Contact: Josh Holly-202.226.3988
Everett Opening Statement for Subcommittee Markup of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009
Washington, D.C. – Today, the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces marked up the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009, which authorizes budget authority for the Department of Defense and the national security programs at the Department of Energy. Rep. Terry Everett (R-AL), Ranking Republican on the Strategic Forces Subcommittee, released the following opening statement:
“I thank my good friend, the chairman, and congratulate her on this year’s Strategic Forces mark. It has been a pleasure working closely with her these last two years. Her leadership, camaraderie, and willingness to work across the aisle sets a high standard for Chairmen and has again produced a mark where we agree on far more than we disagree.
“I would also like to thank Mr. Reyes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and my former Ranking Member. We have worked closely over the years. I have enjoyed his friendship and counsel on both defense and intelligence issues.
“As the Chairman noted, this is my last markup. I think the programs in our subcommittee’s jurisdiction are some of the most exciting things our nation does. We tackle complex issues such as space, missile defense, and nuclear weapons policy. Some are just technically complex; others are highly political and partisan. However, regardless of the issue, we have a strong history of working in a bipartisan manner to identify prudent ways forward that best serve the warfighter and our national security interests.
“This subcommittee has done a lot of good for our country, and this year is no exception. This year’s mark contains many sound measures that provide key capabilities to our warfighters and strengthen our strategic forces. However, there are some aspects of the mark where we disagree. I will talk briefly about these at the end of my remarks, but plan to address them in full committee.
“I am pleased to associate myself with the Chairman’s position on national security space. In a bipartisan manner, the committee seeks stability for the Department’s space programs and industrial base, as well as assurances that these programs are affordable, executable, and most importantly, meet the military’s requirements.
· “The mark continues to highlight space protection and space situational awareness. I appreciate the inclusion of language on wargaming and exercising the loss of space capabilities.
· “Given the growing threats to space, I welcome language requiring vulnerability assessments earlier in the space acquisition process.
· “Key acquisition programs such as AEHF, WGS, SBIRS, GPS-III, and Space Radar remain well funded. The mark continues to reflect a measured approach to space acquisition that overlaps new modernization programs with continuing legacy programs.
· “I am pleased that the mark protects the TSAT budget request. Protected, wideband communications are too important to our armed forces to shortchange this program. I was therefore disappointed with the Department’s decision to cut $4 billion from the TSAT program across the future years defense plan. I fear reductions of this magnitude limit our options at a time when demand for satellite communications is greatly increasing. The committee understands the Department is reevaluating architecture options. We expect them to provide detailed information to inform our conference deliberations.
“The mark makes positive strides in the area of Atomic Energy Defense Activities. In keeping with the military commanders’ concerns about the safety, security, and reliability of the stockpile, the mark:
· “Requests the JASONs independent scientific panel to conduct a technical review of NNSA’s Life Extension Programs to address uncertainties and risks;
· “Adds funds to research enhanced surety for existing weapons systems; and
· “Includes language directing the Secretaries of Defense and Energy to report on steps they are taking to enhance inventory controls for nuclear weapons, in light of recent mishaps concerning the inadvertent movement of nuclear weapons from Minot and a mistaken nosecone shipment to Taiwan.
“I welcome language in the mark that acknowledges the value of the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) cost and design study. However the mark reallocates funds to focus on high priority stockpile challenges. I want to point out this compromise is not intended to discount the value of RRW or prohibit further study. It ensures NNSA, as the expert, has the flexibility to spend limited resources on efforts to increase stockpile safety, security, and reliability. I still see a need, however, to complete the RRW study so that decisions about the future of the stockpile are informed by concrete data and analysis.
“I support the Chairman’s position on Prompt Global Strike. The mark allows the Department to mature key technologies applicable to a tradespace of PGS options.
“Lastly, our missile defense deliberations were perhaps the most challenging. While we agreed on many provisions, there are a few that the minority could not concur with.
“The mark continues to endorse the development, testing, and fielding of near-term capabilities and supports extending them to our allies.
· “The mark increases or fully funds the request for Patriot PAC-3, Aegis, and THAAD.
· “It includes language on force structure highlighting the inventory needs raised by STRATCOM, EUCOM, PACOM, and U.S. Forces Korea to the committee.
· “It also continues to emphasize warfighter involvement, greater OSD oversight, and cooperation with key Allies, such as Israel, Japan, and NATO.
“I am pleased that the mark funds key investments in future capabilities, specifically the Airborne Laser shoot-down test in 2009 and the STSS experiments planned for later this year. These tests are important to inform upcoming reviews and future decisions on a viable and cost-effective way ahead in boost phase defense and in space.
“Testing and Targets continue to be a challenge. The mark adds $25 million to the Targets programs. While the Department’s Operational Test and Evaluation report notes improvements to MDA’s test program, it also recommends more tests. I want to create the conditions for successful testing, so I am concerned when I hear about issues associated with test equipment and the targets program.
“As our nation continues to mature our missile defense capabilities, our Allies are doing much of the same. They recognize the threat to their constituents and the importance of missile defense.
· “I would like to commend our friends in Japan on their successful Aegis intercept test last December.
· “In April, NATO heads of state recognized the “substantial contribution” of the U.S. proposal to place long-range missile defenses in Europe to protect Europe and the U.S. against missile threats.
· “I recently noticed that Turkey is interested in purchasing missile defense systems to defend against short and medium-range threats.
· “We also have a long history of close cooperation with the state of Israel on missile defense.
“With rising concern about the ballistic missile threat and allies around the world pursuing missile defense capabilities, this is a critical time for the U.S. to continue its leadership. Therefore, this committee must follow through in action what it has suggested in words.
“I am deeply concerned about the large reduction in funds for European Missile Defense. I do not agree with this cut. I believe this sends the wrong message to our Allies who have come out strongly in support of the project. The Secretary of Defense noted in a letter to Chairman Skelton and Ranking Member Hunter that funding would send a strong signal to Poland, the Czech Republic, NATO, Russia and Iran. Just last week, the Senate Armed Services, in a bipartisan manner, fully funded the European request.
“Significant progress has been made since last year:
· “NATO endorsed European missile defense and is working with the U.S. on integration activities;
· “The Czech Republic and U.S. plan to sign agreements in June; and
· “The results of the Independent Study are expected to be made available to Congress this summer. And we also look forward to hearing from the Congressional Budget Office on their analysis.
“I understand the Chairman’s concern about schedule and execution of funds. However, I believe we must support the acquisition of long-lead parts in 2009 to meet the scheduled early capability date in 2012. Furthermore, if we don’t fund long-lead items, we risk production breaks that will cost the nation more in the long run and further delay fielding this critical layer of protection.
“As we move this bill through the House and eventually go to conference with the Senate, I hope that the Chairman would be open to readdressing funding for this project.
“MDA also requested $10 million for a Space Test Bed. Although there is disagreement on this subject, I do see merit in a study to examine the pros and cons of such a concept. Technology has advanced and the threat has changed since we last seriously looked at the concept. I worry not only about ballistic missile threats but also threats to satellites, such as the anti-satellite missile the Chinese tested in 2007. Therefore, I support having an independent entity to study the feasibility, technology, and costs of space-based defense concepts.
“Madam Chairman, I remain concerned about the reduction to the overall topline level of the strategic forces mark, and will seek to address this in the full committee next week; however, I appreciate the thought, candor, and measured approach you have taken in preparing this mark. There may be some gaps between us, but I believe we can work through them in defense of our nation.
“On a final note, I would like to thank the other members of the subcommittee and the staff for their hard work toward making this year’s mark such a quality product. I would also like to thank you, Madam Chairman, for all the work this subcommittee does during the year. I will miss the work that we do and the people that I work with. I recommend adoption of the Chairman’s mark and encourage my colleagues to vote in support of it.
“Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
###