[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 120 (Tuesday, July 17, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H6293-H6295]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXPRESSING SENSE OF THE HOUSE THAT THE UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
BUDGETARY UNCERTAINTY ERODES MILITARY READINESS
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
resolution (H. Res. 994) expressing the sense of the House of
Representatives that the United States Marine Corps faces significant
readiness challenges and that budgetary uncertainty impedes the Corps'
ability to meet ongoing and unexpected national security threats,
putting United States national security at risk.
The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
The text of the resolution is as follows:
H. Res. 994
Whereas since fiscal year 2010, United States Marine Corps
active duty end strength has shrunk by 8 percent from 202,100
to 186,000;
Whereas, on March 1, 2016, Marine Corps Commandant Robert
Neller stated, ``The fiscal reductions and instability of the
past few years have impacted our readiness. As resources have
diminished, the Marine Corps has protected the near-term
operational readiness of its deployed and next-to-deploy
units in order to meet operational commitments. This has come
at a risk'';
Whereas, on February 26, 2015, now Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff Joseph F. Dunford stated, ``[a]pproximately
half of our non-deployed units--and those are the ones that
provide the bench to respond to unforeseen contingencies--are
suffering personnel, equipment and training shortfalls'';
Whereas, on February 8, 2017, Assistant Commandant Glenn
Walters stated, ``A focus on [ongoing] operations, the
decrease in funding levels from Fiscal Year (FY) 2012, fiscal
instability and the lack of an inter-war period have left
your Marine Corps insufficiently manned, trained and equipped
across the depth of the force to operate in an evolving
operational environment'';
Whereas the Marine Corps' Assault Amphibious Vehicle (AAV-
7A1) and Light Armored Vehicle (LAV) average over 40 and 26
years old, respectively;
Whereas the Marine Corps has a stated requirement for 38
amphibious ships to support the operations of 2 Marine
Expeditionary Brigades, but the amphibious fleet numbers only
32 ships today;
Whereas former Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Jonathan
Greenert testified on March 12, 2014, that, ``[t]oday, in the
world that we live in, the world that the Navy and Marine
Corps lives in, and the future, we probably need 50
[amphibious ships]'';
Whereas, on April 5, 2017, Marine Corps leaders testified
that, ``The most dire readiness situation lies within our
Aviation element. An unhealthy percentage of our aviation
units lack the minimum number of ready basic aircraft (RBA)
for training, and we are significantly short ready aircraft
for wartime requirements. We simply do not have the available
aircraft to meet our squadrons' requirements'';
Whereas during parts of 2016, only 43 percent of the Marine
Corps' total aviation fleet was available for operational
employment, including less than \1/3\ of its F/A-18 Hornets;
Whereas from fiscal year 2013 through fiscal year 2017,
Marine Corps aviation accidents increased by 80 percent from
56 to 101 per year;
Whereas between 2011 and 2017, aviation accidents killed
more than 60 Marines, including 19 over a 2-month period in
2017; and
Whereas, on March 10, 2017, Deputy Commandant Gary L.
Thomas stated, ``Unstable fiscal environments prevent the
deliberately planned, sustained effort needed to recover
current readiness of our legacy equipment in the near term,
and to modernize in the longer term . . . We must work to
avoid a budget-driven strategy and return to a strategy-
driven budget, informed by the strategic requirements of the
current and future operating environments. Unless we do so,
the range of options we have to address current and future
threats will further erode'': Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
(1) recognizes that the United States Marine Corps faces
significant readiness challenges, as well as shortfalls in
end strength and delayed modernization;
(2) finds that failing to provide the Marine Corps with
stable, robust, and on-time funding impedes its ability to
meet ongoing and unexpected security threats, putting United
States national security at risk; and
(3) commits to enhancing the Marine Corps' ability to meet
our Nation's threats ``In the air, on land, and sea''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from
Wyoming (Ms. Cheney) and the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Smith) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wyoming.
General Leave
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and
insert extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from Wyoming?
There was no objection.
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Gallagher), my colleague on the Armed
Services Committee, to discuss his resolution.
Mr. GALLAGHER. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my good friend from
Wyoming for yielding the time but, more importantly, for her leadership
in this effort to highlight the devastating impacts when we fail to
provide full, on-time, and robust funding to our military.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H. Res. 994, which
would recognize the significant readiness challenges facing the United
States Marine Corps, and warn that budgetary uncertainty is undermining
the ability of our Marines to do their vital work day
[[Page H6294]]
in and day out in defense of this Nation.
Since fiscal year 2010, the Active-Duty Marine Corps has shrunk by 8
percent. Thanks to the work of this House, that figure is finally
trending in the other direction, but there is still much more work to
be done, all of which requires stable, robust, and on-time funding.
Seven years after the Budget Control Act we are still digging out
from holes we dug ourselves. In hearing after hearing, we have heard
military leaders make clear that they will face increased risk due to
continuing resolutions and years of accumulated defense cuts.
It can be all too easy to wave off these warnings. After all, our
military and Marine Corps, in particular, has a ``can-do spirit'' that
is second to none. But increased risk isn't just an abstract notion. It
can have very real consequences. The more than 60 Marines who have
perished in marine aviation accidents since 2011 are a tragic reminder
of what increased risk looks like in practice.
The new national security and national defense strategies marked sea
changes in American security policy. With the new guidance that great
power competition, and not terrorism, is the primary challenge to
American national security policy. There is still much work to be done
to ensure that the Marine Corps, along with the rest of the military,
is best positioned to compete for the long-term.
From contested entry to dispersed operations from austere locations
to contingency response, the Marine Corps is facing great challenges
and opportunities. The obstacles are many as increasingly capable
adversaries are forcing the Marine Corps to reconsider long-held
assumptions about amphibious landings and its ability to operate close
to shore.
In the face of these challenges, the Corps will have to do what it
does best, innovate, and come up with new solutions to execute timeless
missions. Ultimately, however, I am optimistic; not just because I was
privileged to serve 7 years in the Marine Corps, and I know the quality
of the men and women who continue to serve, but because of many other
factors, including the simple geography of the Indo-Pacific, which is
tailor-made for the United States Marine Corps.
As former adversaries learned on the islands of Guadalcanal, New
Guinea, and Tarawa, the absolute last place on Earth you want to be is
between a Marine and his objective.
In the long run however, the only thing that can stop the Marine
Corps is this body's failure to do its job. If we fail to provide on-
time, adequate, or predictable funding, we will undermine our Marine
Corps' ability to get the job done.
This resolution takes a small step to recognize these challenges and
commit to doing better. We owe our beloved Marine Corps nothing less.
Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, we have had the broader debate, so let me just say very
quickly I agree with the resolution brought forward by Congressman
Gallagher; that the budget uncertainty definitely impacts readiness and
impacts the ability of Marines, in fact, the entire Department of
Defense to fight adequately.
I do believe, as I have said earlier, that we need to get at the
underlying fiscal issues that have created that, taking us all the way
back to the Budget Control Act and why it was passed in 2011 in the
first place. We need to get at a fiscal policy in this country so that
we can adequately and predictably fund, certainly the Department of
Defense, certainly the Marine Corps, but I would say the entire Federal
budget in a way that puts us in a much stronger position as a country.
Mr. Speaker, I support the resolution, and I yield back the balance
of my time.
{time} 1515
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to start by thanking both my colleagues, Mr.
Wittman from Virginia, Mr. Gallagher from Wisconsin, and all of the
folks on the Armed Services Committee, Chairman Thornberry, Ranking
Member Smith, as well as the folks on the Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee, led by Chairwoman Kay Granger, for their tremendous work
on these crucially important issues.
I think that, again, Mr. Smith has highlighted, really, the crux of
this issue, and the crux of this issue is whether or not we as a body
are going to recognize that we have the ability here and what we do
here will determine whether or not we provide the support and the
resources our troops need or whether we increase the risk they face.
When we are facing a situation where we have had more servicemembers
die in training accidents than in combat in the last year, that is an
unacceptable and indefensible situation.
Mr. Speaker, on this particular resolution, I want to thank my
colleague from Wisconsin for introducing this resolution. As a marine,
he understands better than most how what we do in this body impacts our
men and women in uniform.
H. Res. 994 highlights the vast readiness impacts we have seen in the
Marine Corps over the past 9 years of continuing resolutions,
sequestration, and overall budget dysfunction. We do not want to be in
a position, Mr. Speaker, where the Marines are forced to continue to
use aging or outdated equipment, or they don't have the funds necessary
to receive the training they require to undo this readiness crisis, or
they don't have the flexibility they need to respond to the fact that
we have got an absolutely changing world of warfare. They need agility
to do that, and that requires funds from this body.
As my colleagues have said, we have made great progress. Over the
past year, we have increased the defense spending caps for fiscal year
2018 and 2019, and we have agreed to fund the Department of Defense at
$700 billion for fiscal year 2018.
Mr. Speaker, we have got to get that done now for fiscal year 2019.
The readiness crisis was not created in a single year, and it will take
many years of effort to be able to address it.
The bill that we considered in the House just a few weeks ago passed
with over 300 bipartisan votes. I would hope, Mr. Speaker, that we can
now, today, commit all of ourselves as a body and urge our colleagues
on the other side of this building to ensure that the work that we do
is worthy of the men and women in uniform who protect all of us, to
ensure that we stay on track to get this bill passed by the Senate and
to the President's desk before the end of the fiscal year.
Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Gallagher) to close.
Mr. GALLAGHER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I quite agree with the sentiment expressed by my
colleague, Mr. Smith, that we do need to look at the overall budget
picture. I think what has changed in that picture over time has been
the amount of the budget consumed by mandatory spending, which is a
very difficult problem. I concede that it is going to require men and
women of good faith on both sides of the aisle to come together and
have, if nothing else, an honest debate.
The argument was also made that we spend more on defense than a large
number of our competitors and our allies, combined, in many cases. I
hear that a lot. That is true. It is also not that helpful of a
statistic, as it ignores both the size of our economy, the relative
size of our economy, as well as the unique nature of our global
commitments.
A more useful matrix of perhaps what we are spending as a percentage
of GDP, we are still spending below the post-World War II average on
defense as a percentage of GDP. For example, during the 1950s, 8 years
of peace and prosperity, we were spending closer to 10 percent of our
GDP on defense.
So I just think we need to be careful when we throw around different
terms like this. And I welcome that debate. It is one we definitely
need to have.
I just would close by saying our Marines put their lives on the line
on a daily basis. When we go to war, we cannot guarantee that everyone
will come home safely, and the Marines know that. They gladly put their
lives on the line. They take the risk, and they ride to the sound of
the guns regardless.
But I do think that we need to look at what we have the power to
affect, and what we have the power to affect
[[Page H6295]]
here as Members of Congress, regardless, actually, of who is in the
White House, what we have the obligation to affect is to guarantee that
we will never send our servicemembers into an unfair fight, that we
will provide them with the training, the equipment, and the numbers
they need to run up the score on the enemy with decisive and
overwhelming force.
Mr. Speaker, that is what this resolution is about, and I urge my
colleagues to support its adoption.
Ms. CHENEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentlewoman from Wyoming (Ms. Cheney) that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 994.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________