[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 9]
[Senate]
[Pages 11708-11709]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      DEFENSE PROCUREMENT PROCESS

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, there is no question that our country's 
defense procurement process is broken. At a time when the American 
people are tightening their personal budgets, making sacrifices, and 
focusing on essentials, our defense acquisition program continues to 
run up huge bills.
  Just this year, the GAO reported that the major defense procurement 
program is $296 billion over budget. Not only are they over budget, 
they are behind schedule. In fact, 95 percent of DOD's largest 
acquisition programs are now an average of 2 years behind schedule. 
Every extra day, every additional dollar spent on these systems is a 
step backward for our Nation's other priorities.
  As we tackle the big challenges by getting our economy back on track 
or our health care system working again for all Americans or 
establishing a clean energy future, it is time that we focused on 
trimming the fat in our defense budget.
  I applaud our Armed Services chairman, Senator Levin, and the ranking 
member, Senator McCain, for introducing the bold plan that is now 
before the Senate, which will bring about reform. Their bill recognizes 
that making changes to acquisition starts at the beginning of the 
process, with the proper testing and the cost calculating and 
development procedures. It also returns discipline to the process by 
making sure the rules limiting cost are enforced. Those and other badly 
needed steps are going to help reform our system and return Federal 
dollars to meet the challenges we have on the horizon.
  Mr. President, that should be only the first step because the truth 
is that, while today's debate has been delayed for far too long, there 
is another hard conversation surrounding procurement that we have not 
yet even started, and that is the conversation about the future of the 
men and women who produce our tanks, our planes, and our boats. The 
skilled workforce our military depends on is a workforce that is 
disappearing today before our eyes.
  Our Government depends on our highly skilled industries, our 
manufacturers, our engineers, our researchers, and our development and 
science base to keep the U.S. military stocked with the best and most 
advanced equipment and tools available. Whether it is scientists who 
are designing the next generation of military satellites or engineers 
who are improving our radar system or machinists who are assembling 
warplanes, these industries and their workers are one of our greatest 
strategic assets today. What if those weren't available? What if we 
made budgetary and policy decisions without talking about the future 
needs of our domestic workforce? It is not impossible. It is not even 
unthinkable. It is actually what is happening.
  We need to have a real dialog about the ramifications of these 
decisions before we lose the capability to provide our military with 
the tools and equipment they need because once our plants shut down, 
once our skilled workforce and workers move to other fields, and once 
that infrastructure is gone, it is not going to be rebuilt overnight if 
we need it.
  As a Senator from the State of Washington, representing five major 
military bases and many military contractors, I am very aware of the 
important relationship between our military and the producers that keep 
them protected with the latest technological advances. I have also seen 
the ramifications of the Pentagon's decisions on communities, workers, 
and families. As many here know, I have been sounding the alarm about a 
declining domestic aerospace industry for years.
  This isn't just about one company or one State or one industry. This 
is about our Nation's economic stability. It is about our skill base. 
It is about our future military capability. We have watched as the 
domestic base has shrunk. We have watched as competition has 
disappeared and as our military has looked overseas for the products 
that we have the capability to produce right here at home.
  Many in the Senate have spent a lot of time talking about how many 
American jobs are being shipped overseas in

[[Page 11709]]

search of cheaper labor. But we haven't focused nearly enough attention 
on the high-wage, high-skilled careers being lost to the realities of 
our procurement system. That is why, today, I am going to be 
introducing an amendment that will require the Pentagon to explain to 
us in Congress and to the American people how their decisions affect 
good-paying jobs and the long-term strength of our industrial base.
  My amendment will help to ensure that our industrial base is capable 
of meeting our national security objectives. It took us a very long 
time to build our industrial base. We have machinists who have past 
experience and know-how down the ranks for more than 50 years. We have 
engineers who know our mission, know the needs of our soldiers, 
sailors, airmen, and marines. We have a reputation for delivering for 
our military. But once those plants shut down, those industries are 
gone. We not only lose the jobs, but we lose the skills and the 
potential ability to provide our military with the equipment to defend 
our Nation and project our might worldwide. Preserving a healthy 
domestic base also breeds competition. That is good for innovation and, 
ultimately, for our taxpayers.
  So today, as we begin this very serious and necessary conversation on 
procurement reform, we cannot afford to forget the needs of our 
industrial base. We have to consider how we achieve reform while 
continuing to support the development of our industrial base here at 
home.
  It calls for thoughtful planning and projection about who our future 
enemies might possibly be and how they might possibly try to defeat us 
in this Nation. It is critical that our country and our military 
maintain a nimble and dynamic base. Once a new threat is identified, a 
solution has to be close at hand.
  The discussion we are having on procurement reform in the Senate is 
happening as our country faces two difficult but not unrelated 
challenges: winning an international war on terror and rebuilding a 
faltering economy. It would be irresponsible not to include the needs 
of our industrial base as we move forward because unless we begin to 
address this issue now, we are not only going to continue to lose some 
of our best paying American jobs, we are going to lose the backbone of 
our military might.
  I will be offering this amendment, and I would love to have the 
support of our colleagues to make sure we have a strong nation in the 
future.

                          ____________________