 66 percent respectively, for the
electrical and mechanical engineering disciplines. Therefore,
we appreciate the opportunity to appear before your
subcommittee to present our views on the importance of the S&T
accounts.
In accordance with the recommendations of the Defense
Science Board, the Quadrennial Defense Review, and the
President's Commission on the Future of the U.S. Aerospace
Industry, and based on the President's fiscal year 2004 budget
request for the Department of Defense, we urge the members of
this subcommittee to provide 3 percent of the total DOD budget,
or $11.4 billion, for the Department's core science and
technology programs for fiscal year 2004.
During the past decade funding for the defense S&T programs
has been below this threshold and essentially flat in constant
dollars. As a result, the job market for engineers in the
defense sector has shrunk, leaving little incentive for young
engineers to seek defense-related career opportunities. The
defense industry has thus had great difficulty in attracting
and retaining the best of the best engineering and scientific
talents of this Nation.
In addition, universities are having difficulty attracting
postgraduate students who rely on S&T funding for their
support. Doctoral engineering enrollments are at a 10-year low.
Students from overseas who study in the United States are
increasingly returning to their home countries for more
attractive opportunities.
Continued unabated, the repercussions of a stagnant defense
investment in research will inevitably extend to the commercial
sector as well. Without question, America's civil aviation
industry has benefited greatly from technological advances in
defense. The situation facing the United States could be a
technologically deficient military together with a subpar civil
aviation industry. Obviously, neither scenario is in the best
interests of the Nation.
The valuable contributions of our engineers and scientists
have been a constant and powerful force over the past century.
These contributions could not have been made without the vision
and support of Members of Congress like yourselves who promote
the continued strengthening of this Nation's investment in the
DOD science and technology programs. Your continued support in
strengthening defense-related engineering sciences is essential
for meeting the future needs of the country.
Therefore, we urge the members of this subcommittee to
continue to provide a robust and stable investment in the
science and technology programs of the Department of Defense to
ensure our national security and protect our homeland while
educating the future defense science and engineering workforce.
It will take a great deal of continued attention to Defense R&D
to ensure that the best engineering and scientific minds are
once again willing to apply their talents to meeting the future
defense needs of the Nation.
Thank you for this opportunity to offer our views. I will
be pleased to respond to any questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dennis Achgill
The Department of Defense (DOD) Task Force of the ASME Inter-
Council Committee on Federal Research and Development (ICCFRD) of the
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME International) is
pleased to provide the following comments on the fiscal year 2004
budget request for the Department of Defense.
FINDINGS
The Department of Defense (DOD) Basic Research (category 6.1),
Applied Research (category 6.2) and Advanced Technical Development
(category 6.3) accounts provide the fundamental building blocks for
Defense Science and Technology (S&T) programs.
The President's proposed fiscal year 2004 budget request for the
DOD S&T Program is $9.93 billion, 7.8 percent lower than the fiscal
year 2003 appropriated levels. Basic Research and Applied Research are
down $109 million (7.7 percent) and $618 million (14.4 percent),
respectively. Advanced Technology Development has increased $186
million (3.7 percent), mostly because of increases to classified
programs. Individually, the Army and Navy are experiencing cuts of 27
percent and 21 percent after accounting for programs devolved from the
Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD). The Air Force budget is up
3.5 percent, but mostly due to increases to a classified 6.3 program.
In the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review, DOD set an S&T funding goal
of 3 percent of the department's Total Obligational Authority (TOA) as
part of its transformation objectives. For the last two years, that
goal has been achieved only after Congress added more than $1 billion
to the President's request in each of those years. The 3 percent goal
was recently reaffirmed by the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics and three senior
officers representing the three services at a March 31st hearing before
the Senate Armed Services, Emerging Threats and Capabilities
Subcommittee. This reaffirmation is in contradiction to a barely
greater than inflation growth in fiscal year 2004 President's budget
Request (PBR) over the fiscal year 2003 PBR and a Future Years Defense
Plan that shows a gradual decline in the percent of TOA budgeted to
S&T.
Defense agencies have historically been the largest source of
federal funding for engineering research in our industry, as well as at
the nation's universities. The universities are significant
collaborators with industry and are the source for young engineering
talent for the defense sector, both public and private. Federal funding
for defense basic and applied research has also provided the majority
of financial support for graduate level education in defense related
fields. DOD has been the dominant source of federal funding, 70 percent
and 66 percent respectively, for the electrical and mechanical
engineering disciplines. DOD also funds more than 40 percent of
academic research in the aerospace and materials engineering fields.
After a decade of defense S&T funding cuts but steady population
growth, it should be no surprise that doctoral engineering enrollments
are at a ten year low. Foreign students who were once counted on to
remain in the United States after graduation are increasingly returning
to their home countries for more attractive opportunities. As a result
of an overall decline in engineering enrollments for much of the past
decade, federal defense laboratories and the defense industry have had
great difficulty in attracting and retaining the best-of-the-best
engineering and scientific talents of this nation. This problem has
only become more critical with the increased focus on security and the
concomitant need to employ citizens in sensitive technology areas.
Nearly a decade of funding declines accompanied by dramatic budget
instability and a pattern in which advanced technology demonstration
programs, designed to accelerate the insertion of research efforts,
were stretched out, delayed and cancelled, resulted in a waste of
valuable resources, and has been a deterrent to attracting a generation
of highly skilled, highly motivated engineers and scientists, the folks
who transform ideas into reality. The decline in support has led to the
loss of irreplaceable research facilities and infrastructure to reduce
federal and corporate overhead costs. In the academic institutions,
many aerospace and other defense related programs of study were
discontinued, thereby weakening the important contributions that these
universities make to the U.S. defense technology base. As research and
development budgets were reduced, the job market for engineers in the
defense sector shrunk, leaving little incentive for young engineers to
seek defense-related career opportunities. The recent budget increases
by the administration and the Congress for DOD S&T must be sustained to
reverse these alarming trends.
The Department of Defense and defense industry now have a workforce
whose average age is increasing at an alarming rate and will continue
to do so until our intellectual resources are replenished. Just as our
country's recent and prolonged economic expansion was largely the
outcome of technological advances that were created by the world's
premier group of talent--U.S. technologists--so has our recent and
prolonged success in military engagements been the outcome of
technological advances made by this national treasure. A February 2003
report by the Presidents Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
(PCAST) stated, ``Federal support for science and engineering students
enhances economic growth.'' Strengthening defense-related engineering
sciences is essential for meeting the future needs of the DOD and our
economy.
The President's Commission on the Future of the United States
Aerospace Industry has documented the workforce and funding issues
above and recommended in its November 2002 Final Report ``that DOD's
annual science and technology (6.1-6.3) funding must be sufficient and
stable to create and demonstrate the innovative technologies needed to
address future national security threats. An amount no less than three
percent of DOD Total Obligational Authority, ``fenced'' from budget
cuts, would be sufficient.''
In 1998, the Defense Science Board recommended that the
department's science and technology budget be about 3.5 percent of the
total budget. The 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review stated that, ``A
robust research and development effort is imperative to achieving the
Department's transformation objectives. DOD must maintain a strong
science and technology (S&T) program that supports evolving military
needs and ensures technological superiority over potential
adversaries.'' The review further called ``for a significant increase
in funding for S&T programs to a level of three percent of DOD spending
per year.'' Unfortunately, the current year budget takes a step back
from the progress made last year and the out-year budget projections of
the department project a declining percentage of TOA devoted to S&T.
S&T budgets within the services have also typically experienced
great fluctuations, as the services have struggled to maintain long-
term, stable funding for basic research. Given the long-term nature of
basic research, any damage to the programs, though it may not be easily
spotted in the near term, will result in the loss of the U.S.
technology lead and will require an even greater corrective investment
in the future.
The fiscal year 2004 budget request to Congress for the department
would transfer--or devolve--a group of critical, joint,
multidisciplinary programs from the Office of the Secretary of Defense
(OSD) to the services. In order to continue moving toward stated
overall investment goals for S&T and to carry out strategic decisions
most effectively, the OSD--as the most appropriate entity to facilitate
jointness--will need controlling authority over basic research programs
and budgets. OSD should retain current oversight and management of
critical research initiatives until management plans are detailed and
tested.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Task Force supports the findings and recommendations of the
Quadrennial Defense Review and the Defense Science Board Task Force to
provide 3 percent of the total Defense Department Budget, or $11
billion for the DOD basic (6.1), applied (6.2) and advanced technology
development (6.3) accounts, which make up the S&T program.
DOD S&T programs provide critical investments in scientific
disciplines vital to ensuring future security--including engineering,
mathematics, and physical, computer, and behavioral sciences. We
strongly concur with the recommendations made in the February 2003
report by the Presidents Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
for a balanced portfolio of physical and life sciences achieved by a
healthy increase to engineering and physical science budgets such as
DOD's for fiscal year 2004, and beyond. Supporting DOD S&T will ensure
that the best engineering and scientific minds are once again available
and willing to apply their talents to meet the future defense needs of
this nation.
Thank you for the opportunity to offer our views.
Senator Stevens [presiding]. We do not have any questions,
Mr. Director, but I am sure that you know we work very hard to
support engineering and research, particularly the nanoresearch
area. I appreciate the briefing that the people involved in the
Mechanical Engineers' Society gave us on nanoengineering and
technology and the nanotechnology concepts.
We appreciate your testimony. We will do our best to see to
it we increase that funding.
Mr. Achgill. Thank you very much, Senator.
Senator Stevens. Thank you.
Fran Visco--pardon me. First is Chris Hudgins, the Public
Policy Associate, National Prostate Cancer Coalition.
STATEMENT OF CHRIS HUDGINS, PUBLIC POLICY ASSOCIATE,
NATIONAL PROSTATE CANCER COALITION
Mr. Hudgins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman,
distinguished members of the subcommittee: I would like to
thank you for the opportunity to share my remarks here today.
My name is Chris Hudgins and I am part of the public policy
team at the National Prostate Cancer Coalition.
Since its inception in 1996, the National Prostate Cancer
Coalition has been dedicated to eradicating a disease which
will afflict over 220,000 men this year and claim nearly 29,000
lives. You may be surprised to see someone who is only 25 years
old here today talking about what once was thought to be an old
man's disease.
Senator Stevens. Be careful now. I had it.
Mr. Hudgins. Well, that is why it was once thought, sir.
Unfortunately, I know all too well the story of prostate
cancer and its effect on America's families. In 2000 my
grandfather was diagnosed with prostate cancer. This was quite
shocking to me because I had always thought of him as a strong
and powerful man. He had served his country as a marine during
World War II and during the occupation of Japan. He returned
home and began a career in academics and eventually rose to the
level of president, first at Meredith College in Raleigh, North
Carolina, and later at the University of Richmond in Virginia.
Then he was crippled by a silent killer.
Thanks to the availability of the prostate-specific antigen
(PSA) blood test and the digital rectal exam, both of which are
recommended by the National Prostate Cancer Coalition, my
grandfather was able to catch the disease in its early stages
when it was the most treatable. After having a radical
prostatectomy, my grandfather fully recovered and has returned
to his post as chancellor of the University of Richmond.
Now the focus turns to the other men in my family. As you
may be aware, a person with one close family member with
prostate cancer is twice as likely to develop the disease. My
father, much like the majority of the baby boom generation, is
now in his early fifties. I say this because he, along with 22
million men, in the next 10 years will be in the target age
group for increased risk of prostate cancer.
Since my grandfather's diagnosis, I have encouraged him to
keep a close eye on his PSA level. This is not only because I
love him, but because if he is diagnosed then my and my
brother's risk of the disease will increase fivefold.
As our Nation welcomes home the soldiers who fought so
bravely in Iraq, I cannot help but think of my grandfather
returning home from Japan in 1947. I believe our Nation has a
responsibility to protect America's soldiers on the battlefield
and long after the fighting has ended. Veterans like my
grandfather and the approximately 2.2 million men currently
serving in active or reserve duty must know that their
government is doing everything it can to protect them from
prostate cancer.
Therefore, to effectively fight prostate cancer the
National Prostate Cancer Coalition requests that you allocate
at least $100 million in fiscal year 2004 for the prostate
cancer research program conducted by the Department of
Defense's congressionally-directed medical research program.
Since its inception in 1998, the prostate cancer research
program has been the most efficient Federally-directed prostate
cancer research program because it builds sound accountability
mechanisms into its fundamental operation. The program is also
focused on non-duplication of effort, fostering the science of
projects that are unique and are not receiving funding from
other sources.
The prostate cancer research program has engaged survivors
of prostate cancer into its accountability practices from its
outset. This consumer input helps drive the program to become
more ambitious and creative in seeking out new areas of
research because it maintains its focus on what is important to
survivors, advocates, and researchers.
The prostate cancer research program offers awards such as
the idea development and new investigator grants that seek
innovative and revolutionary studies that deviate from previous
research. The goal is to stimulate venture research projects
that reward sometimes speculative but promising ideas that can
lead to huge returns on investments. Other grant awards focus
on researching the disproportionate impact of prostate cancer
on African American men.
While the prostate cancer research program's award
mechanisms continue to stimulate exciting new research, the
program is unable to fund its clinical trials awards
appropriately. At least $100 million is needed to allow the
program to resume sound clinical trials, which are paramount in
translating research from the lab into new patients for
treatments.
On behalf of our community of advocates, families,
researchers, physicians, and others touched by the disease, I
would like to thank you and the committee once again for your
time and leadership. Together we can eliminate prostate cancer
as a threat to grandfathers, fathers, brothers, and families
like mine.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Chris Hudgins
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I would
like to thank you for the opportunity to share my remarks. My name is
Chris Hudgins, and am part of the public policy team at the National
Prostate Cancer Coalition (NPCC). Since its inception in 1996, NPCC has
been dedicated to eradicating prostate cancer through awareness,
outreach, and advocacy.
You may be surprised to see someone who is only 25 years old
talking about what was once thought to be an ``old man's disease.''
Unfortunately, I know all to well the story of prostate cancer and its
effects on America's families. I was introduced to the disease a few
years before I began my employment with the NPCC. In 2000, my
grandfather was diagnosed with prostate cancer. This was quite shocking
to me because I had always thought of him as a strong and powerful man.
He had served his country as a Marine during World War II and during
the occupation of Japan. He returned home and studied at five different
institutions. After serving in administrative capacities throughout the
southeast for various colleges, universities and the Tennessee
Department of Education, he rose to level of President, first at
Meredith College in Raleigh, NC and later at the University of
Richmond. Then, he was crippled by a silent killer.
As you can imagine, this was a particularly stressful time for me
and my family. While, at the time of my grandfather's diagnosis, I had
heard of the disease I was not aware of how prevalent prostate cancer
had become among men. I now know that prostate cancer will affect about
220,000 men and their families this year, and 28,900 men will lose
their battle with the disease. It's unfathomable to think that so many
people will be subjected to the anguish my family has experienced.
Thanks to the availability of the prostate specific antigen (PSA)
and the digital rectal exam (DRE), both of which are recommended by
NPCC, my grandfather was able to catch the disease early when it is the
most treatable. After having a radical prostatectomy, my grandfather
fully recovered and has returned to riding his Harley-Davidson around
the University of Richmond campus. Now the focus turns to the other men
in my family.
As you may be aware, a person with one close family member with
prostate cancer is twice as likely to develop the disease. My father,
much like the majority of the baby-boom generation, is now in his early
fifties. I say this because he, along with about 22 million men in the
next ten years, is in the target age group for increased risk of
prostate cancer. Since my grandfather's diagnosis, I have encouraged my
father to keep a close eye on his PSA. This is not only because I love
him but also because if he is diagnosed then my and my brother's risk
of the disease increases five fold.
While my grandfather--and my family--benefited from early
detection, others are not so lucky. In the past few years, I have had
the advantage of learning about the risks of prostate cancer and how
early detection can save lives, but the truth is I am in the minority.
We must focus on those individuals who do not have the benefit of this
knowledge. We must also continue important research in prostate cancer
to develop new treatments until a cure is found. That's why, Mr.
Chairman, we all need your help.
As the nation prepares to bring home the soldiers that fought so
bravely in Iraq, I can't help but think of my grandfather returning
home from Japan in 1947. I believe our nation has a responsibility to
protect America's soldiers on the battlefield and long after the
fighting has ended. Men like my grandfather, veterans exposed to
defoliants, who may bear a disproportionate risk of prostate cancer,
and those who are about to return from the Middle East, must know that
their government is doing everything they can to protect them from
prostate cancer. As President Franklin Delano Roosevelt stated at the
dedication of the National Institutes of Health in 1940, ``we cannot be
a strong nation unless we are a healthy nation.''
While I cannot predict the impact of prostate cancer among our men
in uniform, I can offer some estimates. We know that about 85 percent
of individuals serving in active or reserve duty are men, approximately
2.2 million. If one applies the average risk to this group, over
350,000 men will be diagnosed with the disease in their lifetimes.
That's more than the number of American servicemen lost in both World
Wars.
The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) estimates that there will
be nearly 25 million veterans living in the United States by September
2003. Of these, 94 percent will be male, 81 percent will be age 45 or
older and 17 percent will be minorities. The Veterans Health
Administration also estimates that nearly 50,000 new cancer cases are
diagnosed in VA patients each year--the second leading killer of
veterans. It's easy to see the impact prostate cancer could have on
America's servicemen.
To effectively fight prostate cancer, NPCC requests that you
allocate at least $100 million in fiscal year 2004 for the Prostate
Cancer Research Program (PCRP) conducted by the Department of Defense
through the extramural Congressionally Directed Medical Research
Program (CDMRP). The PCRP is a model program, and it offers ``awards to
fill gaps in ongoing research and complement initiatives sponsored by
other agencies.'' The program has received $85 million in funding in
fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003, but without at least $100
million, PCRP cannot appropriately conduct clinical trials research in
which cutting-edge treatments can be offered to patients who need them
most.
Since its inception in fiscal year 1997, the PCRP has been the most
efficient federally directed prostate cancer research program because
it builds sound accountability mechanisms into its fundamental
operation. Its research is dedicated to increase evidence-based
medicine, and it subjects itself to regular reviews of this effort. The
program is also focused on non-duplication of effort, fostering the
science of projects that are unique and are not receiving funding from
other sources. The PCRP has engaged survivors of prostate cancer into
its accountability practices from its outset. Several of NPCC's friends
and colleagues have the honor of sitting on the Prostate Cancer
Integration Panel, joining other consumers and a diverse group of
scientists in the oversight of the CDMRP program and its projects. This
consumer input helps drive the program to become more ambitious and
creative in seeking new areas of research, because it maintains its
focus on what is important to survivors, advocates and researchers.
The CDMRP prostate cancer program is clear-cut in its mission,
process, goals and results; it is easy to see where--and how
efficiently--every dollar the PCRP receives is spent. Among the
research resources funded by the federal government, the CDMRP is the
only program to offer organ site-specific research grants. Each grant
awarded through the PCRP is 100 percent dedicated to prostate cancer.
The impact on solving the problem of prostate cancer is not subjected
to the complex--and too often fuzzy--calculations of organ site
relevance that other agencies weigh when considering research
opportunities.
As stated in its annual report, the PCRP has ``challenged the
scientific community to design innovative prostate cancer research that
would foster new directions, address neglected issues and bring new
investigators into the field.'' Cornerstones of the program's research
efforts are the ``Idea Development'' and ``New Investigator'' grants.
Both of these awards seek innovative and revolutionary studies that
deviate from previous research. Their goal is to stimulate ``venture
research'' projects that reward sometimes speculative but promising
ideas that can lead to huge returns on investments.
The PCRP also offers grants to explore why certain populations
suffer higher disease incidence. Grants such as the ``Historically
Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Collaborative Partnership'' and
the ``Health Disparity Training'' awards focus on researching the
disproportionate impact of prostate cancer on African-American men and
encouraging HBCU scientists to enter the prostate cancer research
field.
In fiscal year 2003, the PCRP has added several new awards. Perhaps
the most exciting new grant is the ``Exploration-Hypothesis Development
Award'' which allows researchers to explore ``innovative, untested,
potentially groundbreaking concepts in prostate cancer.'' Unlike
similar grants awarded by the PCRP to new and innovative research
ideas, the award is centered on new approaches without requiring any
preliminary data. Such awards contrast other agencies' grant processes
that tend to favor research in which ``proof-of-principle'' has already
been established. The program is also offering the ``Physician Research
Training Award'' which is designed to draw new scientists into the
field and train them for a career in prostate cancer research. Also
awarded for the first time in fiscal year 2003 are the prostate cancer
consortium awards. These large awards, which can be up to $10 million,
are focused on bringing together leading researchers and clinicians to
concentrate on specific areas of prostate cancer research to accelerate
advances in the field.
Unfortunately, the PCRP is not always able to make awards to
worthwhile projects. In fiscal year 2002, the program received nearly
700 proposals but was only able to recommend 150 for funding compared
to the over 300 for breast cancer research. Despite funding fewer than
25 percent of proposals received over the last five years, the program
is still producing exceptional results. Data from more than 450
research projects have been published in scientific journals, and over
25 projects have received a patent or licensing.
As I mentioned, funding for the PCRP must return to its fiscal year
2001 level of $100 million to allow the program to conduct needed
clinical research appropriately. While many advancements are being
made, we must capitalize on discoveries by translating them and testing
them on patients. Clinical trials research conducted through the CDMRP
breast cancer program has already produced a revolutionary new drug
called Herceptin, which impacts a specific pathway in the growth of
cancer cells. Studies have already shown that Herceptin, when used
correctly, increases survivorship of breast cancer patients by one-
third. Once prostate cancer research is afforded the same opportunity,
who knows what kinds of new treatments may become available to men.
Dr. William G. Nelson, a prominent prostate cancer research
professor at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine once stated,
``It's nice to be able to cure rats and mice, but curing humans is what
we're all about--you can't do that without clinical trials.'' We
believe Dr. Nelson's statement speaks for itself. That's why funding
must increase to at least $100 million in fiscal year 2004.
Mr. Chairman, we also ask that you provide at least $10 million in
funding for the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
(USUHS) and Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) program called the
Center for Prostate Disease Research (CPDR).
The CPDR is the intramural prostate cancer research program at DOD.
Among other achievements, the CPDR has helped determine the
effectiveness of the prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening exam. A
recent CPDR study found a significant increase in five-year survival
rates of those diagnosed with the disease and a decreased chance of
losing life to the disease, both attributed to the implementation of
PSA screening. NPCC supports early detection through screening and
believes that the PSA test along with the DRE saves lives.
On behalf of our community of advocates--families, researchers,
physicians, and others touched by the disease, I would like to thank
you and the Committee once again for your time and leadership. The
investments we make today can greatly reduce medical costs and save
lives tomorrow. Together, we can eliminate prostate cancer as a threat
to grandfathers, fathers, brothers, and families like mine.
Senator Stevens. Well, thank you very much. It may interest
you to know my grandfather, my father, and my oldest brother
all died of prostate cancer, and I have had it, and you have a
point. But there is a limit to what we can do to increase
Federal funding for this research. You should do more to raise
money in the private sector.
Mr. Hudgins. All right. Thank you for your leadership in
the past, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Stevens. They really have--there should be--I think
I may put a matching funds requirement on the money in this
year's prostate cancer research and say that it can only be
made available if it is matched by private funds.
Mr. Hudgins. Okay. Thank you very much.
Senator Stevens. Thank you.
Fran Visco, please.
STATEMENT OF FRAN VISCO, J.D., PRESIDENT, NATIONAL
BREAST CANCER COALITION
Ms. Visco. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Fran Visco, a 16-
year breast cancer survivor and the president of the National
Breast Cancer Coalition. As you know, the coalition is an
organization of more than 600 organizations from around the
country and over 70,000 individuals, all dedicated to
eradicating breast cancer through action and advocacy. I am
here on their behalf to thank you and the committee for its
leadership in the breast cancer research program.
Since 1992 this program has set the standard for biomedical
research in this country and in other countries. It has created
new models of research. It has created new mechanisms to
attract scientific ideas, innovative, cutting edge ideas from
around the world. It is a model that has been copied, not just
by other programs within the DOD and the National Cancer
Institute, but also other countries. It has created new
collaborations and partnerships for the military with the
leaders in the scientific community around the world, and the
Army itself has copied the program and used what is happening
in this program in many of its other areas of endeavor.
This year the program itself submitted its annual report
September 30, 2002, and it is their report on all of the
congressionally-directed medical research programs. We have
also submitted testimony on behalf of the coalition, and 65 of
your colleagues in the Senate have written to you and to Mr.
Inouye asking for continuation of the program.
All of those materials lay out the reason why this program
must continue. It is not duplicative. It fills gaps. It is
creating new relationships for the Army and it is creating hope
and real progress for women and their families.
So I am here to urge you to continue this program and again
to thank you for the incredible leadership that you have shown,
and I am available to answer any questions you have. I wanted
to point out another thing of this program that truly is a
model, and that is the meeting that is called the Era of Hope.
Every 2 years the breast cancer research program conducts a
meeting where everyone who has been funded by the program must
report on their research to the American public. This is
probably the only time that the taxpayers learn what is
happening, specifically and directly what is happening with
their tax dollars. It again is a wonderful model that is being
replicated elsewhere.
So for all of these reasons, we urge you to continue this
program and thank you for your support to date.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Fran Visco
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Appropriations
Subcommittee on Defense for your exceptional leadership in the effort
to increase and improve breast cancer research. You and your Committee
have shown great determination and leadership in searching for the
answers by funding the Department of Defense (DOD) Peer-Reviewed Breast
Cancer Research Program (BCRP) at a level that has brought us closer to
eradicating this disease.
I am Fran Visco, a breast cancer survivor, a wife and mother, a
lawyer, and President of the National Breast Cancer Coalition. On
behalf of NBCC, and the more than 3 million women living with breast
cancer, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
The DOD BCRP's decade of progress in the fight against breast
cancer has been made possible by this Committee's investment in breast
cancer research. To continue this unprecedented progress, we ask that
you support a $175 million appropriation for fiscal year 2004. The
program was cut back from $175 million to $150 million two years ago as
part of an across-the-board cut in Congressionally directed health
programs. However, there continues to be excellent science that goes
unfunded which is why we believe that the BRCP should be appropriated
$175 million for fiscal year 2004.
As you know, the National Breast Cancer Coalition is a grassroots
advocacy organization made up of more than 600 organizations and tens
of thousands of individuals and has been working since 1991 toward the
eradication of this disease through advocacy and action. NBCC supports
increased funding for breast cancer research, increased access to
quality health care for all women, and increased influence of breast
cancer activists at every table where decisions regarding breast cancer
are made.
OVERVIEW OF THE DOD BREAST CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM
In the span of only ten years, the DOD Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer
Research Program has established itself as model medical research
program, respected throughout the cancer community for its innovative
and accountable approach. The groundbreaking research performed through
the program has the potential to benefit not just breast cancer, but
all cancers, as well as other diseases. Biomedical research is being
transformed by the BCRP's success.
This program is both innovative, and incredibly streamlined. It
continues to be overseen by a group of distinguished scientists and
activists, as recommended by the Institute of Medicine (IOM). Because
there is no bureaucracy, the program is able to quickly respond to what
is currently happening in the scientific community. It is able to fill
gaps, with little fuss. It is responsive, not just to the scientific
community, but also to the public.
Since its inception, this program has matured from an isolated
research program to a broad-reaching influential voice forging new and
innovative directions for breast cancer research and science. The
flexibility of the program has allowed the Army to administer this
groundbreaking research effort with unparalleled efficiency and skill.
In addition, an inherent part of this program has been the
inclusion of consumer advocates at every level, which has created an
unprecedented working relationship between advocates and scientists,
and ultimately led to new avenues of research in breast cancer. Since
1992, more than 600 breast cancer survivors have served on the BCRP
review panels. Their vital role in the success of the BCRP has led to
consumer inclusion in other biomedical research programs at DOD. In
addition, this program now serves as an international model.
It is important to note that the DOD Integration Panel that designs
this program has a plan of how best to spend the funds appropriated.
This plan is based on the state of the science--both what scientists
know now and the gaps in our knowledge--as well as the needs of the
public. This plan coincides with our philosophy that we do not want to
restrict scientific freedom, creativity and innovation. While we
carefully allocate these resources, we do not want to predetermine the
specific research areas to be addressed.
UNIQUE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES
Developments in the past few years have begun to offer breast
cancer researchers fascinating insights into the biology of breast
cancer and have brought into sharp focus the areas of research that
hold promise and will build on the knowledge and investment we have
made. The Innovative Developmental and Exploratory Awards (IDEA) grants
of the DOD program have been critical in the effort to respond to new
discoveries and to encourage and support innovative, risk-taking
research. The IDEA grants have been instrumental in the development of
promising breast cancer research. These grants have allowed scientists
to explore beyond the realm of traditional research and have unleashed
incredible new ideas and concepts. IDEA grants are uniquely designed to
dramatically advance our knowledge in areas that offer the greatest
potential.
IDEA grants are precisely the type of grants that rarely receive
funding through more traditional programs such as the National
Institutes of Health, and academic research programs. Therefore, they
complement, and do not duplicate, other federal funding programs. This
is true of other DOD award mechanisms as well.
For example, the Innovator awards are structured to recognize
talented individuals, rather than projects, from any field of study by
providing funding and freedom to pursue creative, potentially
breakthrough research that could ultimately accelerate the eradication
of breast cancer. In the area of training, the DOD BCRP has launched
innovative programs such as Physician-Scientist Training Awards, which
are intended to support the training of new breast cancer clinical
research physicians.
Also, Historically Black Colleges and Minority Universities/
Minority Institutions Physicians' Training Awards (``Minority
Institution'' awards) are intended to provide assistance at an
institutional level. The major goal of this award is to support
collaboration between multiple investigators at an applicant Minority
Institution and a collaborating institution with established investment
in breast cancer research, for the purpose of creating an environment
that would foster breast cancer research, and in which Minority
Institute faculty would receive training toward establishing successful
breast cancer research careers.
These are just a few examples of innovative approaches at the DOD
BCRP that are filling gaps in breast cancer research. It is vital that
these grants are able to continue to support the growing interest in
breast cancer research--$175 million for peer-reviewed research will
help sustain the program's momentum.
The DOD BCRP also focuses on moving research from the bench to the
bedside. A major feature of the awards offered by the BCRP is that they
are designed to fill niches that are not offered by other agencies. The
BCRP considers translational research to be the application of well-
founded laboratory or other pre-clinical insight into a clinical trial.
To enhance this critical area of research, several research
opportunities have been offered. Clinical Translational Research
Awards, for investigator-initiated projects that involve a clinical
trial within the lifetime of the award, make up the majority of the
BCRP's translational research portfolio. The BCRP expanded its emphasis
on translational research by offering 5 different types of awards that
support work at the critical juncture between laboratory research and
bedside applications.
SCIENTIFIC ACHIEVEMENTS
The BCRP research portfolio is comprised of many different types of
projects, including support for innovative ideas, infrastructure
building to facilitate clinical trials, and training breast cancer
researchers.
One of the most promising outcomes of research funded by the BCRP
was the development of Herceptin, a drug that prolongs the lives of
women with a particularly aggressive type of advanced breast cancer.
This drug could not have been developed without first researching and
understanding the gene known as HER2-neu, which is involved in the
progression of some breast cancers. Researchers found that over-
expression of HER-2/neu in breast cancer cells results in very
aggressive biologic behavior. Most importantly, the same researchers
demonstrated that an antibody directed against HER2-neu could slow the
growth of the cancer cells that over-expressed the gene. This research
led to the development of the drug Herceptin. This research was made
possible in part by a DOD BCRP-funded infrastructure grant. Other
researchers funded by the BCRP are currently working to identify
similar kinds of genes that are involved in the initiation and
progression of cancer. They hope to develop new drugs like Herceptin
that can fight the growth of breast cancer cells.
Several studies funded by the BCRP will examine the role of
estrogen and estrogen signaling in breast cancer. For example, one
study examined the effects of the two main pathways that produce
estrogen. Estrogen is often processed by one of two pathways; one
yields biologically active substances while the other does not. It has
been suggested that women who process estrogen via the biologically
active pathway may be at a higher risk of breast cancer. It is
anticipated that work from this funding effort will yield insights into
the effects of estrogen processing on breast cancer risk in women with
and without family histories of breast cancer.
One DOD IDEA award success has supported the development of new
technology that may be used to identify changes in DNA. This technology
uses a dye to label DNA adducts, compounds that are important because
they may play a role in initiating breast cancer. Early results from
this technique are promising and may eventually result in a new marker/
method to screen breast cancer specimens.
Another DOD BCRP IDEA award has generated a new vaccine targeted
against ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), a malignant, non-invasive
lesion that can develop into an invasive breast cancer. The vaccine is
being tested on mice that develop spontaneous mammary tumors that over
express the HER-2/neu protein. Mice treated with the vaccine show a
markedly decreased rate of tumor development when compared to that
generated for the prevention of tumor formation in women at risk for
the development of HER-2/neu expressing tumors.
Investigators funded by the DOD have developed a novel imaging
technique that combines two-dimensional and novel three-dimensional
digital mammographic images for analysis of breast calcifications.
Compared to conventional film screen mammography, this technique has
greater resolution. Ultimately, this technique may help reduce the
number of unnecessary breast biopsies.
Despite the enormous successes and advancements in breast cancer
research made through funding from the DOD BCRP, we still do not know
what causes breast cancer, how to prevent it, or how to cure it. It is
critical that innovative research through this unique program continues
so that we can move forward toward eradicating this disease.
FEDERAL MONEY WELL SPENT
The DOD BCRP is as efficient as it is innovative. In fact, 90
percent of funds go directly to research grants. The flexibility of the
program allows the Army to administer it in such a way as to maximize
its limited resources. The program is able to quickly respond to
current scientific advances, and is able to fill gaps by focusing on
research that is traditionally under-funded. It is also responsive, not
just to the scientific community, but also to the public. This is
evidenced by the inclusion of consumer advocates at both the peer and
programmatic review levels. The consumer perspective helps the
scientists understand how the research will affect the community, and
allows for funding decisions based on the concerns and needs of
patients and the medical community.
Since 1992, the BCRP has been responsible for managing $1.2 billion
in appropriations, which has resulted in 2,837 awards for fiscal year
1992-2000. The areas of focus of the DOD BCRP span a spectrum and
include basic, clinical, behavioral, environmental sciences, and
alternative therapy studies, to name a few. The BCRP benefits women and
their families by maximizing resources; the program offers awards that
fill existing gaps in breast cancer research. Scientific achievements
that are the direct result of the DOD BCRP are undoubtedly moving us
closer to eradicating breast cancer.
The outcomes of the BCRP-funded research can be gauged, in part, by
the number of publications, abstracts/presentations, and patents/
licensures reported by awardees, to date. There have been 2300
publications in scientific journals, 1800 abstracts and 30 patents/
licensure applications.
The federal government can truly be proud of its investment in the
DOD BCRP.
POSITIVE FEEDBACK ON THE DOD BCRP
The National Breast Cancer Coalition has been the driving force
behind this program for many years. The success of the DOD Peer-
Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program has been illustrated by two
unique assessments of the program. The Institute of Medicine (IOM),
which originally recommended the structure for the program,
independently re-examined the program in a report published in 1997.
Their findings overwhelmingly encourage the continuation of the program
and offer guidance for program implementation improvements.
The 1997 IOM review of the DOD Peer-Review Breast Cancer Research
Program commended the program and stated that, ``the program fills a
unique niche among public and private funding sources for cancer
research. It is not duplicative of other programs and is a promising
vehicle for forging new ideas and scientific breakthroughs in the
nation's fight against breast cancer.'' The IOM report recommends
continuing the program and establishes a solid direction for the next
phase of the program. It is imperative that Congress recognizes the
independent evaluations of the DOD Breast Cancer Research Program, as
well as reiterates its own commitment to the Program by appropriating
the funding needed to ensure its success. The IOM report has laid the
groundwork for effective and efficient implementation of the next phase
of this vital research program, now all that it needs is the
appropriate funding.
The DOD Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program not only
provides a funding mechanism for high-risk, high-return research, but
also reports the results of this research to the American people at a
biennial public meeting called the ``Era of Hope.'' The 1997 meeting
was the first time a federally funded program reported back to the
public in detail not only on the funds used, but also on the research
undertaken, the knowledge gained from that research and future
directions to be pursued. The transparency of the BCRP allows
scientists, consumers and the American public to see the exceptional
progress made in breast cancer research.
At the 2002 Era of Hope meeting, all BCRP award recipients from
fiscal years 1998-2000 were invited to report their research findings
and many awardees from previous years were asked to present
advancements in their research. Scientists reported important advances
in the study of cancer development at the molecular and cellular level.
Researchers presented the results of research that elucidates several
genes and proteins responsible for the spread of breast cancer to other
parts of the body, and, more importantly, reveals possible ways to stop
this growth. The meeting, which marked the 10th Anniversary of the
program, also featured grant recipients who are working towards more
effective and less toxic treatments for breast cancer that ``target''
the unique characteristics of cancer cells and have a limited effect on
normal cells.
The DOD Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program has attracted
scientists with new ideas and has continued to facilitate new thinking
in breast cancer research and research in general. Research that has
been funded through the DOD BCRP is available to the public.
Individuals can go to the Department of Defense website and look at the
abstracts for each proposal.
COMMITMENT OF THE NATIONAL BREAST CANCER COALITION
The National Breast Cancer Coalition is strongly committed to the
DOD program in every aspect, as we truly believe it is one of our best
chances at finding cures and preventions for breast cancer. The
Coalition and its members are dedicated to working with you to ensure
the continuation of funding for this program at a level that allows
this research to forge ahead.
In May of 1997, our members presented a petition with over 2.6
million signatures to the Congressional leaders on the steps of the
Capitol. The petition called on the President and the U.S. Congress to
spend $2.6 billion on breast cancer research between 1997 and the year
2000. Funding for the DOD Peer-Reviewed Breast Cancer Research Program
was an essential component of reaching the $2.6 billion goal that so
many women and families worked to gain.
Once again, NBCC is bringing its message to Congress. Just last
week, many of the women and family members who supported the campaign
to gain the 2.6 million signatures came to NBCC's Annual Advocacy
Training Conference here in Washington, D.C. More than 600 breast
cancer activists from across the country joined us in continuing to
mobilize behind the efforts to eradicate breast cancer. The
overwhelming interest in, and dedication to eradicate this disease
continues to be evident as people are not only signing petitions, but
are willing to come to Washington, D.C. from across the country to
deliver their message about our commitment.
Since the very beginning of this program, in 1993, Congress has
stood in support of this important investment in the fight against
breast cancer. In the years since then, Mr. Chairman, you and this
entire Committee have been leaders in the effort to continue this
innovative investment in breast cancer research.
NBCC asks you, the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, to
recognize the importance of what you have initiated. What you have done
is set in motion an innovative and highly efficient approach to
fighting the breast cancer epidemic. What you must do now is continue
to support this effort by funding research that will help us win this
very real and devastating war against a cruel enemy.
Thank you again for the opportunity to submit testimony and for
giving hope to the 2.6 million women living with breast cancer.
Senator Stevens. Thank you. I think we started this
research 11 years ago.
Ms. Visco. Yes.
Senator Stevens. Twelve years ago. And every year we have
put the money up for this research and prostate cancer research
in increasing amounts. But I have not seen a similar response
from the private sector. While we are going to continue to
support research for prostate cancer and breast cancer, I am
going to urge Congress to start requiring matching funds at
least of some amount to come forward from the private sector.
We cannot continue to increase the amount of money that
comes out of the defense bill for this research when the more
money we put up the less you get from the private sector. I
think that trend has to stop and we have to see a strong
response from the private sector for us to continue our support
for these research--particularly when it is requested from this
subcommittee for money from the defense account.
Now, we have many women in the armed services now and they
deserve to have the military proceeding to deal with one of
their major concerns, which is breast cancer. We will continue,
but I do think that the research that we are doing with defense
dollars, it benefits the whole society, but the society ought
to respond more to the demands for this research money as it
has in the past.
Ms. Visco. Mr. Chairman, we would be happy, the National
Breast Cancer Coalition would be happy, to work with your staff
to give you information on what is being done now in the
community outside of the government, so we can work from there.
We would be happy to work with you in that regard.
Senator Stevens. I would like to see that. I would like to
see to it that the organizations that are asking for taxpayers'
money are reaching out and trying to raise non-taxpayers' money
to continue this research.
Ms. Visco. Yes, sir. We will give you that information.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
Our next witness is Martin B. Foil, member of the Board of
Directors, National Brain Injury Research and Treatment and
Training Foundation.
STATEMENT OF MARTIN B. FOIL, JR., MEMBER OF THE BOARD
OF DIRECTORS, NATIONAL BRAIN INJURY
RESEARCH, TREATMENT AND TRAINING FOUNDATION
Mr. Foil. Thank you, Senator Stevens, Mr. Chairman. It is
good to be back. We appreciate everything that you and your
folks here on the committee have been doing.
My name is Martin Foil. I am the father of a man with a
severe brain injury. I am happy to be here on behalf of the
wonderful men and women in our armed services. Really, I know
we are all proud of what they did and their valiant performance
in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
I am privileged to come here today to request $5 million in
funding for the Defense Veterans Head Injury Program (DVHIP),
which provides treatment and services to thousands of military
people injured annually. As you know, the DVHIP is a component
of the military health system, providing direct care at
treatment facilities in veterans hospitals throughout the
Nation. While there is a research component, it provides mainly
state-of-the-art medical care and rehabilitation to our
personnel who sustain concussions and more severe brain injury.
Our goal is to get them back to work as soon as possible.
Since the war on terrorism began, DVHIP has treated some 40
troops injured in Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and
Iraqi Freedom. On two occasions, President Bush has visited a
few of these soldiers who were being treated at our lead site
at Walter Reed. My written testimony includes examples of
military personnel who have recently received care under the
full spectrum of the DVHIP program from acute care to
rehabilitation to community reentry and, more importantly,
return to work.
Some highlights of the program include collaborating with
leading researchers on battlefield biomarkers for mild brain
injury and injury recovery. The goal here is to see if they
need to be taken back from the front line or if they are going
to be well in a few hours or a few days. Working with the U.S.
Army Aeromedical Laboratory at Fort Rucker, we are working and
implementing phase two of the paratrooper's helmet study at
Fort Bragg, a very interesting study. We have also been asked
to assist in evaluation of potential concussions as a result of
blast injuries, particularly those from land mines.
I respectfully request your support for the $5 million from
the DOD appropriations bill under health affairs operations and
maintenance for fiscal year 2004. This funding request is
supported by Senators Reed, Kennedy, Hagel, Allen, Rockefeller,
and Boxer, and the Congressional Brain Injury Task Force.
Indeed, we are all grateful for your support over the
years. We hope you again support our efforts to provide the
best care for our brave men and women in uniform.
Thank you, sir.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Martin B. Foil, Jr.
Dear Chairman Stevens, Senator Inouye and Members of the Senate
Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense: My name is Martin B. Foil, Jr.
and I am the father of Philip Foil, a young man with a severe brain
injury. I serve as a volunteer on the Board of Directors of the
National Brain Injury Research, Treatment and Training Foundation
(NBIRTT) \1\ and Virginia NeuroCare in Charlottesville, Virginia
(VNC).\2\ Professionally, I am the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
of Tuscarora Yarns in Mt. Pleasant, North Carolina.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ NBIRTT is a non-profit national foundation dedicated to the
support of clinical research, treatment and training.
\2\ VNC provides brain injury rehabilitation to military retirees,
veterans and civilians through an innovative and cost effective day
treatment program.
\3\ I receive no compensation from this program. Rather, I have
raised and contributed millions of dollars to support brain injury
research, treatment, training and services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On behalf of the thousands of military personnel that receive brain
injury treatment and services annually, I respectfully request that $5
million be added to the Department of Defense (DOD) Health Affairs
budget for fiscal year 2004 under Operation and Maintenance for the
Defense and Veterans Head Injury Program (DVHIP).
I appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony regarding this
important program which is a collaborative effort among DOD, Department
of Veterans Affairs (DVA), the Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the
Advancement of Military Medicine and the Uniformed Services University
of the Health Sciences (USUHS).
The Defense and Veterans Head Injury Program (DVHIP)
Established in 1992, the DVHIP is a component of the military
health care system that integrates clinical care and clinical follow-
up, with applied research, treatment and training. The program was
created after the Gulf War to address the need for an overall systemic
program for providing brain injury specific care and rehabilitation
within DOD and DVA. The DVHIP seeks to ensure that all military
personnel and veterans with brain injury receive brain injury-specific
evaluation, treatment and follow-up. Over time, the research conducted
by the DVHIP has come to define optimal care for military personnel and
veterans with brain injuries. A multi-center clinical care and clinical
research program, the program's motto is ``working for a cure.''
The DVHIP has been proactive since its inception, developing
numerous innovative programs that enable patients to have a variety of
treatment options at each site. Clinical care and research is currently
undertaken at seven DOD and DVA sites and one civilian treatment
site,\4\ allowing single and multi-center trials to be conducted
informing future clinical care and treatment strategies. In addition to
providing treatment, rehabilitation and case management at each of the
8 primary DVHIP traumatic brain injury (TBI) centers, the DVHIP
includes a regional network of additional secondary veterans hospitals
capable of providing TBI rehabilitation, and linked to the primary lead
centers for training, referrals and consultation. This is coordinated
by a dedicated central DVA TBI coordinator and includes an active TBI
case manager training program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, DC; James A. Haley
Veterans Hospital, Tampa, FL; Naval Medical Center San Diego, San
Diego, CA; Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis,
MN; Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA;
Virginia Neurocare, Inc., Charlottesville, VA; Hunter McGuire Veterans
Affairs Medical Center, Richmond, VA; Wilford Hall Medical Center,
Lackland Air Force Base, TX.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The DVHIP is a model program of efficient and effective
collaboration between DOD and DVA.
DVHIP Stands Ready to Treat Troops and Veterans Sustaining Brain
Injuries
Head injury is a leading combat concern in modern warfare.
Neurotrauma (traumatic brain and spinal cord injuries) accounts for
almost 25 percent of combat casualties. In addition, secondary brain
injuries--resulting from stroke, cerebral ischemia, seizures, ionizing
radiation, low blood pressure due to loss of blood volume, nerve
agents, cyanide, toxic concentrations of oxygen, neurotoxicity due to
central nervous system (CNS) malaria or treatment with antimalaria
agents, and other CNS traumas, have a significant impact on the health
and readiness of military personnel. Many of the currently feared
terrorist threats would involve secondary brain injuries, particularly
those involving chemical or biological neurological insults.
The DVHIP sites have provided clinical care for over 40 casualties
from the War on Terrorism to date. Thorough evaluation, referral for
appropriate clinical supports, prompt discharge to home or military
unit, and focus on returning service members to active duty have been
the primary goals of the clinical care provided to these war fighters.
Additional service members have been identified who were promptly
discharged back to their units. These individuals will be actively
followed to ensure that they receive specialized clinical care and
follow-up as needed.
The DVHIP is prepared to provide a full continuum of care for
military personnel injured during any and all future hostilities.
Examples of Military Personnel Injured, Treated and Returning to Work
The following are examples of injured active duty military
personnel who recently received care provided by the DVHIP:
--On April 11, 2003, President Bush visited soldiers being treated at
Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) who were injured during
Operation Iraqi Freedom. At least 2 patients were under the
care of DVHIP staff.
--On January 16, 2003, President Bush visited WRAMC and saw five
soldiers who had been injured during Operation Enduring Freedom
in Afghanistan, one of whom sustained a brain injury along with
a fractured skull and other broken bones. The Washington Post
reported on the President's visit and noted that some 200
troops have been injured in Afghanistan. The soldier with the
brain injury was treated by DVHIP staff.
--Another soldier treated at WRAMC was featured on the front page of
WRAMC's publication Stripe, on January 17, 2003. A photo showed
First Sgt. Colin Robert Rich, A Company, 1st Battalion 504th
Parachute Infantry Regiment, receiving a visit from Secretary
of the Army Thomas E. White. Sgt. Rich had been shot in the
head on December 28, 2002 while serving in Afghanistan. Stripe
reported that Sgt. Rich explained to the Secretary that the
round went through his Kevlar helmet, ``which decelerated it
enough that it didn't blow my head up. It ricocheted and it did
shatter the skull.'' Rich added, `` `Love your Kevlar', sir,
that's my motto.'' Rich received initial acute care at a
hospital in Germany within 15 hours of being shot and arrived
at WRAMC on January 4 where he was cared for by DVHIP staff
before being discharged home on January 16, 2002.
--In June of 2002, a 32 year old female Air Force Tech Sgt. customer
service and unit deployment manager fell asleep while driving
and rear-ended a stationary 18-wheeler at highway speed. She
sustained a severe brain injury and remained in a coma for 7
days at Memorial Hermann Hospital in Houston, Texas. She was
transferred to the Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care
System for inpatient rehabilitation by the DVHIP on July 11,
2002. Her admission evaluation revealed multiple neurological,
physical and cognitive symptoms.\5\ By August 13, 2002 she was
discharged with improved neurological, physical and cognitive
abilities and returned home to San Antonio with her husband and
two young children. She received outpatient therapy at Warm
Springs Rehabilitation Hospital in San Antonio through the end
of the year. On November 20, 2002 she was evaluated by the
medical board at Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC) and showed
mild residual symptoms.\6\ The board recommended trial of duty,
initially half days with close supervision. She was evaluated
six months post injury by DVHIP staff at WHMC on February 5,
2003 and underwent a driving re-evaluation on February 7, with
full driving privileges recommended. She began her trial of
duty on February 11, 2003 and anticipates going to the NCO
academy if her recovery continues as anticipated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Her symptoms included mild dizziness, headaches, continued
diminished rapid toe and finger movements on the right, abnormal gait
but walking unassisted, difficulties with fluency, naming, reading and
word-finding difficulties. Greatest cognitive impairments continued in
the areas of memory and problem solving--modified independent level of
function in bathing and dressing due to wearing a brace for the
vertebral fracture. Independent in all other area of basic self-care.
\6\ Improved speech, persistent mild facial numbness, mild
disequilibrium without vertigo, walking independently, continued
weakness in verbal memory but effective use of compensatory techniques;
able to care for 4 year-old and 10-month old children at home.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--Sgt. MF, a 39 year old Army Recruiter was involved in a motorcycle
accident in July 2002, resulting in a traumatic brain injury.
His initial evaluations showed a very serious brain injury to
the right and left sides of the brain with a sub-dural hematoma
and massive swelling. He underwent major surgery to remove part
of the bleed and resulting damage to the right side of the
brain. He received his acute care in Louisville, Kentucky, and
was subsequently transferred to McGuire Veterans Hospital in
Richmond, Virginia, for post-acute rehabilitation and then to
Virginia NeuroCare (VNC) in October 2002 for community re-entry
rehabilitation. He was discharged to the Medical Holding
Company Unit at his Army station of origin on March 8, 2003. MF
stated that he was very satisfied with his care throughout his
entire recovery and rehabilitation. He stated that the DVHIP
staff at the Richmond VA and Virginia NeuroCare took a one-on-
one interest in him and he was pleased with his rehabilitation
experience.
At VNC, Sgt. MF was particularly appreciative of the opportunity to
live independently in a transitional apartment. He reported that the
therapy program was good, and he appreciated the fact that the program
was tailored to individual needs. His volunteer placement at the local
Army Recruiting Station during the final phase of his rehabilitation at
VNC was a positive experience that led him to believe he would get his
life back.
These are just a few examples of what DVHIP does for hundreds of
military personnel each year--from being ready to care for injured
troops in the acute care setting to neuro-rehabilitation involving the
entire patient to full community integration.
DVHIP Support for Families after Brain Injury
Every military commander and soldier knows the importance of taking
care of their families so that they may focus on performing their
critical duties. This is especially important in times of conflict, as
demonstrated during Operation Iraqi Freedom. When soldiers sustain
brain injuries in conflict, taking care of families is even more
important. This is because the impact of brain injury on the family is
particularly traumatic, in that not only life and death are at stake,
but there are also significant disruptions to family systems for months
or years thereafter as the rehabilitation and recovery process ensues.
On May 3, 2003, Deputy Commander Lt. General Doug Brown of Special
Operations had the opportunity to observe first hand the support
services provided to families of our soldiers and veterans when he was
visiting a soldier undergoing rehabilitation at Tampa VAMC for a brain
injury from shrapnel sustained during Operation Iraqi Freedom. General
Brown participated in the program's family support group and listened
to the stories of the families and survivors. General Brown expressed
his appreciation for the treatment and services offered and the
importance and usefulness of the family support group.
Support groups have been provided by the DVHIP since the program's
inception in 1992. Family support groups provide a great deal of
support, education, and information to families. The family support
program at the Tampa VA also holds bi-annual reunions in which former
patients and families come from around the country.
Educating Care Providers
On April 30, and May 1, 2003, DVHIP and the WRAMC Department of
Psychology, Neuropsychology Postdoctoral Fellowship held the first
joint sponsored brain injury conference, entitled ``Innovative Concepts
In Traumatic Brain Injury: Neurobiological and Neurobehavioral
Aspects.'' The presenters, David A. Hovda, Ph.D. from UCLA and Jeffrey
T. Barth, Ph.D. from UVA are both internationally recognized
scientists-practitioners in the area of brain injury. The conference
targeted both experienced health-care professionals and postgraduate
trainees and residents the areas of neurology, neuropsychology,
neurosurgery, psychiatry, and physical medicine and rehabilitation, as
well as other professionals with an interest in learning about the
neurobiological and neurobehavioral aspects of traumatic brain injury.
With this audience in mind the conference presented a balance of both
an overview of the basics of the biomechanical aspects of TBI as well
as cutting edge research. The two-day conference was attended by over
70 professionals and trainees from the DOD and VA throughout the
National Capital Area and a story on the conference appeared in the May
2, 2003 edition of Stripe.
Education of corpsmen and other military medical providers on
concussion care continues to be one of the primary objectives at the
DVHIP at Camp Pendleton. Additionally, standardized educational
programs are being developed this year by the DVHIP educational core in
order to reach a greater number of medical providers. DVHIP plans to
make these educational materials available on its website to enhance
this outreach and provide information to providers in austere locations
where travel for on-site training would not be possible.
Additional DVHIP Accomplishments and Ongoing Research Initiatives
Provided successful rehabilitation and return to work and community
re-entry for active duty military personnel and veterans.
Established the War on Terrorism Brain Injury Registry to identify
individuals with brain injury and examine clinically relevant issues in
the management of brain injury sustained in theatre.
Ongoing studies are being conducted with Army paratroopers and
cadets and U.S. Marines at Fort Bragg, West Point, and Camp Pendleton.
These studies are investigating brief evaluation instruments for use on
the battlefield to determine which injured service members require
immediate treatment and which can return to duty. The goal of these
studies is to preserve our nation's fighting strength while conserving
medical resources for those injured and requiring treatment.
Completed enrolling patients in a research protocol on functional
rehabilitation versus cognitive rehabilitation for severe brain injury.
A randomized controlled study of sertraline for post concussive
syndrome is being carried out in all DVHIP military and VA sites.
Started new randomized controlled trial of valproate for brain
injury related agitation at James A. Haley Veterans Hospital, Tampa,
Florida.
A new DVHIP website is currently under construction. The website
will provide information to individuals with brain injury, their
families and caregivers, as well as to clinicians, researchers and the
general public.
Fiscal year 2004 Goals
Expand clinical capacity to meet the need to care for an increasing
number of injured military personnel and veterans.
Improve rehabilitation and treatment program for active duty
service members with mild cognitive impairment following possible
chemical or biological exposure.
Establish a multi-center trial to provide the first evidence on the
effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation and stimulant medication
early in recovery from severe brain injury.
Conduct the study of enhanced protection from parachute injury by
field testing approved novel helmet configurations at Fort Bragg.
Develop return to duty guidelines through analysis of data
collected in the West Point sports concussion study and the Fort Bragg
concussion study.
Examine biomarkers in mild brain injury and injury recovery in
collaboration with Ron Hayes, Ph.D. at the Evelyn F. and William L.
McKnight Brain Institute at the University of Florida.
Examine the utility of mobile transcranial Doppler ultrasonography
to identify cerebral blood flow alterations in mild brain injury and
recovery patterns.
Report to the U.S. Army the findings from the War on Terrorism
Brain Injury Registry regarding incidence of closed head injury and the
impact of early wound closure in penetrating brain injury.
Extend outcomes research through the evaluation of long-term work
and duty status in DVHIP rehabilitation trial participants.
Disseminate evidence based guidelines on pharmacological management
of neurobehavioral consequences of brain injury.
Expand the DVHIP Registry to include patients from additional DVA
and DOD medical facilities. Broaden the spectrum of care for military
personnel and veterans who have sustained brain injuries by using the
DVHIP Registry to identify individuals in need of additional treatment
and support.
Expand the content and services of the DVBIC website. Future
website applications will include enhanced educational materials and
the capability to make referrals and gain access to care.
Conclusion
As a part of the military health program, the DVHIP is in a unique
position to help prevent, treat, and provide education regarding brain
injury and to lead efforts to better the lives of active duty and
retired military personnel affected by brain injury. The DVHIP stands
ready to assist in the care of troops injured in any and all potential
hostilities.
I respectfully urge your support for $5 million for the DVHIP in
the fiscal year 2004 Defense Appropriations bill in the DOD Health
Affairs budget under Operation and Maintenance to continue this
important program.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much for appearing again.
We appreciate your concern.
Mr. Foil. Always a pleasure to be here, sir.
Senator Stevens. We will do our best.
Next, Captain Marshall Hanson, U.S. Naval Reserve, Acting
Chair of Associations for America's Defense. Good morning, sir.
STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN MARSHALL HANSON, USNR (RETIRED),
ACTING CHAIR, ASSOCIATIONS FOR AMERICA'S
DEFENSE
Captain Hanson. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. The
Associations for America's Defense (A4AD) thanks you for the
opportunity to testify today.
A4AD first met in March of 2002 because it felt that
certain defense issues were not being addressed in the MSO
community. At the initial meeting were Enlisted Association of
the National Guard of the United States (EANGUS), Marine Corps
Reserve Officer's Association (MCROA), Naval Reserve
Association (NRA), Naval Enlisted Reserve Association (NERA),
National Association of Uniformed Services (NAUS), The Retired
Enlisted Association (TREA), Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW),
and the Center for Strategic Policy. Military Order of World
Wars (MOWW), the Navy League, and ROA have since joined.
Collectively we represent over 2.5 million members.
A4AD looks at national defense, equipment, force structure,
funding, and policy issues. We are submitting what we feel are
the top equipment requirements for the active and Reserve Armed
Forces in our written statement.
In the President's budget, DOD has made clear its intent to
consolidate all pay and operations and maintenance (O&M)
accounts into one appropriation per service. A4AD strongly
opposes the proposed consolidation. While we support seeking
efficiencies, we view the proposed business consolidation as
ill-conceived and as an attempt to reduce congressional
oversight.
Further, the Defense Transformation for the 21st Century
Act of 2003 recommends amending Title 10 to allow the Secretary
of Defense (SECDEF) to transfer 2\1/2\ percent of appropriated
funds for military functions. A4AD is opposed to this degree of
authority. Two-and-a-half percent is too high a sum of money
and allows a high risk that items authorized by Congress could
be stripped of funding to support a DOD project viewed as
underfunded.
We further disagree with an increase of the $10 million
limit to $20 million to allow reprogramming of acquisition
funds.
The United States is still at war, as evidenced by this
week's bombing in Riyadh. While Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld
claims that there are no plans for reduction, subtle pressures
are to be found encouraging personnel cuts. Defense planners
within each service see the writing on the wall with money
being moved by DOD from personnel to research and weapons
systems and they are going to preemptively recommend select
personnel cuts to save portions of their programs starting in
fiscal year 2005 and 2006.
It should be remembered that it is a mixture of legacy
forces and 21st century technology that has brought a swift
victory against Saddam. The presence of troops on the ground is
enabling us to capture members of the Iraqi regime. While the
vision of joystick warfare, with operators removed from the
battle site, is a subject of magazine articles, it is the blood
and sweat of our young men and women who capture and win the
battlefield.
The Senate authorization has agreed to the President's
fiscal year 2004 numbers. The House has included increases.
A4AD supports full funding for end strengths proposed by the
House. We also solicit your input and backing for maintaining
or increasing end strengths in future budgets.
A core of military and veterans associations are now
looking beyond just personnel matters to the broader issues of
national defense. As a group, we will continue to meet in the
future and we hope to provide your committee with our inputs.
Thank you for your ongoing support for the Nation, the
armed services, and the fine young men and women who defend our
country. I stand by for questions.
Senator Stevens. I do not have any questions. Thank you
very much for presenting your statement. We appreciate your
comments and will do our very best to follow through on them.
We appreciate your concern.
Captain Hanson. Thank you.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Captain Marshall Hanson
INTRODUCTION
Mister Chairman and distinguished members of the Committee, The
Associations for America's Defense (A4AD) are very grateful for the
invitation to testify before you about our views and suggestions
concerning current and future issues facing the defense appropriations.
Founded in 2002, the Association for America's Defense is a
recently formed adhoc group of Military and Veteran Associations that
have concerns about National Security issues that are not normally
addressed by The Military Coalition, and the National Military Veterans
Alliance. The participants are members from each. Among the issues that
are addressed are equipment, end strength, force structure, and defense
policy. Collectively, we represent about 2.5 million members.
--Enlisted National Guard Association of the United States
--Marine Corps Reserve Association
--Military Order of World Wars
--National Association for Uniformed Services
--Naval Enlisted Reserve Association
--Naval Reserve Association
--Navy League of the United States
--Reserve Officers Association
--The Retired Enlisted Association
--Veterans of Foreign Wars
Collectively, the preceding organizations have over two and a half
million members who are serving our nation, or who have done so in the
past. The number of supporters expands to beyond five million when you
include family members and friends of the military.
A4AD, also, cooperatively works with other associations, who
provide input while not including their association name to the
membership roster.
CURRENT AND FUTURE ISSUES FACING DEFENSE
The Associations for America's Defense would like to thank this
Committee for the stewardship that it has demonstrated on issues of
Defense. Its pro-defense and non-partisan leadership sets the example.
In keeping with this, A4AD would like to submit what its membership
feel are the top equipment requirements for the Armed Forces. Over the
last six months, A4AD has compiled this list to provide the committee
with a consolidated listing which does not favor a particular service
and is a compilation from numerous sources. Both Active and Reserve
requirements are provided for the major four of the uniformed services.
The services are not listed in priority order.
Top Equipment Requirements:
Air Force Active:
F/A-22's
Tanker Modernization
Space-Based Infrared System SBIRS
Air Force Reserve:
C-17's (replaces aging C-141)
F-16 Upgrades; sensor, targeting pods, displays
A-10 Targeting Pods
C-40's Medivac (replaces aging C-9A)
Air Guard:
C-17's
KC-135 Re-engine
Litening II targeting pods
Army Active:
Recapitalize The M1A1 & M2 force
AH-64 and CH-47 Aviation Upgrades
Objective Force Future Combat Systems
Army Reserve:
Light Medium Tactical Vehicles (LMTV)
Medium Tactical Vehicles (MTV)
High Mobility Multi-Purpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV)
IHFR Radio
Army Guard:
UH-60 Black Hawks
AH-64 Apaches
Active Marine Corps:
JSF Joint Strike Fighter
V-22 Osprey Program
AAAV Program
Reserve Marine Corps (and Active):
F/A-18 ECP-583 Upgrade
CH-53E HNVS ``B'' Kits (Forward Looking Infrared)
Initial Issue equipment
Active Navy:
Littoral Combat Ship
F/A-18 E/F Procurement
DD(X)
Naval Reserve:
C-40A's Airlift Aircraft (replace aging C-9B)
LITTORAL SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM, LSS
F/A-18 ECP-560 Upgrades
Language delaying decommissioning of Navy's Coastal Patrol Craft
(PCs) and Aviation Squadrons
Equipment requirements on the above equipment list were purposely
broken out by Active and Reserve requirements.
Maintaining the Reserve Equipment List
Issue.--The Active Duty leadership has fallen short of fulfilling
the Congressional mandate of responsibility for funding Reserve as well
as Active Duty equipment through budgetary planning. The active
solution seems to be suggesting that Reserve equipment should be
returned to the Active Duty. This would be a mistake.
Position.--The overwhelming majority of Reserve and Guard members
join the RC to have hands-on experience with equipment. The training
and personnel readiness of Guard and Reserve members depends on
constant hands-on equipment exposure. Historical records show that
Guard and Reserve units maintain hardware and equipment at or higher
than average material readiness and often have better training
readiness.
In Operation Iraqi Freedom, Reserve and Guard units have proven
their readiness. Current and future war fighting requirements will need
these highly qualified units when the Combatant Commanders require
fully ready units. The personnel readiness, retention, and training of
Reserve and Guard members will depend on them having Reserve equipment
that they can utilize, maintain, train on, and deploy with when called
upon.
Depending on Active Component hardware has never been successful
for many functional reasons. History shows that this can only be
accomplished through Reserve and Guard equipment, since the training
cycles of Active Components are rarely, if ever, synchronized with the
training or exercise times of Guard and Reserve units. The A4AD
recommends strengthening the appropriations for Reserve and Guard
equipment in order to maintain highly qualified trained Reserve and
Guard personnel.
We ask this committee to provide appropriations against unfunded
equipment requirements. To appropriate funds to Reserve equipment would
help emphasize to the Active Duty that it is exploring dead-ends by
suggesting the transfer of Reserve equipment away from the Reservists.
Not Combining Active and Reserve Appropriations:
Issue.--The fiscal year 2004 Defense budget request makes it clear
that OSD intends to consolidate all pay and O&M accounts into one
appropriation per service. These consolidations would require various
legislative changes before they could become law. The rationale for the
consolidations is to provide greater flexibility for the Active chiefs
to move monies from the Reserve and Guard pay accounts to fund Active
component pay and O&M shortfalls. Managing fewer appropriations would
also make managing pay and O&M easier.
Position.--The Associations for America's Defense strongly opposes
the proposed consolidation of all Guard, Reserve and Active pay into
one service pay appropriation. We similarly oppose the proposed
consolidation of all Guard, Reserve and Active operations and
maintenance accounts into one service O&M appropriation. While we
support seeking efficiencies wherever possible, we view the proposed
``business'' consolidation as ill conceived, misrepresented as
inefficient, and as an attempt to reduce Congressional oversight. We
oppose it for a variety of other reasons, as well.
Under current law, the Reserve chiefs are the directors for their
respective Reserve pay and O&M appropriations. Public Law 90-168, as
amended by the fiscal year 1997 NDAA, vested in the Reserve chiefs full
management and control of their respective Reserve financial resources.
Consolidating Reserve and Active pay into one appropriation would
divest the Reserve chiefs of this authority and preclude their
executing the programs and responsibilities, and maintaining the
readiness mandated by Congress.
Much of the Guard and Reserve annual training occurs during the
fourth quarter of a fiscal year, the same time frame when the Active
components are most likely to run short of funds and may desire to use
Reserve pay and O&M to fund their own shortfalls. Allowing the Active
components the ``flexibility'' to use Reserve funds whenever they need
to pay Active component bills means that somewhere a Reserve soldier or
sailor will not be paid, a Reserve unit will not be trained for
mobilization, or Reservist will not receive the specialized training
needed for promotion, and ultimately retention. The Active Component
will have flexible funding at the cost of Reserve Readiness.
Opposition to: Proposed Revision to authorization on
Appropriations Funding
Issue.--The Defense Transformation for the 21st Century Act of 2003
recommends under Title IV, Subtitle A, Section 411, that Section 2214
of title 10 be amended to ``enhance General Transfer Authority and
allow authority to SECDEF to permit the transfer of 2.5 percent of the
total appropriations or funds appropriated to the Department of Defense
for that fiscal year of working capital funds of DOD for military
functions (except MILCON); increasing to five percent in times of war
or emergency.
Position.--A4AD is opposed to this degree of authority. Two and a
half percent of $400 billion is $10 billion. This is the same amount
that the Bush Administration asked for in funding, without detailing
utilization, which Congress turned down. This is too high a sum of
money, and permits a high risk that items authorized by Congress could
be stripped of funding to support a DOD project viewed as under funded.
Issue.--The Defense Transformation for the 21st Century Act of 2003
recommends under Title IV, Subtitle A, Section 412, that Section 2214
of title 10 be amended to permit the transfer of funds to correct
specific acquisition.
Position.--This requested change from a $10 million to a new $20
million limit of reprogramming of funds provides too much
``flexibility'' to the Secretary of Defense, reducing Congressional
oversight.
Maintaining or Increasing End Strength
Issues.--The United States is at War. While Secretary of Defense
Rumsfeld has publicly opposed increases, and claims there are no plans
for reduction, subtle pressures are to be found encouraging personnel
cuts. It has been reported that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld throttled
down on the troop presence in Iraq, even though the commanders in the
field wanted more. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force
General Richard Myers, is already on record saying that, ``leaner
forces contributed to tactical surprise, success in Iraq.'' The
Presidential budget suggested an 1,100 person cut in the Navy and a
1,900 (2.2 percent) person cut in the Naval Reserve, as a start. DoN
planners are suggesting another 11 percent cut in the Naval Reserve for
fiscal year 2005.
Position.--It should be remembered that it is a mixture of legacy
forces and 21st century technology is what brought us swift victory
against Saddam's regime. The presence of troops on the ground is
enabling us to capture members of the Iraqi regime. While the vision of
a ``joy stick'' warfare, with operators removed from the battle site,
is the subject of magazine articles; it is the blood and sweat of our
young men and women who capture and win the battleground. We are
decades away from bucolic warfare.
A4AD has continuing concerns about the mismatch between reducing
active duty and reserve force strengths and the increasing mission
requirements. While retention remains at record highs, and military
members seem ready and willing to make personal sacrifices on behalf of
their country in the War on Terrorism, this luxury of manpower will not
last. The Navy, the first service to suffer manpower cuts, set record
deployment lengths during Iraqi Freedom. The President/DOD should not
be even implying cuts while the U.S.A. is at war.
A4AD believes the Administration and Congress must make it a high
priority to maintain if not increase end strengths of already
overworked military forces, even though DOD seems to want to work these
forces even harder. End strengths need to be closely examined by both
the House and Senate as a first step in addressing this situation.
Full funding for proposed end strengths is sought by A4AD. We also
solicit your input and support for maintaining or increasing end
strength in future debates.
The 4 percent solution
Issue.--Despite increases in the Defense budget, demands will be
outstripping the availability of dollars. As money begins to be
reprogrammed into Research and Development, the active duty programs
will be stressed by perceived shortfalls. Resulting covetous possession
will distort long term planning as planners seek to preserve favorite
programs, surrendering the vulnerable and obsolete as a means to
maintain the ``strong''. Such acquisitiveness will stifle innovation,
and eradicate retention.
Position.--A4AD urges the President of the United States and
members of Congress to continue to increase defense spending to a
minimum of 4 percent of Gross Domestic Product. The Armed Forces are an
instrument of National Security and Defense, and are in affect an
insurance policy to this Country; as demonstrated by events since 9-11-
2001. Americans should be willing to invest as much into defense as we
do into the personal insurance policies.
CONCLUSION
A core of military and veteran associations are looking beyond
personnel issues to the broader issues of National Defense. As a group,
we will continue to meet in the future, and hope to provide your
committee with our inputs.
Thank you for your ongoing support of the Nation, the Armed
Services, and the fine young men and women who defend our country.
Senator Stevens. Steven Garrett, the Deputy Legislative
Director of the Retired Enlisted Association.
STATEMENT OF STEVEN L. GARRETT, DEPUTY LEGISLATIVE
DIRECTOR, THE RETIRED ENLISTED ASSOCIATION
Mr. Garrett. On behalf of The Retired Enlisted Association
(TREA), I would like to thank the committee for allowing us to
testify today. TREA is an association that focuses its
attention on the issues related to senior active duty personnel
and especially military retirees. I will focus my testimony on
these concerns.
Understanding the differences between the duties of the
appropriators and the authorizers, I will do my best to stay
within the boundaries of this committee's jurisdiction. In
short, I will emphasize the need for funding currently
authorized programs, areas TREA would like the committee to
keep in mind, and finally a few extraneous issues.
As I am sure you are aware, the 2003 National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) includes the combat-related special
compensation provision, and TREA would like to emphasize that
this measure is a welcome step in the right direction and we
anticipate continued progress. In the meantime, we ask for the
proper appropriation to fund this new entitlement.
The basic allowance for housing was also authorized an
increase. Here again, we request that it receive the necessary
funding from this committee.
Thirdly, TREA would like to join Congress and the rest of
the country in its appreciation for the sacrifices of the Guard
and the Reserve and ask that these vital components be fully
funded so that they will be ready to act as quickly as we call
on them.
A couple of issues to keep in mind. It is with great
emphasis that TREA encourages the members of this committee to
stay current with issues, issues of concurrent receipt,
survivor benefit plan, and health care, with regard to further
base realignment and closures, or BRAC. These closures have
significant impact on the beneficiaries using Tricare that
needs to be taken into consideration if Congress deems BRAC
necessary. We are working these issues with the authorizing
committee and it is our goal that they will be authorized and
brought before your committee in the near future.
Before closing, I would like to mention a quick concern.
TREA is cautious of the DOD request the assume more control of
its spending. It concerns us that this authority may come at
the expense of personnel and retirement issues. We urge this
committee to scrutinize this proposal with this thought in
mind.
In addition to the above statements, I ask that you look
carefully at the written statements of the Military Coalition
and the National Military Veterans Alliance. These groups
represent veterans and retiree communities in a very positive
manner, and as an active member of both organizations TREA
requests that you give them close attention.
Again, I thank the committee for the opportunity to present
our issues and concerns and we look forward to working with you
to improve the quality of life for veterans, retirees, and
their families.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Steven L. Garrett
On behalf of The Retired Enlisted Association I would like to thank
the committee for allowing me to testify today. The Retired Enlisted
Association is an association whose members are enlisted military
retirees and their families.
HEALTH CARE FOR MILITARY BENEFICIARIES
Today, there are approximately 8.2 million beneficiaries in the
military health care program. Military retirees and their dependents
make up nearly one half of that number, and over 500,000 retirees have
lost or will lose their access to military health care as a result of
the closure of approximately 40 percent of military treatment
facilities. Access to affordable health care, regardless of age, status
or location, has represented a major concern among military retirees.
The creation of TRICARE for Life and a TRICARE Senior Pharmacy
benefit in Public Law 106-398 was an historic triumph for Congress and
those 1.3 million Medicare-eligible military retirees and dependents.
While TRICARE for Life came with its own funding stream in fiscal year
2002, authorization must be budgeted to provide for the program for
fiscal year 2004. The Retired Enlisted Association recommends that you
continue to improve this important program by providing the necessary
funding. The Retired Enlisted Association also applauds your work last
year in eliminating TRICARE co-payments for active duty family members.
We also salute the Department of Defense for reducing active duty time
for Reservists to 30 days for their families to be eligible for
TRICARE.
Although Congress enacted legislation to restore TRICARE to
Medicare-eligible beneficiaries as a wraparound to Medicare (TRICARE
for Life) and to improve TRICARE for active duty families, further
improvements are still needed, especially for retired beneficiaries
under age 65. TRICARE must be a consistent, reliable and equitable
health care benefit for all uniformed services beneficiaries,
regardless of age or geography.
The fiscal year 2001 NDAA eliminated copays for active duty family
members enrolled in Prime, and enacted TRICARE For Life (TFL) and
TRICARE Senior Pharmacy (TSRx) for Medicare-eligibles. With TFL
implementation complete Congress and DOD must turn their attention to
improving serious shortcomings in healthcare benefits for TRICARE
beneficiaries under the age of 65.
--Low reimbursement rates are causing providers to refuse any TRICARE
patients or reduce the number of TRICARE patients they will
treat, limiting beneficiary access and choice. Solution:
Increase statutory (Medicare) payment rates; require use of
existing authority to raise TRICARE rates where necessary to
ensure sufficient numbers of participating providers.
--TRICARE is cumbersome to use and causes administrative hassles for
providers and beneficiaries attempting to obtain authorization,
expedite claim repayment, or move between regions. Solution:
Improve TRICARE Prime enrollment procedures, portability, and
beneficiary education. Decrease administrative burdens,
eliminate non-availability statement requirements, streamline
claims processing requirements with greater reliance on
electronic claims technology, and eliminate unnecessary
reporting requirements. Require TRICARE contractors to assist
beneficiaries in finding TRICARE Standard providers.
--Institute ``benefits plus benefits'' reimbursement methodology. TFL
pays beneficiary expenses not covered by Medicare (``benefits
plus benefits''). For TRICARE Standard beneficiaries with other
health insurance (OHI), TRICARE seldom pays expenses not
covered by other insurance (``benefits less benefits'').
Solution: Restore TRICARE reimbursement policy to pay up to
what TRICARE would have paid had there been no OHI coverage (as
was the policy before 1993).
Since the commencement of the first class of graduates of the
Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences (USUHS) in 1980, over
3,200 physicians continue to pursue careers as physicians in the Army,
Navy, Air Force and the U.S. Public Health Service each year. The USUHS
education process emphasizes primary care medicine and also provides
special training in military medicine and combat stress courses not
found in civilian medical school curricula. USUHS graduates have also
proven themselves willing to accept operational overseas assignments
often viewed as less than desirable by civilian medical school
graduates.
Both the fiscal year 1996 National Defense Appropriations Act and
the National Defense Authorization Act prohibit the closure of USUHS.
The Defense Authorization Act also provided a five year prohibition on
reducing the staffing levels of USUHS below the levels established as
of October 1, 1993. The Retired Enlisted Association urges the Congress
to resist any efforts to circumvent the law to downscale or close the
USUHS. The Retired Enlisted Association is convinced that the USUHS is
an economical source of career medical leaders who serve this nation
during peace and war and provide military health care consistency and
stability. The Retired Enlisted Association urges the Congress to
retain and fully fund USUHS as a continued source of career military
physicians for the Army, Navy, Air Force and U.S. Public Health
Service. The Retired Enlisted Association also supports the
construction of an Academic Center to accommodate the USUHS Graduate
School of Nursing.
OTHER MILITARY RETIREE ISSUES
The Retired Enlisted Association believes strongly that quality-of-
life issues for retired military members and families also are
important to sustaining military readiness over the long term. If the
Government allows retired members' quality-of-life to erode over time,
or if the retirement promises that convinced them to serve are not
kept, the retention rate in the current active-duty force will
undoubtedly be affected. The old adage that you enlist a recruit, but
you reenlist a family is truer today than ever as more career-oriented
servicemembers are married or have dependents.
Accordingly, The Retired Enlisted Association believes Congress and
the Administration must place high priority on ensuring that these
long-standing commitments are honored:
--VA Compensation Offset to Military Retired Pay (Retired Pay
Restoration).--Under current law, a military retiree with
compensable VA disabilities cannot receive full military
retirement pay and VA disability compensation. The military
retiree's retirement pay is offset (dollar-for-dollar) by the
amount of VA disability compensation awarded. We would like to
thank the committee for providing funding for the authorized
special compensation programs; however, The Retired Enlisted
Association supports restoration of retired pay (concurrent
receipt) for all disabled military retirees. The purposes of
these two compensation systems are fundamentally different.
Longevity retirement pay is designed primarily as a force
management tool to attract large numbers of high quality
members to serve for at least 20 years. A veteran's disability
compensation is paid for an injury or disease incurred or
aggravated during military service. Monetary benefits are
related to the residual effects of the injury or disease or for
the physical or mental pain and suffering and subsequently
reduced employment and earnings potential. The Retired Enlisted
Association also urges that disabled retired Reservists' and
those retired under the early retirement authority be eligible
for the authorized Special Compensation programs. What better
time to authorize and fund concurrent receipt than during this
period of War?
--Social Security Offsets to the Survivors' Benefits Plan (SBP).--The
Retired Enlisted Association supports amending Public Law 99-
145 to eliminate the provision that calls for the automatic
offset at age 62 of the military SBP with Social Security
benefits for military survivors. Military retirees pay into
both SBP and Social Security, and their survivors pay income
taxes on both. The Retired Enlisted Association believes that
military survivors should be entitled to receipt of full Social
Security benefits which they have earned in their own right. It
is also strongly recommended that any SBP premium increases be
assessed on the effective date, or subsequent to, increases in
cost of living adjustments and certainly not before the
increase in SBP as has been done previously. In order to see
some increases in SBP benefits, The Retired Enlisted
Association would support a gradual improvement of survivor
benefits from 35 percent to 55 percent over the next five-year
period. The Retired Enlisted Association also supports
initiatives to make the military survivors' benefits plan more
attractive. Currently, about 75 percent of officers and 55
percent of enlisted personnel are enrolled in the Plan.
--Reducing the Retired Reservist age from 60 to 55.--The Retired
Enlisted Association believes that retirement pay should be
paid sooner as many of these retirees will not live to their
60th birthday. Similarly, these retirees and their dependents
should be eligible for TRICARE health care and other military
privileges when they turn 55.
--Military Retired Pay COLAs.--Servicemembers, current and future,
need the leadership of this Subcommittee to ensure Congress
remains sensitive to long-standing contracts made with
generations of career military personnel. A major difficulty is
the tendency of some to portray all so-called ``entitlement''
programs, including military retirement, as a gratuitous gift
from the taxpayer. In truth, military retired pay is earned
deferred compensation for accepting the unique demands and
sacrifices of decades of military service. The military
retirement system is among the most important military career
incentives. The Retired Enlisted Association urgently
recommends that the Subcommittee oppose any changes to the
military retirement system, whether prospective or retroactive,
that would undermine readiness or violate contracts made with
military retirees.
--The SBP Veterans Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) Offset
for Survivors.--Under current law, the surviving spouse of a
retired military member who dies from a service connected
disability and was also enrolled in SBP, the surviving spouse's
SBP benefits are offset by the amount of DIC (currently $948
per month). A pro-rated share of SBP premiums is refunded to
the widow upon the member's death in a lump sum, but with no
interest. The Retired Enlisted Association believes that SBP
and DIC payments, like military retirement pay and disability
compensation, are paid for different reasons. SBP is elected
and purchased by the retiree based on his/her military career
and is intended to provide a portion of retired pay to the
survivor. DIC payments represent special compensation to a
survivor whose sponsor's death was caused directly by his or
her uniformed service. In principle, this is a government
payment for indemnity or damages for causing the premature loss
of life of the member, to the extent a price can be set on
human life. These payments should be additive to any military
or federal civilian SBP annuity purchased by the retiree. There
are approximately 31,000 military widows/widowers affected by
the offset under current law. Congress should repeal this
unfair law that penalizes these military survivors.
--Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA).--The
Retired Enlisted Association urges Congressional support for
amending language to Public Law 97-252, the Uniformed Services
Former Spouses Protection Act. This law continues to unfairly
penalize active-duty armed forces members and military
retirees. USFSPA has created an even larger class of victims
than the former spouses it was designed to assist, namely
remarried active-duty service members or military retirees and
their new family. The Retired Enlisted Association believes
this law should be rescinded in its entirety, but as an
absolute minimum, the provision for a lifetime annuity to
former spouses should be terminated upon their remarriage. This
is consistent with most divorce decrees. Based on this current
provision, monthly provisions for life are being granted to
former spouses regardless of marital status, need, or child
custodial arrangements. The time has come to cease lifetime
annuities to former military spouses, should they remarry.
Judicial determinations of appropriate support should be
determined on a case-by-case basis and not be viewed as an
``entitlement'' by former spouses as exists under current law.
The Retired Enlisted Association urges hearings on the USFSPA.
A CONCERN
TREA is cautious of the DOD request to assume more control of its
spending. It concerns us that this authority may come at the expense of
personnel and retirement issues. We urge Congress to scrutinize this
latest proposal.
CONCLUSION
In addition to the above statements I ask that you all look
carefully at the written statements of The Military Coalition and The
National Military Veterans Alliance. These groups represent veterans
and retirees communities in a very positive manner, and as an active
member of both organizations, TREA requests that you give each close
attention. Again, I thank the Committee for the opportunity to present
our issues and concerns, and we look forward to working with you to
improve the quality of life for veterans and retirees and their
families.
Senator Burns [presiding]. Mr. Garrett, thank you for your
testimony. We are playing tag up here again.
Mr. Garrett. Sure, sure.
Senator Burns. I want to just say thank you. We enlisted
your help a little bit with regard to people that had taken
early retirement and some miscommunications as far as the
benefits they receive and how they receive those, and we got
some great information from your organization. Now we are
pursuing making some changes in that so that people are ensured
they get their benefits whenever they took early retirement.
And we thank you for your testimony today.
Mr. Garrett. Yes, sir.
Senator Burns. Thank you very much.
Now we call Joseph Barnes, National Executive Secretary of
the Fleet Reserve Association. Thank you for coming today, sir,
and let us apologize for the conditions in which you have to
offer your testimony.
STATEMENT OF JOSEPH L. BARNES, NATIONAL EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY, FLEET RESERVE ASSOCIATION
Mr. Barnes. Not a problem, Senator. Thank you very much.
The Fleet Reserve Association (FRA) appreciates the opportunity
to present its views on the 2004 defense budget. The
association thanks the distinguished subcommittee for its
leadership, support, and strong commitment to important quality
of life programs benefiting service members, their families,
and military retirees.
My statement today addresses several priority issues. FRA
recommends continued progress towards closing the military pay
gap by 2006 and beyond by funding higher than civilian level
pay increases. The Senate Armed Services Committee endorsed at
least a 3.7 percent pay increase for all uniformed services
personnel and FRA requests the appropriations necessary to
implement this increase on January 1, 2004.
FRA strongly recommends full funding for the Defense health
program and adequate appropriations to revitalize the Tricare
Standard program. The association also believes Tricare should
be available for reservists and their families on a cost-
sharing basis. Bob Washington, FRA's Director of Legislative
Programs, earlier addressed other health care concerns on
behalf of the association and the Military Coalition.
FRA supports benchmarking the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB)
education benefits to the cost of an average 4-year college
education. Noteworthy is the fact that a significant percentage
of Navy enlisted personnel have no education benefits and they
should be afforded an opportunity to enroll when reenlisting.
The military survivor benefit plan provides an annuity to
surviving spouses equal to 55 percent of covered retired pay.
This amount is reduced to 35 percent when the beneficiary
begins receiving social security. FRA believes that the program
should be funded at the intended 40 percent level rather than
at the current level, which is less than 17 percent.
Additional issues addressed in our statement include:
continuing support for an increase in end strengths to ease
both operational and personnel tempos; funding for spouse
employment opportunities, which are integral to the well-being
and retention of service members; and supplemental impact aid
funding for school districts with large numbers of military-
sponsored students.
FRA strongly supports funding to maintain the commissary
benefit at the current level and restates its continued
opposition to privatization. The benefit is an integral part of
the total compensation package. In addition, limitations on
access for Guard and Reserve personnel should be lifted due to
the increased reliance on these service members.
Finally, FRA advocates retention of the full final month's
retired pay by the retiree's surviving spouse and the extension
of the dislocation allowance to retiring service members. If
authorized, the association asks for your support for these
proposals, which have also been endorsed by the entire Military
Coalition. Thank you again, Senator, and I stand ready to
answer any questions you may have.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joseph L. Barnes
INTRODUCTION
Mr. Chairman and other distinguished Members of the Subcommittee:
The Fleet Reserve Association (FRA) is grateful for the opportunity to
address the panel on military personnel programs. First, however, the
Association extends sincere gratitude to the Subcommittee for its
outstanding efforts these past four years in enhancing life in the
military for the Nation's service members and their families. The
result has been nearly miraculous. Recruiting and retention is at its
highest since the advent of the all-volunteer force. The ``magic'' spun
by this subcommittee has enriched quality of life for the men and women
who serve or will serve or have retired from the Armed Forces of the
United States.
With 135,000 members strong, FRA presents a well-deserved salute to
the Subcommittee for, among others, providing ``targeted'' pay
increases for NCOs and Petty Officers in the grades of E5 thru E9 and
funding the Tricare for Life health care program for military retirees
65 years of age or older. The Subcommittee's commitment to service
members, their families, and retired military veterans is unmatched.
Thanks for doing a superb job.
FISCAL YEAR 2004 DEFENSE BUDGET
FRA is acutely aware of the estimated deficits facing the United
States in 2004 and succeeding years. Defense build-up is critical to
this country that now plays a major role in keeping the United States,
as well as other world nations, free from intrusion by an enemy or
enemies. The cost of doing business defense-wise leaves little for
societal and environmental programs.
FRA supports a strong defense, first and ever more. However, it is
a people-oriented organization whose mission is to provide loyalty,
protection, and service to its members. To serve its members
effectively, the Association has a duty to apprise Congress of the
resolutions adopted by them in convention.
For fiscal year 2004, FRA is seeking support from the Subcommittee
for the issues and programs addressed in this statement. For the past
12 months the Association, as in almost 76 of its 79 years, renewed its
commitment to serve as the premier ``watchdog'' organization for its
members as well as the enlisted men and women serving in the Navy,
Marine Corps, and Coast Guard. From that group, as well as other
sources dedicated to enhancing quality of life for the Nation's Sea
Services personnel, FRA offers the below recommendations for
consideration and, hopefully, the Subcommittee's endorsement.
QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAMS
The following recommendations are divided into six (6) major
categories. They are: Pay and Allowances, health care, education,
retirement, military construction, and other issues.
Overworked U.S. troops will accept the strain of current
deployments--for a while--as long as they believe their families are
cared for back home.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Attributed to the military's top enlisted members before a
House panel Mar 5. 2003 as reported by Navy Times, Mar 17, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pay and allowances
Compensation
Recommendation.--That Congress holds fast to its commitment of
closing the military pay gap by 2006 through the utilization of higher-
than-civilian-pay increases to military basic pay and not permit
military pay to again fall behind that of the civilian community. To
accomplish the task Congress needs to react before 2006 in repealing
the law authorizing the capping of annual military pay increases below
that of civilian wages. Additionally, to continue its promise to erase
the disparity in housing allowances that cause service members to pay
higher out-of-pocket costs to reside in the civilian community.
Pay and allowances continue as the top retention choice of military
personnel since the beginning of the all-volunteer force. This is
substantiated once again in a recent survey conducted by FRA on its web
site. More service members are married than ever before in the history
of the Nation's military. Societal and economical customs demand higher
incomes for military personnel, the same as for their civilian brothers
and sisters. Congress in its wisdom has adopted higher pays for all
uniformed members and ``targeted pays'' for both mid-grade officers and
noncommissioned officers to meet that demand in the military. Further,
Congress has committed itself to closing the pay gap between military
and civilian pay levels.
For fiscal year 2004, the basic pay increase is currently locked in
law at 3.7 percent, 0.05 percent higher than the latest ECI figure [37
USC, 1009(c)]. BHA (Basic Housing Allowance), also locked in law, is in
for an increase in fiscal year 2004 of four (4) percent. However, the
Administration's budget calls for a mix of basic pay increases
beginning at 2 percent for personnel in the grade of E1 to a high of
6\1/4\ percent for those in grade E9. With the exception of pay grades
E1 and O1, all other grades are set to receive at least a 3.7 percent
increase. FRA is delighted with the Department of Defense for
piggybacking on the Association's 1999 Pay Study and again recommending
``targeted'' increases for mid-grade and senior noncommissioned and
petty officers (NCOs/POs).
FRA supports the Administration's recommendations on pay and
housing allowance increases and urges the Subcommittee to appropriate
the necessary funds to affect the authorized increases. However, if
Congress believes a higher increase should go to E1s and O1s, the
Association suggests no reduction in the design to target pay increases
for NCOs and POs who, until recently, have been slighted since the
advent of the AVF.
FRA also urges Congress not to buy the Administration's suggestion
to change the current Employers Cost Index (ECI) to the Consumer Price
Index (CPI) as a measure to determine future military pay increases.
One may recall that it was only a few years ago when the then incumbent
Administration urged Congress to adopt the ECI. DOD noted at the time
that the ECI was a much superior indicator in matching civilian wages
to military pay. In the event the Administration's suggestion prevails,
the Association requests that no funds be appropriated to support the
administration of such a change.
Pay Raise for USPHS and NOAA Personnel
Recommendation.--FRA urges the funding of comparable basic pay
raises in 2004 for Public Health Service (PHS) and National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Commissioned Officers.
Both agencies are an integral part of the seven uniformed services
and should receive the same consideration as for other commissioned
officers in the Armed Forces. FRA is particularly concerned for
officers in the PHS who provide health care to members of the U.S.
Coast Guard, identical to the care provided by officers of the Armed
Services Medical Corps to members of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps and
Air Force.
Reserve Compensation
Recommendation.--Support the restoration of tax deductions for
expenses expended by reservists in performing military training.
With the United States resolve to maintain worldwide peace, the
role of the reservist is more important than ever. Due to extensive
mobilization of the reserves, some individuals/units more than once and
for undesignated periods of time, it behooves Congress to improve
benefits for reserves so that their numbers will meet that which the
military services need to support the active forces. One of the
benefits would be to allow reservists to deduct non-reimbursable
expenses associated with performing monthly drills. It is the
Association's fervent hope the Senate will act on the bill as soon as
possible.
Dislocation Allowance
Recommendation.--Amend 37 USC, Sec. 407, to authorize the payment
of dislocation allowances to members of the armed forces retiring or
transferring to an inactive duty status such as the Fleet Reserve or
Fleet Marine Reserve who perform a ``final change of station'' move.
Moving households on government orders can be costly. Throughout a
military career, service members endure a number of permanent changes
of station (PCS). Often each move requires additional expenses for
relocating to a new area far removed from the service members' current
location.
Dislocation allowances are authorized for military-ordered moves.
To aid service members in defraying these additional costs, Congress in
1955 adopted the payment of a special allowance-termed ``dislocation
allowance''--to recognize that duty station changes and resultant
household relocations reflect personnel management decisions of the
armed forces and are not subject to the control of individual members.
Odd as it may appear, service members preparing to retire from the
Armed Services are not eligible for dislocation allowances, yet many
are subject to the same additional expenses they experienced when
effecting a permanent change of station during the 20 or more years of
active duty spent earning the honor to retire. In either case, moving
on orders to another duty station or to retire are both reflective of a
management decision.
FRA recommends appropriating the necessary funds to affect payments
of this allowance.
Health Care
Tricare
Recommendation.--FRA strongly recommends continuation of full
funding for the Defense Health Program, to include military medical
readiness, TRICARE, and the DOD peacetime health care mission.
Additionally, FRA urges the distinguished Subcommittee to provide
appropriations to revitalize the Tricare Standard Program and make the
Tricare program available for reservists and families on a cost-sharing
basis.
Funds need to be appropriated for the Defense Health Budget to meet
readiness needs and deliver services through both the direct care and
purchased-care systems for all uniformed services beneficiaries,
regardless of age, status and location. Congressional oversight of the
Defense Health Budget is essential to avoid a return to the chronic
under-funding of past years that led to shortfalls, shortchanging of
the direct care system, and reliance on annual emergency supplemental
funding requests. Even though supplemental appropriations for health
care were not needed last year, FRA is concerned that the current
funding level only meets the needs to maintain the status quo.
Addressing Tricare shortfalls will require additional funding.
Access to care is of major concern to the FRA membership.
Beneficiaries report that some health providers in their areas are not
willing to accept new Tricare Standard patients. The Association
believes further distinction must be made between Tricare Standard and
Prime in evaluating the Tricare program. Our members report increased
problems and dissatisfaction with the Standard benefit.
There are a number of persistent problems with Tricare Standard, a
new name for an old program once known as CHAMPUS. First, many
beneficiaries have difficulty in locating Health Providers who'll
accept Tricare Standard. The paperwork is extensive and the payments
are insufficient. In a FRA survey administered in early February 2003,
15 of 55 service members (27 percent) attending a military course of
instruction complained of the difficulty in obtaining health care
providers for their family members. (The remaining 40 were enrolled in
Tricare Prime.)
Reservists are rightfully concerned with continuity of health care
for their families when called to active duty. Until recently, there
was no single coverage for reservists and no coverage for some. Now,
reservists called to active duty in excess of 30 days may enroll their
families in Tricare Prime and have access to either Military Treatment
Facilities (MTF) or civilian providers. To maintain permanence of
health care, many reservists and families would just as soon keep their
current health care coverage. To improve readiness in the reserves,
increase morale, and ease concern for families when reservists are
mobilized, Congress should direct and fund DOD to implement a program
whereby the reservists' current health insurance premiums are paid by
Tricare.
Education
MGIB
Recommendation.--FRA continues to support increased benefits for
participation in the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) and to authorize certain
service members the opportunity to enroll or reenroll in the MGIB.
FRA advocates the creation of a benchmark for the MGIB so that its
benefits will keep pace with the cost of an average four year college
education. Even with the forthcoming October 1 increases in basic
rates, a MGIB student looking forward to completing the 2003-2004
academic year will have to pay out-of-pocket about one-third the cost
of a four year course of education in a public college or university.
If married, the shortfall in benefits will place a heavier financial
burden on the student.
The Reserve MGIB has failed to maintain a creditable rate of
benefits with those authorized in Title 38, Chapter 30. Other than
cost-of-living increases, only two improvements in benefits have been
legislated since 1985. In that year MGIB rates were established at 47
percent of active duty benefits. This October 1, the rate will fall to
27 percent of the Chapter 30 benefits. In support of Guard and Reserve
personnel, being mobilized in increasing numbers, FRA seeks the support
of Congress is enhancing the MGIB rates for those who choose to
participate in the program.
Approximately 40 percent of the Navy's enlisted force has no
educational benefits. It seems ironic that an individual enlisting in
the military services is eligible to enroll in the MGIB while another
seeking to reenlist does not have the opportunity. Allowing service-
members to enroll in the MGIB upon reenlisting in the Armed Forces
should be the norm.
Retirement
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP)
Recommendation.--To adopt and fund Senate Bill, S. 451, to amend
the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) [10 USC, 1451(a)] to authorize the
repeal of the post-62 annuity over a period of 5 years [35 percent to
40 percent in October 2004, to 45 percent in October 2005, to 50
percent in October 2006] and to 55 percent in October 2007. Further to
change the date 2008 to 2004 [10 USC, 1452(l)] at which time the
retiree, attaining the age of 70 years who has paid 30 years of SBP
premiums, will be fully insured for the covered amount without further
payments to the Plan.
The Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) provides an annuity to surviving
spouses equal to 55 percent of the deceased member's covered military
retirement pay with a reduction to 35 percent when the surviving spouse
attains the age of 62. SBP also offers annuities to spouses and
children, children only, former spouses, former spouses and children,
and insurable interests.
Two-thirds of the total military retired community is in the
enlisted grades, most are earning retirement pay in the E6 and E7 pay
grades. At the time of their retirement, few are financially able to
afford SBP coverage at the full amount of their retirement pay. On
retirement, the typical service member may lose nearly 70 percent of
the income received while on active duty. As a result, they opt for the
basic amount that provides a miniscule annuity for a surviving spouse.
The Plan is perplexing adding to the confusion of what constitutes
a ``social security offset'' when the Social Security Administration
(SSA) has nothing to do with computing the SBP annuity? And the
question: Why is there a sharp annuity loss suffered at age 62 for some
and not for others? Why isn't Congress adhering to its original intent
to cover 40 percent of the costs of the program? Why, if the SBP is
patterned after the Federal Employees' plans, is FERS subsidized at 33
percent and 48 percent for CSRS? Additionally, FERS annuitants receive
50 percent of the employees' retired pay and CSRS annuitants 55 percent
with no reduction in the annuity at age 62.
Mr. Chairman. Let's fix the program before our retired service
members are paying 100 percent for participating in a program that was
adopted to replace a previous plan where the participants were required
to carry 100 percent of the costs.
Authorize Surviving Spouses a Full Month's Payment of Retired Pay for
Month in Which Retirees Die
Recommendation.--In consideration of service to the Nation and the
trauma surrounding the death of a retired service member, the surviving
spouse would be entitled to receive and retain the final retired pay
check/deposit covering any month in which the member was alive for any
24-hour period.
Current regulations require survivors of deceased military retirees
to return any retirement payments received for the month in which the
retiree dies. Upon the demise of a retired service member entitled to
retired pay, the surviving spouse or beneficiary is to notify the
Defense Department of the death. The Department's financial arm then
stops payment on the retirement check or electronic deposit and
subsequently recalculates the payment to cover the actual days in the
month the retiree was alive. In other cases where the death is not
reported in a timely manner, any payments made for the days the retiree
was not alive will be recouped.
Retirement and its related activities are most agonizing if not an
arduous experience for many military retirees and families
transitioning to an unfamiliar civilian-lifestyle. For the average
retiree, and most likely the one who is enlisted, will suddenly
discover finances will be a principal concern. On leaving active duty,
the retiree's income will drop 60-to-70 percent of what was earned
while in uniform. The enlisted retiree, unlike his or her active duty
counterpart, will receive no death gratuity and, in the case of many of
the older enlisted retirees, would not have had the financial resources
to purchase adequate insurance to provide a financial cushion for their
surviving spouses.
Death is a most traumatic experience for survivors. It is a most
painful time when the surviving spouse must accept the task of
arranging for the deceased members' funeral services. The additional
cost involved constitutes a major output of scarce family dollars only
amplified by the loss of retirement income when needed the most. A
final month's retirement payment will go far in helping to soothe the
strain on the survivor's financial obligations.
To aid in reducing the cost of the proposal, survivor benefit
payments may be forfeited for the month in which the retiree dies and
the survivor receives the retiree's final month's check. In the event
the retiree's final month's retirement check is less than the SBP
annuity, the survivor would receive the one most favorable.
Military Construction
Housing
Recommendation.--To make every effort to eliminate substandard
family and bachelor housing, now referred to as inadequate by DOD, and
expedite the construction of new housing to accommodate the Nation's
service members and families. Also, to provide enhanced child care
programs to relieve the tension of spouses or working spouses with
children whose service member husbands or wives are deployed.
In a recent appearance before the House Appropriations Subcommittee
on Military Construction, the Armed Services four top enlisted chiefs
voiced concern for the quality and availability of housing and child
care. Both are ever-most in the minds of service members deployed or
serving outside the United States without their families.
Although there is a threat of base closures in the immediate
future, apparently the larger military installations, such as Norfolk
Naval Bases, Camp Pendleton, etc., are not at risk. There is no reason
not to authorize and appropriate additional funding for both housing
and child care.
Both the Navy and Marine Corps have unfunded housing priorities.
For example, the Navy has reduced its fiscal year 2004 Family Housing
request by 17 percent and the Corps needs $165 million of which $63
million is for family housing. This raises the question of whether the
Navy and Marine Corps will meet their 2007 target of ridding both
services of ``inadequate'' housing. Congress is encouraged to purge the
Navy and Marine Corps of ``substandard housing'' (the name it was
before DOD changed it to ``inadequate'') by authorizing and
appropriating additional funding to accomplish the task.
At the same time FRA seeks increased funds for family housing it
cannot ignore the need for bachelor quarters. The Association endorses
the requests of the Navy's and Marine Corps' top enlisted chiefs in
their statements of February 26, 2003 before the House Appropriations
Subcommittee on Military Construction. (Available upon request to FRA
at 703-683-1400 or [email protected].)
Facilities
Recommendation.--To provide for additional funding to accommodate
the construction and modernization of installation facilities at Naval
and Marine Corps bases, to include physical fitness and MWR centers.
The value of having adequate facilities cannot be over-stated. The
backlog of maintenance to many of the work-stations and other buildings
continues to grow along side the need to replace those structures that
are beyond repair. It's shameful as well as wasteful to require our
service members to labor in dilapidated buildings on weapons systems
and other equipment costing the taxpayers millions of dollars. Again,
the Navy and Marine Corps have priorities that should be funded so more
secure, cleaner, and healthier work places are available for Sailors
and Marines enabling them to perform at their best.
Additionally, community support facilities require congressional
attention. Physical fitness centers are much in demand. Not only are
they places to relieve tension but to build body strength and improve
health, both important to maintaining physical readiness.
Other Issues
End Strengths
Recommendation.--FRA believes this honorable Subcommittee is aware
of the need for greater strength authorizations and funding to ease
both operational and personnel tempos imposed upon a force not
sufficient in numbers to sustain the current demands for manning
operational commitments. Although Congress, under the provisions of the
fiscal year 2003 NDAA, did allow and fund a small increase in the
active component strength of the Marine Corps, it only authorized
increases for the Navy, if needed, but without funding. FRA recommends
Congress give greater credence to its instincts and authorize
appropriations for additional manpower.
Since 1995, when it was obvious the downsizing of strengths in the
Armed Forces was causing increased operational and personnel tempos,
FRA has annually requested increases in military manpower. It will do
so again this session of Congress.
In an appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee last
year, the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, avowed the Armed Forces will
defeat terrorism ``no matter how long it takes or where it takes us.''
On January 31, 2003, The Washington Times reported Defense Secretary
Rumsfeld as alerting his commanders ``that troops will deploy for
longer periods because of the war on terrorism and potential conflict
with Iraq.'' Missing from both statements was the promise to succeed
only if the Forces had adequate manpower to accomplish the mission.
Previously, a Navy Times editorial of December 12, 2001, warned not
to overextend the military: ``Time and again, America's armed forces
have shown they'll do what it takes to serve their country. But history
offers a warning: Work them too hard, keep them away from home too
long, overlook their welfare and eventually they will walk.''
Additionally, The Washington Times of January 31, 2003, noted that a
retired Navy Admiral commenting on high military deployment rates
stated, . . . ``the chances of keeping a marriage together for 20 years
at the current op tempo is approaching zero.''
These warnings are not to be ignored. It doesn't take a rocket
scientist to resolve the question of how the Department of Defense
(DOD) can justify no need of increased manpower when the strength of
the Forces has been reduced by one-third while the optemp has
accelerated dramatically. Operational levels involving uniformed
members of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard
have escalated significantly over the past decade to a point where the
United States does not have adequate numbers of military personnel to
fully accommodate the many commitments ordered by the Department of
Defense and area commanders.
Early in 2002, it was reported the Army had told the Pentagon it
needs 20,000 to 40,000 additional troops in fiscal year 2003, the Air
Force 8,000 to 10,000, and the Navy and Marine Corps an additional
3,000 each. However, the Secretary of Defense was not favorable to an
increase in manpower. Congress, in its decision, authorized an increase
but because of a shortage of funds provided no money to pay the
additional manpower.
There are numerous defense officials, both civilian and military,
complaining uniformed personnel are doing more with less, over
deployed, overworked, and stretched too thin. However, our service
members are serving magnificently, but the question is: For how long
and if they have to face a determined foe? Operation Iraqi Freedom is
no guideline to justify further reductions in military manpower.
Spousal Employment
Recommendation.----The Association urges Congress to continue its
support of the military's effort to affect a viable spousal employment
program and to authorize sufficient funds to assure the program's
success.
Today's all-volunteer environment requires the services to consider
the whole family. It is no longer adequate to focus only on the morale
and financial well-being of the member. Now, his or her family must be
considered, too. One of the major considerations is spousal employment
which could be a stepping-stone to retention of the service member--a
key participant in the defense of this Nation.
In recent years, the Armed Forces have become concerned with the
plight of military spouses who lose employment when accompanying their
service member husbands or wives to new duty locations. Studies have
concluded that many military families suffer significant financial
setbacks. Some losses are substantial. Worse, yet, is the lack of equal
or even minimal employment opportunities at the new duty locations.
The services are continuing to test new programs to assist spouses
in finding full or temporary employment to include counseling and
training. Other initiatives will help spouses find ``portable''
employment in companies with customer-service jobs that can be done at
remote locations. FRA salutes these efforts and encourages the military
departments to continue the march.
Impact Aid to School Districts with Concentrations of
Military Sponsored Students
Recommendation.--To continue to provide funds to school districts
heavily impacted with military personnel-sponsored children.
The President's Budget request contains a provision to reduce funds
earmarked for distribution to school districts heavily impacted with
children of military personnel (and civilian employees hired by the
service department concerned). The reduction is to be the amount that
would be appropriated for children, known as B students, whose parents
reside in the civilian community and not on the military installation.
FRA cannot urge this Subcommittee in any stronger terms to support
full funding of impact aid. Previous attempts by former Administrations
to terminate these payments have met with failure and rightfully so.
Impacted schools could not operate efficiently nor provide adequate
tutoring to service members' children with less money. Many of these
schools either closed their doors to these children or threatened to do
so if funds were cut.
At this time in history FRA believes it to be utterly foolish if
the Nation forgets the damage the President's request, if adopted, will
do to our service members' morale. There are 240,000 school children,
whose uniformed service parents live off of military installations,
depending on receiving a quality education from local educational
facilities. It will not happen unless the funds are provided.
Commissaries
Recommendation.--To oppose privatization of commissaries and
strongly support full appropriations to fund the current level of
service for all commissary patrons. Additionally, to authorize
unrestricted access to commissaries to Reservists.
The fiscal year 2003 budget reduced Defense Commissary Agency
funding by $137 million and envisioned eliminating over 2,600 positions
from stores and headquarters staff by September 30, 2003. While surveys
indicate there has been no significant loss in service to the customer,
FRA cautions that further initiatives be evaluated with regard to
potential negative impacts on quality and service to customers,
including additional store closings, reduced hours, longer cashier
lines and reduced stock on store shelves. The benefit is widely
recognized as a valuable part of the service member's compensation
package and a cornerstone of quality of life benefits. As in the past,
FRA opposes any effort to privatize commissaries and strongly supports
full funding of the benefit in fiscal year 2004 and beyond.
As in previous years, FRA once again seeks full access to
commissaries for selected reservists. The process involved in issuing
(annually), checking, and accounting for the current cards required of
the reservist to shop in the commissary is costly and unnecessary.
Reservists are part of the Total Force. They should receive the same
consideration as their active duty comrades-in-arms.
CONCLUSION
FRA is grateful for the opportunity to present its goals for fiscal
year 2004. If there are questions or the need for further information,
I will be pleased to respond.
Senator Burns. Thank you very much, Mr. Barnes. We
appreciate your testimony.
We are looking into some of these health care issues that
you are looking into and of course right now, you know, we have
got budget problems and we are trying to cover too many bases
with too few dollars. It is just like I asked--I met a lady on
the street in Billings the other day and I asked her about her
husband and she said, well, he retired. And I said, well, that
is pretty great. And she says, it is not worth a darn; it is
half as much money and twice as much husband. She said, that is
a bad equation. So thank you very much for your testimony. We
appreciate that very much.
Mr. Barnes. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Burns. We now call Dr. James A. Fabunmi. I am sorry
about that. I just killed that name, I know. I just slaughtered
it. The president of the Science and Technology Workforce for
America's Security. We appreciate you, and how do you pronounce
your last name, sir?
STATEMENT OF JAMES A. FABUNMI, Ph.D., PRESIDENT, THE
AMERICAN HERITAGE DEFENSE CORPORATION
Dr. Fabunmi. ``FAH-bune-mee.'' And I might say that you did
the best that I hear every day, so do not feel apologetic. That
is fine.
Senator Burns. Okay, thank you very much. I appreciate your
patience and your goodwill.
Dr. Fabunmi. Good afternoon, sir. Mr. Chairman and members
of the committee. Thank you for allowing me to present this
testimony before you today. I appreciate the opportunity to
present you some new ideas on how to broaden the base of
production of science and technology workforce for America's
security.
I represent the American Heritage Defense Corporation, a
nonprofit corporation registered in the District of Columbia
for the specific purpose of developing and implementing
programs that enhance the quality and quantity of American
citizens trained in the fields of science and technology. As
the committee knows, these are challenging times in the history
of our great Nation. There are serious threats from abroad to
our national defense, economic, and homeland security. Yet
American technological prowess, which has helped ensure our
military and economic security during the past 50 years, is in
serious jeopardy because of the increasing shortages of
American-educated scientists and engineers, who are the bedrock
of our technological enterprise.
The committee may be aware of recent reports by the Council
on Competitiveness, the National Science Board, and others that
pinpoint some critical factors that correlate highly and
positively with economic and military strength. They include:
the size of the labor force dedicated to research and
development and other technically oriented work; the amount of
investment directed at research and development; the resources
devoted to higher education; and the degree to which national
policy encourages investment, innovation and commercialization.
The committee may also be aware that there are innovative
economies of other countries that have made great strides in
developing high-value products and services. These innovative
economies are ramping their capacities to educate, train, and
deploy scientific and engineering talent. Their pool of
scientists and engineers is increasing briskly. The quality of
patents by foreign investors--inventors is strong. Global
access to capital is growing.
On the other hand, the source of the innovative capacity of
our Nation is thinning. A quarter of the current science and
engineering workforce, whose research and innovation produced
the American technological superiority of the past decades, is
more than 50 years old and will retire by the end of this
decade.
The Department of Defense has historically been the largest
source of Federal funding for engineering, research, and
development in this country. Universities are significant
collaborators with industry and are the source for young
science and technology talent for the defense sector, both
public and private. In particular, Federal funding for defense
basic and applied research and development has provided the
majority of financial support for graduate education in the
physical sciences and engineering.
The American Heritage Defense Corporation believes that it
is in our national defense and homeland security interest to
significantly increase our national investment in science and
engineering workforce education. Indeed, on April 10, 2002, the
Director of Defense Research and Engineering, the Honorable
Ronald M. Sega, said, and I quote: ``The quality of our science
and technological workforce and the management of the
laboratory infrastructure in which they work are very important
factors in the overall research and engineering equation.''
They are critical elements in our transformation. Our science
and technological workforce has been downsized considerably in
the past 12 years. This has left us with a very knowledgeable
workforce, but one that is also reaching retirement age. We are
at a critical point that requires a focused effort to bring
stability to the workforce that will attract and retain talent.
There are four key components to the development of a top-
grade science and technology workforce. These are: knowledge of
the basic disciplines of math and science; discovery of new
knowledge in mathematics and science; applications of
mathematics and science to new and future engineering systems;
and the practice and design and production of useful and
marketable products and services.
The first component, as well as some degree of the second
component, is available at most accredited institutions across
the country and could be strengthened through various
educational and basic research programs sponsored by the
National Science Foundation and the Department of Defense. The
third and fourth components by and large are found only at
institutions that have developed and maintained longstanding
relationships with government and industrial laboratories, but
clearly laboratories evolved in the development of systems for
the Department of Defense.
The American Heritage Defense Corporation believes that the
broadening of access to these four components by students at
institutions across the country is a significant and necessary
step to address the current shortage of American science and
technological workforce. The American Heritage Defense
Corporation has proposed the Science and Technology Workforce
for America's Security program to offer specific approaches to
broadening the base of production of a high-quality scientific
and technological workforce. These approaches leverage on the
internship opportunities available to students at government
and industrial laboratories to create a structured integration
of the two missing components into the education of American
citizens enrolled in science and engineering programs
throughout the country.
It is recommended that the committee appropriate funds
which would enable the Department of Defense to provide a grant
of $3.5 million in fiscal year 2004 to the American Heritage
Defense Corporation and an amount of $5 million each in fiscal
year 2005 and fiscal year 2005 also to the American Heritage
Defense Corporation, for a 3-year demonstration program to
assist the Director of Defense Research and Engineering in
implementing the proposed Science and Technology Workforce for
America's Security program.
The requested amounts are estimated to provide seed funds
for organizing and promoting the program and to support 30
students in the first year and 50 students in each of the
subsequent 2 years of the 3-year effort.
I thank you very much for the opportunity to appear before
you and I will be very happy to respond to any of your
questions.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dr. James A. Fabunmi
Honorable Chairman and Members of the Committee, good afternoon and
thank you for allowing me the privilege of appearing before you today.
I appreciate the opportunity to present testimony before you in support
of efforts to broaden the base of production of top grade Science and
Technology Workforce for American Security (STWAS). I appear before you
as the President of the American Heritage Defense Corporation (AHDC), a
non profit Corporation registered in the District of Columbia for the
specific purpose of developing and implementing programs that enhance
the quality and quantity of American citizens, trained in the fields of
Science and Technology.
SUMMARY
As the Committee knows, these are challenging times in the history
of our great nation. There are serious threats from abroad to our
national defense, economic and homeland security. Yet, American
technological prowess, which has helped ensure our military and
economic security during the past 50 years, is in serious jeopardy
because of the increasing shortages of American educated scientists and
engineers who are the bedrock of our technological enterprise. The
committee may be aware of recent reports by the Council on
Competitiveness, the National Science Board, and others that pinpoint
some critical factors that correlate highly and positively with
economic and military strengths. They include the size of the labor
force dedicated to research and development and other technically
oriented work; the amount of investment directed at research and
development; the resources devoted to higher education; and the degree
to which national policy encourages investment in innovation and
commercialization.
The committee may also be aware that there are innovative economies
of other countries that have made great strides in developing high-
value products and services. These innovative economies are ramping
their capacities to educate, train, and deploy scientific and
engineering talent. Their pool of scientists and engineers is
increasingly briskly; the quality of patents by foreign inventors is
strong, and global access to capital is growing. On the other hand, the
source of the innovative capacity of our nation is thinning. A quarter
of the current science and engineering workforce, whose research and
innovation produced the American technological superiority of the past
decades, is more than 50 years old and will retire by the end of this
decade. The Department of Defense has historically been the largest
source of federal funding for engineering research and development in
this country. Universities are significant collaborators with industry
and are the source for young science and technology talent for the
defense sector, both public and private. In particular, federal funding
for defense basic and applied research and development has provided the
majority of the financial support for graduate education in the
physical sciences and engineering.
The AHDC believes that it is in our national defense and homeland
security interests to significantly increase our national investment in
science and engineering workforce education. Indeed, on April 10, 2002,
the Director of the Defense Research and Engineering (DDRE), the
Honorable Ronald M. Sega, said and I quote: ``the quality of our
Science and Technology (S&T) workforce and the management of the
laboratory infrastructure in which they work are very important factors
in the overall research and engineering equation. They are critical
elements in our transformation. Our S&T workforce has been downsized
considerably in the last twelve years. This has left us with a very
knowledgeable workforce, but one that is also reaching retirement age.
We are at a critical point that requires a focused effort to bring
stability to the workforce that will attract and retain talent.''
There are four key components to the development of top grade S&T
Workforce. These are: (1) Knowledge of the basic disciplines of
Mathematics and Science; (2) Discovery of new knowledge in Mathematics
and Science; (3) Applications of Mathematics and Science to new and
future engineering systems; and (4) Practice of design and production
of useful and marketable products and services. The first component as
well as some degree of the second component is available at most
accredited Institutions across the country and could be strengthened
through various educational and basic research programs funded by the
National Science Foundation and the Department of Defense. The third
and fourth components by and large are found only at Institutions that
have developed and maintained long-standing relationships with
government and industrial laboratories, particularly laboratories
involved in development of systems for the Department of Defense. The
AHDC believes that the broadening of access to these four components by
students at Institutions all across the country is a significant and
necessary step to address the current shortage of American S&T
workforce.
The AHDC has proposed the STWAS program to offer specific
approaches to broadening the base of production of high quality
scientific and technological workforce. These approaches leverage on
the internship opportunities available to students at government and
industrial laboratories, to create a structured integration of the two
missing components into the education of American citizens enrolled in
science and engineering programs throughout the country. It is
recommended that the Committee appropriate funds, which will enable the
Department of Defense to provide a grant of $3.5 million in fiscal year
2004 to the American Heritage Defense Corporation (AHDC), and amounts
of $5 million each in fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2006, also to
the American Heritage Defense Corporation (AHDC) for a 3-year
demonstration program to assist the Director, Defense Research and
Engineering (DDR&E) in implementing the proposed STWAS program. The
requested amounts are estimated to provide seed funds for organizing
and promoting the program and to support 30 students in the first year,
and 50 students in each of the subsequent two years of the three-year a
pilot effort.
SHORTAGE OF AMERICAN S&T WORKFORCE
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Aerospace Engineering
degrees granted to United States citizens dropped by half from 1991 to
2000. 54 percent of United States Aerospace workers over the age 45
will leave the field during the next six years while 6 million
Aerospace jobs vital to the United States Economy and National Security
will open up with no Americans being trained to fill them. The
Electronics Engineering Times reports that in 2000, the United States
imported 90,000 engineers and computer scientists, while graduating
65,000 engineers and 15,000 computer scientists. Indeed, on April 10,
2002, the Director of the Defense Research and Engineering (DDRE), the
Honorable Ronald M. Sega, said and I quote: ``the quality of our
Science and Technology (S&T) workforce and the management of the
laboratory infrastructure in which they work are very important factors
in the overall research and engineering equation. They are critical
elements in our transformation. Our S&T workforce has been downsized
considerably in the last twelve years. This has left us with a very
knowledgeable workforce, but one that is also reaching retirement age.
We are at a critical point that requires a focused effort to bring
stability to the workforce that will attract and retain talent.''
In a discussion of whether or not there is a shortage of S&T
Workforce, it is important to clarify what the real issues are. While
an unemployed scientist or engineer may wonder what is meant by
``shortage'', it is apparent that such a scientist or engineer is
unlikely to be a graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
There are different grades of S&T Workforce, and it is safe to assume
that when Industry or Government Agencies go out to recruit S&T
Workforce, they are most likely seeking top grade S&T Workforce, and
not just anyone with a college degree in science or engineering. Every
time the debate comes up regarding the need for the Federal government
to increase investments in the development of S&T workforce, there will
always be opposing viewpoints that point to unemployed S&T
professionals as if to indicate that there is instead a surplus in this
particular labor category. The reality though is that a college degree
in science or engineering does not automatically imply that one has
acquired the competence to contribute productively to industry or
government workforce. I want to clarify at this point that the issue of
concern is the base of production of top grade S&T workforce.
COMPONENTS OF TOP GRADE S&T EDUCATION
There are four key components to the development of top grade S&T
Workforce. These are: (1) Knowledge of the basic disciplines of
Mathematics and Science; (2) Discovery of new knowledge in Mathematics
and Science; (3) Applications of Mathematics and Science to new and
future engineering systems; and (4) Practice of design, production and
maintenance of useful and marketable products and services.
The first component as well as some degree of the second component
is available at most accredited Institutions across the country and
could be strengthened through various educational and basic research
programs funded by the National Science Foundation and the Department
of Defense. The third and fourth components by and large are found only
at Institutions that have developed and maintained long-standing
relationships with government and industrial laboratories, particularly
laboratories involved in development of systems for the Department of
Defense. In his book ``Rescuing Prometheus'', the technology historian
Thomas P. Hughes stated that institutions that currently produce top
tier aerospace professionals evolved from the 1960's era risk reduction
projects in support of Air Defense, Ballistic Missile Offense and Space
Exploration programs. These institutions have developed and maintained
long-standing relationships with government and industrial research and
development laboratories. In 1998 for example, according to a
Department of Defense report, out of $1.9 Billion invested by DOD in
Engineering Development funding, $763.9 Million or 40 percent went to
the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and its affiliated
laboratories. It is therefore no surprise that the probability of
producing a top grade S&T workforce from MIT is significantly higher
than that of most other institutions. Unfortunately, there is a limit
to the number of students that can attend MIT at any given point in
time.
PROPOSED STWAS PROGRAM
Having identified the four key components needed to enhance the
quality of S&T Workforce preparation, and recognizing that it is not
practical to replicate MIT on every campus in the country, the American
Heritage Defense Corporation (AHDC) has come up with an alternative
approach to achieving the same ends in a manner that is measurable, and
cost effective. These approaches leverage on the internship
opportunities available to students at government and industrial
laboratories, and will create a structured integration of the third and
fourth components (see preceding section) into the education of
American citizens enrolled in science and engineering programs
throughout the country.
At the present time, internship opportunities that are offered to
S&T graduate (and in some instances undergraduate) students are treated
as little more than extracurricular programs for the students during
their summer and/or winter breaks. These programs are not particularly
coordinated with the degree requirements of the students, and nobody is
particularly accountable for the impact of these programs on the
quality of preparation of the participating students. Most
significantly, these programs do not necessarily evolve into on-going
relationships between the faculty at the Institutions and the S&T
personnel at the government and/or industry laboratories.
The STWAS program aims to: (1) leverage national defense and
homeland security research and development efforts for the training of
future generations of American S&T workforce; (2) immerse American
students in environments where the most exciting systems are being
developed, prototyped and demonstrated; (3) focus the best and
brightest American students on America's security needs; and (4) create
a mechanism for the initiation, development and maintenance of
relationships between Academia, Industry and Government Laboratories,
centered around the educational needs of American S&T students.
The basic concept of STWAS is that internship opportunities for
American S&T students at government and/or industry laboratories and
centers should be coordinated with their degree programs, and
facilities should be established at or near their campuses to enable
them to continue the work that they have started during their on-site
visits to the laboratories and centers. It requires a dedicated
organization such as the AHDC to catalyze this process and take over
the responsibility of putting in place the necessary human and material
infrastructure for implementing such a program. The AHDC will: (1)
recruit and obtain necessary clearances for participating students; (2)
provide full support (tuition, fees, salary) to the students; (3)
collaborate with Universities to establish on or near campus facilities
for telecommuting with government and industry laboratories and
centers; and (4) organize an alliance between Academia, Industry and
Government to promote and expand the STWAS program into a nationwide
activity.
THE AMERICAN HERITAGE DEFENSE ALLIANCE
The strategy for corporate development of AHDC hinges on the
formation of the American Heritage Defense Alliance (AHDA) with
participation from governmental, industrial, academic and philanthropic
organizations. These organizations will be stakeholders and will assist
in accomplishing the mission of AHDA to create, fund and operate
Engineering Centers for expediting national defense and homeland
security and to accelerate the production of higher quality American
engineers in sufficient quantities for the defense and advancement of
the United States of America. AHDC shall have the following classes of
members: (1) Alliance Members: One representative from each of the
organizations participating in AHDA provided such organization is in
good standing as determined by the Alliance Committee of AHDC; (2) Ex-
Officio Members: The Chair of AHDC; the President; the Treasurer; the
Secretary and other officers of AHDC that are from time to time
recommended for membership by the Executive Committee, provided such
other officers shall be approved for ex-officio membership by the
simple majority of the members of AHDC; (3) Professional Members: No
more than three members in office at any one time, who are experts in
matters of National Defense and Homeland Security of the United States
of America and workings of Federally Funded Research and Development
Centers. Nominations for membership in this class shall be from the
Alliance Committee and subject to approval by a simple majority of the
members of AHDC; (4) Life Members: The Principal Founder of AHDC and
others elected by the members of AHDC, provided that the number of such
life members shall never be greater than twenty-five at any one time.
RECOMMENDED APPROPRIATIONS
It is recommended that the Committee appropriate funds, which will
enable the Department of Defense to provide a grant of $3.5 million in
fiscal year 2004 to the American Heritage Defense Corporation (AHDC),
and amounts of $5 million each in fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year
2006, also to the American Heritage Defense Corporation (AHDC) for a 3-
year demonstration program to assist the Director, Defense Research and
Engineering (DDR&E) in implementing the proposed STWAS program. The
requested amounts are estimated to provide seed funds for organizing
and promoting the program and to support 30 students in the first year,
and 50 students in each of the subsequent two years of the three-year a
pilot effort.
Honorable Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for the
privilege of addressing you and representing the AHDC. If you have
further questions, I would be happy to entertain them. If I cannot
address them at this hearing, I will have your questions researched
further and respond directly to you at a later date.
Senator Burns. Well, thank you very much and your entire
statement will be made part of the record and it will be read
and perused, I know, many times. I appreciate your coming today
and your recommendations will be well taken, I think, because
that is an area where we continue to have a lot of support here
in the Congress.
So thank you very much for coming today.
Dr. Fabunmi. Thank you, sir.
ADDITIONAL SUBMITTED STATEMENT
[Clerk's Note.--Subsequent to the hearing, the subcommittee
has received a statement from the Ovarian Cancer National
Alliance which will be inserted in the record at this point.]
Prepared Statement of the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance
On behalf of the Ovarian Cancer National Alliance, I would like to
take this opportunity to share some remarks on the unique value and
effectiveness of the DOD Ovarian Cancer Research Program (OCRP). As
Congress is charged with the important task of allocating defense
funding to meet the growing needs of our military to adequately protect
American lives from unknown threats here and abroad--it is worth noting
the critical role the DOD plays, through medical research, in
protecting Americans from other serious and under-recognized threats
like ovarian cancer.
As you may know, ovarian cancer is the deadliest of gynecologic
cancers, because the vast majority of cases are not detected until
advanced stage, when survival is only about 25 percent. However, when
detected early, ovarian cancer survival improves to 90 percent. This
toll is harsh on the 25,400 women and their families who each year
receive a diagnosis of ovarian cancer. A growing number are women in
the military and dependents of military families--whose service to our
country is compromised when they must battle this terrible cancer too!
In order to adequately improve women's chances of surviving this
devastating disease, the Alliance is requesting an appropriation of $15
million, specifically earmarked for the DOD Ovarian Cancer Research
Program (OCRP) in fiscal year 2004. Because the OCRP suffered several
cutbacks over the past two years, and because this program is so modest
to begin with, the designation of $15 million is critical to the
continued health and success of the life-saving research supported by
this initiative.
The DOD Ovarian Cancer Research Program, like the breast and
prostate cancer programs in the DOD budget, augments the important
funds spent on cancer research by the National Cancer Institute. As in
the funds spent at NCI, the DOD cancer research proposals must be peer-
reviewed and meet standards of scientific excellence.
There are however, several unique aspects of the DOD Ovarian Cancer
Research Program. The DOD ovarian program promotes ``innovative''
approaches to research that will lead to a better understanding and
control of the disease. The program encourages projects and idea awards
that propose new ways of examining prevention, early detection and
treatment and bring new investigators into ovarian cancer research.
Proposals that address the needs of minority, elderly, low-income,
rural and other underserved women are highly encouraged. And finally,
since their inception nearly ten years ago, the DOD programs have
actively involved consumers on all Scientific Peer Review and
Integration (Program Design) panels. Consistent with DOD's support of
consumer involvement, two Alliance leaders serve on the Integration
Panel and based on our recommendations, over a dozen ovarian cancer
advocates serve on the Scientific Review Panel. At NCI, a formal
program designed to involve consumers in decision-making was recently
established, and is drawing on the successful experience of the DOD
programs.
For the past 6 years, the DOD OCRP has been dedicated to supporting
research that will improve the outcome for women with ovarian cancer.
Its successes to date are impressive. There have been 69 publications
in scientific journals, 119 abstract at professional meetings and over
20 new investigators recruited into the field.
A distinguishing feature of the DOD OCRP has been program project
grants. Several multi-year ovarian cancer project grants were awarded
to cancer centers in Pittsburgh, Minnesota and Indiana. As result of
these program project grants, these cancer centers have greatly
enhanced their ovarian cancer research capabilities--and have already
begun to develop some breakthrough findings in the areas of prevention
and early detection. Two cancer centers, Fred Hutchinson in Seattle and
Fox Chase in Philadelphia, funded by the DOD OCRP, went on to win major
grants from NCI through the SPORE program (Specialized Program of
Research Excellence). Particularly with the Hutchinson, the DOD grant
enhanced their capacity to compete successfully for important NCI
funding. Through this program, researchers have identified several new
biomarkers that are promising as markers for early detection. They have
also identified an agent in oral contraceptives that help protects
against ovarian cancer--and that could result in an urgently needed way
of preventing ovarian cancer. The only caveat is--if the program
continues to receive reduced funding from the DOD, these researchers
will not be able to continue their important work.
With a strong track record and a growing core of investigators who
are contributing vital knowledge that could improve prevention, early
detection, and ultimately survival from ovarian cancer, the DOD OCRP is
making a difference in women's lives.
On behalf of the entire ovarian cancer advocacy community--
patients, family members, caregivers, clinicians and researchers--we
thank you for your leadership and support of the Ovarian Cancer
Research Program. We very much hope we can continue to count on you to
provide $15 million for this program, so that the life saving research
it supports will continue.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OVARIAN CANCER RESEARCH PROGRAM
Over the last six years, Congress has appropriated funds for the
Department of Defense (DOD) Ovarian Cancer Research Program (OCRP).
Modeled after the very successful breast cancer research program first
included in the DOD budget in 1992, the OCRP is a component of the DOD
Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program (CDMRP). Currently
funded at $10 million, the annual appropriation reached as high as $12
million in 2000 and 2001. Each year, the DOD OCRP funding is considered
for renewal by Congress or the program terminates
Overall, the OCRP has received a total of $71.7 million, which has
supported 62 awards--out of 575 proposals submitted. Because the
program has received $37 million worth of proposals ranked excellent or
outstanding that have NOT been funded, ovarian cancer advocates and
Congressional leaders are requesting a funding increase--to $15 million
for fiscal year 2004.
With ovarian cancer research neglected and underfunded for too
long, restoring recent cuts in Department of Defense's Ovarian Cancer
Research Program is critically important. This program strengthens the
federal government's commitment to ovarian cancer research and supports
innovative and novel approaches that offer promise of better
understanding the cause and prevention of ovarian cancer.
THE DOD OCRP HAS AN OUTSTANDING RECORD OF ACHIEVEMENTS
69 publications in scientific journals.
119 abstracts/presentations at professional meetings.
Over 20 new investigators recruited into ovarian cancer research.
2 patent applications filed.
The commitment to a serious, sustained ovarian cancer research
effort by several new institutions that prior to their DOD grant, did
little in ovarian cancer. With the award of multi-year project grants,
the University of Pittsburgh, University of Minnesota, Indiana
University, University of South Florida, the Medical University of
South Carolina and Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle have
dramatically increased the ovarian cancer research infrastructure and
the capacity for breakthrough findings that will improve women's
survival from this deadliest of women's cancers.
Two cancer centers--Fred Hutchinson in Seattle and Fox Chase in
Philadelphia--funded by the OCRP went on to win major grants from NCI
through the SPORE program (Specialized Program of Research Excellence).
Particularly with the Hutchinson, the DOD grant enhanced their capacity
to compete successfully for important NCI funding.
A top ovarian cancer researcher from Duke University identified the
hormone progestin as a key agent in oral contraceptives' activity in
reducing the risk of ovarian cancer. This finding has significant
implications for preventing ovarian cancer.
Several new bio-markers have been identified that have the
potential to improve early detection.
Three new agents that inhibit tumor growth, spreading and new blood
vessel formation (angiogenesis) have been discovered--a development
that could result in new and more effective treatments.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE PROGRAM
The DOD ovarian cancer research program augments the important
funds spent on cancer research by the NCI. As with the funds spent at
NCI, the DOD cancer research proposals must be peer-reviewed and meet
standards of scientific excellence.
There are however, important differences between the NCI and DOD
cancer research programs. In considering the DOD research programs,
Congress each year ``earmarks'' or designates a specific dollar figure
for each cancer. By contrast, at NCI funding levels for particular
cancers are not specified, and Congress does not play a role in
determining allocations by cancer. In another important area of
difference, the DOD program promotes ``innovative'' approaches to
cancer research. And finally, since their inception ten years ago, the
DOD programs have actively involved consumers on all scientific peer
review and Integration (Program Design) panels--a process that has only
recently been implemented at NCI.
A unique feature of the DOD Ovarian Cancer Research Program is that
it promotes innovative research that will lead to a better
understanding and control of ovarian cancer. The program also
encourages projects and idea awards that propose new ways of examining
prevention, early detection and treatment, and also bring new
investigators into ovarian cancer research. Proposals that address the
needs of minority, elderly, low-income, rural and other under-
represented populations are strongly encouraged. Overall, the DOD OCRP
is fostering the development of a sustained commitment to ovarian
cancer.
All proposals are evaluated in a two-tiered review system. At the
first level, a multi-disciplinary panel rates each proposal on the
basis of scientific merit. Final decisions are made by an Integration
Panel, based not only on scientific merit, but also on the programmatic
goal of innovative ideas. Consistent with DOD's support of consumer
involvement, four Ovarian Cancer National Alliance leaders have served
on the Integration Panel, and over a dozen Alliance-nominated advocates
on Scientific Review Panels.
The Ovarian Cancer National Alliance is a consumer-led umbrella
organization uniting ovarian cancer survivors, women's health activists
and health care professionals in a coordinated effort to focus national
attention on ovarian cancer. The Alliance is working at the national
level to increase public and professional understanding of ovarian
cancer and to advocate for increased research for more effective
diagnostics, treatments and a cure.
CONCLUSION OF HEARING
Senator Burns. This concludes the hearing of the
subcommittee, the scheduled hearings on the fiscal year 2004
budget request. The subcommittee will stand in recess subject
to the call of the Chair. By the way, the record will remain
open and I will let the chairman close that because no
subordinate will ever close the chairman's record.
This meeting stands recessed.
[Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., Thursday, May 15, the hearings
were concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
subject to the call of the Chair.]