WASHIINGTON- Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX), ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, made the following statement ahead of the Committee's hearing on the FY21 DoD budget request:
“Thank you Mr. Chairman, and let me begin by joining you in thanking our witnesses for being here; but even more importantly thanking each of them for their service. As you point out, this is a challenging security environment. It is also a challenging political environment. To be charged with what I believe is the first function of the federal government, to defend the country, is a significant responsibility. And I appreciate the service of both the Secretary and the Chairman.
“I also appreciate the effort the Department has made to have a budget that reflects a strategy. We haven’t had that in quite a while. I think it is absolutely true that the strategy is imperfect, and the budget is imperfect. The old ‘you can’t turn an aircraft carrier on a dime’ analogy has some application.
“But there is at least a concept around which we can make spending decisions. And so, I appreciate the effort that the Department has put into doing so. There are tough choices, and especially with a fixed topline. It will be a significant challenge for Congress to make these choices in a way that reflects the long-term security interests of the country.
“I also want to say I appreciate the efforts the Secretary has made for the Defense Wide Review. It is something we have talked about in this Committee; trying to get more value out of the taxpayer dollars for the benefit of the warfighter. Again, we may agree or disagree with some of the specific choices, but the point is trying to not only make reductions in some areas but to make reforms also, that can result in more for the warfighter.
“I have to also make some comments about the recent reprogramming. Article 1, Section 8 says its Congress’s responsibility - not just our authority but our responsibility, to provide and maintain, raise and support, make the rules and regulations for, the military forces of the United States.
“There have been decades- literally decades- of practice where if there are changing needs money can be moved within the department budget with the approval of Congress.
“That has not taken place in this most recent reprogramming.
“Now you can argue that last year there was the milcon and the other thing, but there was excess funds in the personnel account because they didn’t meet the recruiting goals that could be used for other purposes.
“This year is very different.
“This is not taking excess funds. This is substituting the judgement of the Department – and actually, the Administration, this is I think, my opinion is, not totally at the discretion of the Secretary- it is substituting the judgement of the Administration for the judgement of Congress. By reducing specific weapons systems that had been authorized and appropriated.
“We made a different judgment call than the Administration’s budget request. And in effect what the Administration does is say ‘we don’t care what has been authorized and appropriated, we are going to do what we darn well want.’
‘In this room, as long as I have been here, I think a fair amount about the guy that’s is just to the right of the TV screen there, Carl Vinson, for whom this room is named. In his History of the Second World War Victor David Hanson said that, ‘The American fleet that broke the back of the Japanese Navy in 1943-44 was designed and approved before Pearl Harbor mostly through the efforts of one naval visionary, Congressman Carl Vinson, Chairman of the House Naval Affairs Committee, who from 34-40 pushed through five successive bills to expand and reconfigure the Navy.’
“In other words, he had a different judgement call than the Roosevelt Administration, and because of what he did we were able to break the back of the Japanese Navy in 1943-45. Different judgement calls we’ve made, and the list is long: Predators, MRAPS, ISR Aircraft, A-10s. We have made different judgement calls for years. While our history, again, is not perfect, it looks pretty good.
“But to me, it’s not that sometimes we’re right, sometimes we’re wrong, it is the constitutional issue.
“And let me just quote again, Carl Vinson, because he got into a tussle with the second Secretary of Defense, Louis Johnson. And he said, ‘Congress provides the forces, the President commands them. If we ever get this principle of our government distorted our whole fabric of government will be in jeopardy. It is whether the Congress will say what kind of defense the nation will have or whether the creature of the Congress, the Secretary of Defense, Mr. Louis Johnson, will tell us what kind of defense he will let the Congress have.’
“This is a deeper issue than the wall. I support physical barriers on the border. I support walls. But I am deeply concerned about where we are headed with the Constitutional issue about Congress’s role in national defense and whether that is being overridden.
“We need to hit on all cylinders in national defense. There are too many challenges out there for us and I’m afraid that this, that the result of this will be greater restrictions on the department’s ability to move money around, to meet changing needs, and the country will suffer as a result.
“I hope I am proved wrong but I am concerned about where this is headed.
“I yield back.”