Posted by: Elizabeth French
December 16, 2008
Senator Inhofe believes that providing for our national defense is one of the most important roles of the federal government. In order to maintain the world's most formidable military, we must provide it with the best resources, support, and technology. We must also continue to make the critical investments required to modernize and transform our military so that we may confidently confront the challenges of the future.
One of the great tragedies of our national security history is President Clinton's military spending record. Between 1994 and 2001, the Department of Defense budget experienced a steep downward trend, $313.3 billion less than if it stayed true to the rate of inflation. It has taken our military years to begin re-building it to the force that is required to meet the unknown threats of the 21st Century.
As the Politico points out today, though, the incoming Obama Administration may be looking to re-allocate vital dollars for defense programs, such as the Future Combat System (FCS) and the F-22 Raptor, for domestic programs, further denigrating our military’s ability to protect our nation.
Senator Inhofe will continue fighting to ensure FCS and the F-22 Raptor are procured and our country maintains the best equipped military in the world, ready and able to withstand any threat.
Politico
The Pentagon's sitting ducks
By: Jen DiMascio
December 16, 2008 04:46 AM EST
President-elect Barack Obama and his Democratic allies are scouring the Pentagon budget for cuts.
Some of his liberal campaign supporters would like to see some of that defense money poured into domestic programs. But wresting money from the military would provoke a huge outcry, especially with the country at war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It’s unclear, too, what Obama might do with any savings. But there are clearly at least a half-dozen sitting ducks. Here’s a closer look:
F-22 Raptor
In the Bush administration, Defense Secretary Robert Gates avoided the dirty work of ending the next-generation fighter jet program. But now that he’s staying on, he’ll be the decider.
The advanced jet is manufactured by Lockheed Martin in Georgia, where it has its strongest parochial backers: Republican Rep. Phil Gingrey and Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss, who just survived a runoff election.
Georgia politicians were hoping to sign a new multiyear contract to put the Air Force on track to double its current order of 183 F-22 Raptors. Gates fired the Air Force secretary and chief of staff who endorsed that plan, but even the new Air Force leaders want to keep making more of the jets.
Cutting production now, Lockheed warns, could result in up to 95,000 lost jobs. And defense officials are hoping that the new Obama administration will see the program differently than the outgoing Bush administration does.
Democratic leaders on the Defense Appropriations and Armed Services committees have rallied behind the idea of keeping the production line open at least until the Air Force starts manufacturing another tactical fighter jet, the Joint Strike Fighter.
Gates refused to comment on the issue during a recent press conference, saying it would have to be studied. But time is running out. The Pentagon has released only enough money to keep the line running through next month.
Future Combat System
The Army’s major modernization brings in a fat $3 billion each year by ingeniously combining what would have been 14 different expendable programs with an advanced computer network.
The idea to sell it as a package to protect its weaker elements has worked so far. But that could change significantly next year.
Gates and others praise the program’s ability to release elements — such as unmanned aerial vehicles and scouting robots — as they are ready and point to their successes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Other elements of the program, such as its ever-heavier ground vehicles, can be slowed down or shed altogether by the new administration.
Persistent concerns about development of those vehicles and the system’s vast computer network, as well, could pose problems for funding in the years ahead.
The program hangs onto a core of support, particularly from Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), who backs the program’s new auto-loading cannon. And the system is being tested at Fort Bliss, Texas, drawing loyalty from Texas Democratic Rep. Silvestre Reyes and Republican Sen. John Cornyn.
Navy destroyers
Navy wrangling over whether to continue making a new but costly destroyer or to upgrade its older model has created turbulence within the shipbuilding community.
Navy leadership has drifted between pursuing the Zumwalt-class destroyer, designed to operate with a small crew, and pursuing the Arleigh Burke-class ship.
The back-and-forth is accompanied by calls to beef up investment in smaller ships, which some fear could cause a slowdown in funding for destroyers.
But don’t expect the destroyers to go down without a fight.
The Zumwalt-class ship has bipartisan support on the Senate Armed Services Committee from Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, where the ships are to be built, and from Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, where Raytheon is making key software for the vessel.
The older-model Arleigh Burke ships have a huge presence in southern Mississippi — sure to draw backing from Republican Sen. Roger Wicker and Democratic Rep. Gene Taylor, who are members of their respective chambers’ Armed Services committees.
VH-71 Presidential Helicopter
The president’s helicopter, Marine One, is in need of replacement, but the new fleet of VH-71 helicopters has come under fire for being too costly and for its international contractors.
With a new president taking office, the exiting one is likely to take the blame for stuffing the helicopter with high-tech communication and security features that drove up the cost. Initial development costs for the helicopter nearly doubled, and the full program is now on track to cost $11 billion.
In addition to cost concerns, the program run by Lockheed Martin from Owego, N.Y., and AgustaWestland has faced questions about whether production of the helicopter would occur overseas, a potential work force issue and safety concern. It has also faced technical problems.
On that front, the program has made progress. The first production helicopter was recently delivered to the Patuxent River Naval Air Station for testing.
It has been identified as a real need, so critics say it’s likely to continue, even if it’s pared down.
But one of its supporters on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), has been tapped by Obama to run the State Department, where the focus won’t be on New York state issues.
Airborne Laser and Kinetic Energy Interceptor
Developed by the Missile Defense Agency, the Airborne Laser is a high-energy laser installed on a Boeing 747 that can detect and shoot down ballistic missiles.
Boeing leads the other two top defense firms — Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman — in making the future missile system.
The Kinetic Energy Interceptor is similar in concept in that it can shoot down a ballistic missile early in its flight. But the system is made up of a mobile launcher, an interceptor and a command-and-control system that resides in a trailer that can be flown aboard a military plane.
The key hurdle for these programs is winning over congressional Democrats who have been highly supportive of short- and medium-range missile systems that are proven and working but have been less vocal in their backing for future, unproven programs.
Sen. Jon Kyl and Rep. Trent Franks, both Arizona Republicans, along with Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), are chief supporters, and Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) has come through in the past to ensure that the program retains funding to reach a key milestone next year.
But the question remains: Even if the two weapons systems continue to progress and demonstrate success in testing next year, will the cash-strapped Pentagon trim them to save money?
New Programs
One idea picking up steam among budget cutters — and irritating defense lobbyists — is a potential moratorium on new programs.
The left-leaning Center for National Progress is calling for a “strategic pause,” a two-year hold on new weapons systems. If the new administration is on board with that, it could jeopardize programs that were just getting off the ground, such as the Army-led Joint Light Tactical Vehicle program. Three companies are competing for that contract.
Defense officials already see that program as expendable because of increased investment in a new, lighter version of Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicles that are credited with saving lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Materiel like the MRAP vehicles have been highly praised by Gates. In a recent article in Foreign Affairs magazine, the defense secretary reiterated a common theme of his two-year tenure under President George W. Bush that shows a willingness to cut vulnerable programs, though some of these cuts may take time to roll out.
The Pentagon, he said, needs to shift investments away from high-end weapons under development for wars against other nations.
“In recent years, these platforms have grown ever more baroque, have become ever more costly, are taking longer to build — and are being fielded in ever-dwindling quantities,” Gates said. “Given that resources are not unlimited, the dynamic of exchanging numbers for capability is perhaps reaching a point of diminishing returns.”
Link to Article
###
