[Congressional Record Volume 169, Number 196 (Wednesday, November 29, 2023)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5650-S5652]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Government Funding
Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I come to the floor to urge action on
the fiscal year 2024 appropriations bills that fund critical programs,
programs that are so important to America and to American families,
programs ranging from biomedical research to our national defense.
On November 1, the Senate passed its first package of three
appropriations bills: the military construction and veterans affairs
legislation, the Agriculture and FDA bill, and the Transportation and
Housing bill. And due to the extraordinary work of the members of the
Appropriations Committee, they passed by overwhelming bipartisan vote
of 82 to 15.
Despite the Appropriations Committee working hard to report all 12 of
the funding bills by the end of July, additional full-year
appropriations bills have not been brought to the Senate floor.
Instead, the Federal Government has been operating under short-term
funding patches known as continuing resolutions since the start of the
fiscal year on October 1. These temporary funding patches lead to
harmful uncertainties, needless inefficiencies, and wasted taxpayer
dollars.
One of the bills that I hope will be brought to the floor soon is the
Department of Defense appropriations bill. This bill would provide
critical resources for our military at a time when we are facing many
complex threats from around the globe, including those posed by an
imperialistic Russia, a hegemonic China, and an increasingly
belligerent Iran and its proxies.
Earlier this summer, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved its
version of the defense funding bill by a strong bipartisan vote of 27
to 1. This bill contains funding for key national security priorities,
including providing our troops and their families with the pay and
benefits that they deserve, expanding our naval fleet, and modernizing
the nuclear triad, strengthening deterrence against China--our pacing
threat--rebuilding our munitions stockpiles, and addressing military
readiness and capability gaps.
Each day that the Department of Defense operates under a temporary
funding measure rather than its full-year appropriations bill,
important national security investments remain on hold. For example,
the Department has identified more than 330 new programs or production
increases that cannot proceed. This includes more than a dozen high-
priority initiatives identified by the Air Force, 6 billion in Army
transformation efforts, and multiyear procurement authority for the
Virginia class submarines.
In a letter that was sent to the Appropriations Committee just today,
Chairman C.Q. Brown, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff writes
that ``We cannot outpace our pacing challenge while under continuing
resolution.''
In other words, continuing resolutions give China the upper hand.
[[Page S5651]]
I ask unanimous consent that the text of General Brown's letter be
printed in the Record following my remarks.
Recently, some have called for simply passing a year-long continuing
resolution for fiscal year 2024, essentially locking in last year's
priorities, continuing to fund programs that should not be funded or
should be reduced, and preventing the funding of new programs. I would
like to take just a few moments to describe just how harmful that would
be to our national defense. A year-long continuing resolution would
simply fail to provide the resources needed to protect our Nation. For
fiscal year 2024, it would reduce defense spending by 26.6 billion
relative to the President's budget request and the Fiscal
Responsibility Act and by 34.6 billion compared to the funding levels
approved by the Appropriations Committee by that wide bipartisan vote.
So you can see the big difference that having a year-long CR would
lock in completely inadequate funding levels, given the threats that we
face. Many of the key national security priorities funded in the
Defense bill would suffer under a year-long continuing resolution.
Let me give some specific examples. To respond to military
recruitment challenges, the Senate committee-approved bill would invest
in our men and women in uniform. It includes funding for the 5.2
percent military pay raise. As General Brown points out, a year-long CR
would create a $5.8 billion shortfall in military personnel funding and
exacerbate recruiting and retention challenges.
To offset the cost of the pay raise for the military, DOD would be
forced to slow recruiting--the last thing we want to see happen--delay
servicemembers' moves, and take other detrimental actions.
So this chart compares our committee bill versus a year-long CR. And
as you can see, there are tremendous differences in quality-of-life
issues for our servicemembers and the actual funding for the pay raise
which will go into effect, but the Department would have to take money
out of other personnel accounts.
Other quality-of-life initiatives in the bill, such as expanding
prekindergarten for more than 4,000 children of servicemembers and
improving living conditions for sailors serving aboard ships would not
be able to proceed during a year-long CR. Our committee-passed bill
also invests in the overdue modernization of all three legs of the
nuclear triad. These efforts would be delayed under the yearlong CR
because of a nearly $3.4 billion funding shortfall.
At a time when China's Navy is already at least 80 ships larger than
our own, the committee-approved bill includes record investments--more
than $33 billion--in Navy shipbuilding. It includes funding for two
destroyers and advance procurement for a much needed third.
In recent days, the capabilities of these ships and the
professionalism and expertise of the sailors who serve aboard them have
been on full display as they have downed numerous drones and missiles
headed toward them and aimed also at Israel.
Two of these ships, I am proud to say, the USS Carney and the USS
Thomas Hudner, were built at Bath Iron Works in my State.
Since October 7, Iranian-backed proxies have launched at least 73
attacks on U.S. servicemembers and bases. Our fleet is essential to
protect those servicemembers and bases as well as Israel.
The Senate committee-approved bill also includes funding for two
Virginia-class submarines, two frigates, and a downpayment on an
amphibious ship, which is the Marine Corps' top unfunded priority. In
addition to contributing to cost increases and delays in the delivery
of ships to the Navy, a yearlong CR would result in only one Virginia-
class submarine, one frigate, and potentially no funding for the
amphibious ship or the third destroyer.
General Brown points out in his letter that 30 percent of the funding
in the Navy shipbuilding request could not be spent.
The Defense bill also includes more than $65 billion for capabilities
or requirements related to the Indo-Pacific, including $857 million to
meet the highest priorities of the most senior U.S. military commander
in the region and an additional $981 million for other unfunded
requirements listed as priorities by our military services focused on
deterring China.
Our bill would authorize multiyear procurements for seven munitions
critical to the region, such as long-range precision missiles, Patriot
air defense missiles, and anti-ship missiles. Multiyear procurements
provide stability and predictability to our defense industrial base and
save taxpayer dollars. Neither the additional funding nor the authority
to award these contracts would be possible under a yearlong CR.
Our committee-passed bill would ramp up investments in the U.S.
defense industrial base. It would increase munitions procurement
funding by 31 percent compared to the last fiscal year and includes
$1.8 billion to modernize 23 Army depots, arsenals, and ammo plants
across 17 States. Under a yearlong CR, both of those initiatives would
be blocked or delayed.
Our committee-passed bill also includes readiness investments that
would be put at risk under a yearlong CR. Up to 75 Navy ship repair
availabilities would be delayed or canceled, which would degrade the
Navy's ability to deploy its fleet for operations, even as the Navy is
maintaining a greater presence and projecting power in the Middle East
since Hamas's terrorist attack against Israel.
There was just yesterday a news story talking about the Department of
Defense ordering an additional aircraft carrier strike group, air
defenses, fighter jets, and hundreds of troops to the Middle East since
the surprise terrorist attacks on Israel in an effort to prevent that
conflict from spiraling into a regional war. But the problem is that
the military, because it has not received its regular appropriations
bill, is having to scramble to find the funding for this. Because these
Middle East troop movements weren't planned, the Pentagon has had to
pull money from existing operations and maintenance accounts. That
means less money for training exercises and deployments that the
military had already planned for this year.
Our Nation's security and our service men and women deserve better
than a yearlong continuing resolution. In the letter sent today,
General Brown writes that besides passing a supplemental, ``the single
greatest thing that Congress can do to enable the Department to execute
our strategy is to enact a full-year appropriation.''
Let's get our work done and pass the full-year funding bills. I urge
my colleagues to work together. Let's meet the challenges our Nation
faces.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Patty Murray,
Chair, Committee on Appropriations,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Madam Chair: Thank you for the opportunity to share my
view on the impact that a year-long Continuing Resolution
(CR) would have on the Department of Defense (DoD) and the
Joint Force. In addition to the critical need for Congress to
take action to support our allies and partners by passing the
President's national security supplemental funding request,
the single greatest thing that Congress can do to enable the
Department to execute our strategy is to enact a full-year
appropriation.
DoD has never operated under a year-long CR; it would be
historically costly to the Joint Force. In a CR, the DoD's
actual buying power is significantly impacted and degraded.
Failing to fully fund the DoD would disrupt important
progress made in fiscal year 2023. The National Defense
Strategy lays out evolving security challenges, which require
the Joint Force to modernize quickly or risk losing our
strategic advantage. As I have said previously, we cannot
outpace our pacing challenge while under a CR.
A year-long CR would prevent the DoD from executing
numerous multi-year procurement contracts that are critical
to meeting our requirements in the Indo-Pacific; delay or
deny investments in important modernization projects; and
create a significant shortfall in personnel funding.
Thousands of programs will be impacted with the most
devastating impacts to our national defense being to
personnel, nuclear triad modernization, shipbuilding and ship
maintenance, munitions production and replenishment, and U.S.
Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) priorities.
Personnel: A year-long CR would create a $5.8 billion
shortfall in military personnel funding and exacerbate
recruiting and retention challenges. DoD would be forced to
delay service member moves and slow recruiting to offset the
costs of the 5.2 percent pay raise for the military.
[[Page S5652]]
Nuclear triad modernization: A year-long CR would delay
nuclear triad modernization, including a delay in the
procurement of the B-21 Raider and could prevent the award of
the second Columbia class ballistic missile submarine.
Shipbuilding and ship maintenance: Under a year-long CR, 30
percent ($9.7B) of the funding in the Navy shipbuilding
budget request could not be spent and only one of two
requested Virginia class submarines could be awarded.
Additionally, a year-long CR would cancel or delay ship depot
maintenance availabilities, impacting readiness.
Munitions production and replenishment: Under a year-long
CR, DoD could not award multi-year procurement contracts to
increase production capacity or replenish inventories for
munitions critical to INDOPACOM, including long range anti-
ship missiles, GMLRs (precision rockets), Patriot air defense
missiles, the naval strike missile, and a long-range version
of the joint air to surface standoff missile.
Pacific Defense Initiatives: A year-long CR would
jeopardize $1.3 billion in investments critical to DoD's
INDO-PACIFIC posture including impacts to forward basing,
sensor-to-shooter capabilities, long range radars, hypersonic
defense, and investments in classified capabilities.
No new military construction projects: Military
construction projects are, by definition, new starts, so a
year-long CR could cause a year-long delay in construction
projects intended to modernize our installations and improve
quality of life.
Passing a full-year funding bill and the President's
national security supplemental request would prevent these
devastating impacts. It would also provide funding for
critical weapons and equipment for our allies and partners
while replenishing depleted DoD stocks and providing for
robust investments in the defense industrial base.
We owe our servicemembers the tools they need to be
successful. We have asked them to modernize and accelerate
the future capabilities they need to continue to deter and
project credible combat power. We need full appropriations to
stay ahead of pacing, acute, and unforeseen challenges.
I appreciate your continued support for our Joint Force and
look forward to our future engagements.
Sincerely,
Charles Q. Brown, Jr.,
General, U.S. Air Force.