[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 89 (Tuesday, July 12, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 12, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
         FISCAL YEAR 1995 DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS

                                 ______


                             HON. JIM KOLBE

                               of arizona

                    in the house of representatives

                         Tuesday, July 12, 1994

  Mr. KOLBE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to explain my yea vote on H.R. 
4650, the Department of Defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 
1995. This bill, although it continues to force dangerous reductions in 
the military as we starve it for funds, reflects a fair and bipartisan 
effort to make the best use of the money allocated to the Defense 
Subcommittee.
  One issue that seriously concerns me in this bill is the treatment of 
the military retiree cost-of-living adjustment [COLA]. The Omnibus 
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, by requiring extended delays in the 
effective dates of military retiree COLA's, imposed a harsh and unfair 
financial penalty on military retirees. Contingent upon a specific 
appropriation for the purpose, the House, as part of the 1995 Defense 
authorization bill, remedied this inequity by equalizing the 1995 
payment dates for military and civilian retiree COLA's. However, H.R. 
4650 does not provide the appropriation for military retiree COLA's.
  I was, however, assured by Chairman Murtha that he was committed to 
resolving the inequity and will work with me, and the appropriate 
congressional committees, to eliminate the disparity between the two 
retiree groups. I remain committed to work with the chairman to find a 
fiscally responsible solution that will not adversely affect the 2.6 
percent active duty pay raise, or our military readiness.
  Another issue of great concern to me is the large amount in the 
defense budget for programs which do not directly contribute to 
national security. This bill includes $16.3 billion in environmental 
expenditures and economic conversion expenditures. Although there is 
some value in these programs, I am deeply concerned about the draining 
effect this high spending level could have on military readiness as 
military spending continues to decline.
  A final area of great concern is the trend in military personnel 
manpower levels. During fiscal year 1995, DOD active duty personnel, 
Guard and Reserve, and civilian end strength will be reduced by 
180,000. Let me put it this way--that 15,000 per month or 500 per day. 
Given the range of current and potential global commitments, I am 
committed to working to find ways to maintain adequate end strengths 
and force structures to reflect the demand. Additionally, I applaud the 
committee for urging DOD to continually review its force structure and 
for their commitment to maintaining ready and well equipped national 
defense.
  This bill does provide funds for many important programs. Let 
me mention two of them. First, a program critical to the country's 
theater missile defense is the Navy's Upper Tier Program. The Nation 
has invested about $42 billion in Aegis ships which form the basic 
infrastructure for the Upper Tier Program. Without spending additional 
funds, the system provides a forward-based, self-deploying, self-
sustaining capability that will be ready on arrival. This bill provides 
$120 million for further development of this program so we can achieve 
deployment as early as 1998 and avoid future disasters such as the 
barracks attack in Desert Storm. The upper-tier, sea-based ballistic 
missile defense provides the most affordable, expeditious, and 
strategically sound approach to addressing the theater ballistic 
missile threat, and I commend the committee for their work in this 
area.

  Second, this bill provides $3.2 billion beyond the administration's 
budget request for military readiness enhancements. Already the 
military is straining to maintain necessary combat readiness levels. 
These additional funds will help close the gap so our soldiers will be 
trained, equipped, and ready to defend U.S. interests at home and 
abroad.
  Although not perfect or exactly what I would like to see, H.R. 4650 
represents an effort to provide funding for necessary components of our 
national defense. Certainly, I would like to see the disturbing 
downward spiral in defense spending slowed down to correspond with 
global threats and this administration's lack of a coherent foreign 
policy. Our military is being asked to do more and more, and I remain 
committed to supporting legislation that will keep this country's 
defense strong and able to do its job.

                          ____________________