[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 150 (Tuesday, October 20, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12695-S12696]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MILITARY READINESS AND THE DEFENSE BUDGET
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, over the past several weeks, the Senate
Armed Services Committee held a series of hearings to review the status
of our armed forces. I scheduled these hearings because I have been
concerned for some time that the Administration's defense budget was
inadequate to maintain readiness and because members and staff were
bringing back anecdotal information indicating the readiness of our
armed forces was declining.
On September 29, the committee heard from General Shelton, the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other members of the Joint
Chiefs, General Reimer, Admiral Johnson, General Ryan, and General
Krulak. The hearing has been described by the media as adversarial,
however, I would describe it as open, candid and productive. It was not
surprising that the Chiefs acknowledged the U.S. military is falling
into a readiness crisis and faces the danger of becoming a ``hollow''
force if appropriate measures are not taken. They specifically
indicated the need for additional resources now and in the out years.
Most illustrative of the testimony is the following quote by General
Shelton:
I must admit up front that our forces are showing
increasing signs of serious wear. Anecdotal and now
measurable evidence indicates that our current readiness is
fraying and that the long-term health of the Total Force is
in jeopardy.
Mr. President, on October 6, the committee followed up the hearing
with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with a hearing at which Secretary of
Defense Cohen and General Shelton testified. Although the focus of the
hearing was to be primarily on world trouble spots, the readiness
status of our forces also became a subject of intense debate. Secretary
Cohen reiterated the concerns of the service chiefs and indicated that
he would seek additional funds in the fiscal year 2000 budget.
Mr. President, the indicators that most concerned the service chiefs
and brought them to the realization that readiness was clearly
declining included downturns in recruiting and retention, a shortfall
in unit training, and widespread equipment breakdowns and spare parts
shortages. These are basic indicators whose impact is felt throughout
the ranks, in units throughout all the services and affect operations,
training, morale and esprit de corps.
Mr. President, when pressed to explain the reasons for the decline in
readiness, Secretary Cohen and the Joint Chiefs of Staff attributed the
cause primarily to the high operational tempo and the under funding of
the defense budgets. General Reimer encapsulated the problem in this
way during the September 29 hearing:
Soldiers are asking, ``When is it going to stop? When will
the downsizing end? When will our leaders stop asking us to
do more with less?'' Our soldiers are smart, hard working,
and dedicated. They are also very tired.
For many of us, the acknowledged shortfall in defense spending is not
a surprise. Last year, during the Senate debate on the budget
resolution, I expressed my concerns that funding levels for defense
considered in the budget agreement would not provide sufficient funds
to adequately sustain over time the personnel, quality of life,
readiness and modernization programs critical to our military services.
Regretfully, my concerns have become a reality sooner than expected and
we must now take measures to resolve these problems and reverse the
decline in the readiness of our military services.
Mr. President, as long as the administration continues to pursue a
foreign policy that requires the U.S. military to be a global police
force, our troops will be challenged by an operational tempo higher
than that of the cold war. If the administration persists in this
endeavor, we must ensure that our armed forces have the funds to carry
out these operations while maintaining a force structure that
withstands the impact of the high operational and personnel tempos
associated with our current aggressive foreign policy.
More importantly, we have the responsibility to correct those quality
of life and modernization shortfalls identified during our hearings.
General Shelton recommended the following:
My recommendation is to apply additional funding to two
very real, very pressing concerns. First, we need to fix the
so-called REDUX retirement system and return the bulk of our
force to the program that covers our more senior members--
that is, a retirement program that provides 50 percent of
average base pay upon completion of twenty years of service.
Second, we must begin 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.
General Reimer described the modernization problem as follows:
In order to preserve future readiness, we must begin today
to increase our modernization accounts and to develop the
equipment, force structures, professional development
systems, training, and doctrine we will need to prepare for
the future. And we must develop all these capabilities
together.
Mr. President, during the October 29 hearing, Secretary Cohen assured
us that he would address these problems in the fiscal year 2000 budget
request. In my judgement, it would require a substantial increase in
the defense budget to alleviate the problems recently acknowledged by
the Joint Chiefs of Staff. During the hearings, the service chiefs
testified they needed approximately $17.5 billion additional annually
to correct the near and long term readiness problems. This amount does
not include a pay increase nor does it include the funding necessary to
change the retirement program.
With respect to the retirement issue, the Armed Services Committee
will consider carefully the recommendations of the Secretary of Defense
in his fiscal year 2000 budget request and will address this issue in
the Defense authorization bill. Senator Levin and I wrote the Secretary
of Defense on October 8 indicating that we believe he should conduct
appropriate analyses to determine the greatest readiness payoff among
the measures under consideration to improve recruiting and retention,
including pay, retirement, housing, health care, personnel tempo, and
morale and recreation programs and facilities. These analyses will be
crucial to making the difficult funding decisions we will face next
year. I ask unanimous consent that our letter of October 8 be printed
in the Record following my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See Exhibit 1.)
Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, the Joint Chiefs described alarming
indicators of declining readiness. I strongly believe that if there is
an actual emergency that should be addressed in this omnibus
supplemental bill, it should be military readiness. The Joint Chiefs
testified that while the $1 billion readiness supplemental requested by
the Department of Defense would be helpful, it is inadequate to
maintain the readiness of our military forces. I believe that, as the
highest priority, the Congress should have provided an emergency
supplemental for military readiness of at least $2 billion. Mr.
President, while I appreciate and commend the Chairman of the
Appropriations Committee and the majority leader for negotiating this
agreement under difficult circumstances, I regret that the final
agreement provides only half that amount which I believe is required
now to shore up our military readiness.
Mr. President, next year, we are going to have to face up to the
serious fiscal problems our military services are experiencing in
addition to already existing outlay problems. The Secretary of Defense
is conferring now with the Office of Management and Budget to determine
how additional funds can be provided for defense next year and in the
out years. I do not believe the administration will request
[[Page S12696]]
the additional $20 billion or so which the Joint Chiefs indicated will
be required annually over the next 5 years to address personnel,
readiness, and modernization deficiencies.
The Congress will have to come to grips with these funding realities
or consider significantly scaling back our worldwide commitments. We
cannot continue to have it both ways. It is unfair to our men and women
in uniform and cannot be sustained over time.
Mr. President, our hearings have substantiated the readiness and
funding problem facing our armed forces. The solution to these problems
will require the close cooperation between the Congress and the
administration. It will require the Congress to relook the balanced
budget agreement and will require challenging decisions by all parties.
We have no choice but to make careful and deliberate decisions. The
future of our Nation and the lives of our soldiers, sailors, airmen,
and marines depend on it.
Exhibit 1
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC, October 8, 1998.
Hon. William S. Cohen,
Secretary of Defense,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Secretary: In light of your recent testimony and
the testimony of the Joint Chiefs of Staff before the
Committee, it is obvious that maintaining the delicate
balance among the key components of personnel and quality of
life, readiness and modernization in the FY2000-2005 Future
Years Defense Plan will be difficult. The current discussions
of ``catch-up'' pay raises, returning to a richer military
retirement system, funding modernization programs, providing
adequate training funds and controlling high personnel and
operational tempos make your task of setting priorities a
significant challenge.
As you develop the defense budget request for fiscal year
2000, it is imperative that the Department thoroughly analyze
any proposals to address the pay gap or return to the pre-
August 1986 military retirement system. We are totally
committed, as we are sure you are, to taking care of our
military personnel and their families. However, before
enacting any proposals in this area with significant long-
term costs, the Department of Defense and the Congress must
have a clear view of the likely impact of the proposals on
recruiting, retention, and military readiness.
During our hearing on October 6, 1998, you testified that
you would address the issues of military pay and retirement
in your fiscal year 2000 budget. As you and the Chiefs
testified, there are a number of programs that combine to
make up Quality of Life for our military personnel and their
families, including pay, retirement, housing, health care,
personnel tempo and morale and recreation programs and
facilities. We believe that recommendations included in your
budget request for the areas indicated above must be fully
supported by careful analyses justifying the costs and
providing assurance of measurable increases in recruiting,
retention and military readiness.
We look forward to reviewing your recommendations in the FY
2000 budget request.
Sincerely,
Carl Levin,
Ranking Member.
Strom Thurmond,
Chairman.
____________________