|
 Reacting to the new Pentagon budget unveiled this week, members of
the Senate Armed Services Committee expressed concern about plans to
slash the size of the Army, curb the growth of military compensation
and retire popular weapons systems such as the entire fleet of A-10
"Warthog" tank-killer aircraft.
"This administration's misguided budget priorities are robbing our
military men and women of the tools they need to defend the nation
against growing threats," said Senator Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, the
top Republican on the committee.
Even the panel's Democratic chairman, Senator Carl Levin of
Michigan, questioned whether the resources provided to the Defense
Department were "adequate to enable our military to meet its
national security missions."
The Pentagon's 2015 spending plan unveiled on Tuesday begins to look
beyond the wars of the past 13 years, calling for a smaller overall
military to generate savings that can be used to ensure training and
modernization at a time of reduced budgets.
The plan calls for a Pentagon base budget of $496 billion, remaining
virtually flat for a third consecutive year. It seeks an additional
$79.4 billion in war funding, but officials said that was a
place-holder value that would be replaced once the size of the
post-2014 U.S. force in Afghanistan is decided.
The new budget comes as the Pentagon tries to slash nearly $1
trillion in projected defense spending over a decade as required
under the Budget Control Act of 2011, which set caps on outlays for
national security.
The Pentagon is currently operating under a two-year deal approved
by Congress that provided some relief from the budget cuts. But the
larger cuts will return in the 2016-2019 fiscal years under the law
as it stands, a move Pentagon officials say would be harmful to
national security.
The Pentagon's proposed 2015 budget urges Congress to give the
military an additional $26 billion above the spending lid for the
year to be used largely for training and modernization.
It also ignores the budget caps for the 2016-2019 fiscal years,
asking for $115 billion more than the law allows during that time
frame. Pentagon documents said returning to the higher-level cuts
would increase security risks and lead to a military too small to
meet the needs of U.S. strategy.
"The risks will grow and the options that we can provide the nation
will dramatically shrink," Army General Martin Dempsey, the
military's top uniformed officer, told the committee.
[to top of second column] |
Lawmakers expressed skepticism about the budget's proposals for
military compensation reform, such as lower pay increases, a
reduction in the housing allowance and a cut in subsidies for
commissaries where many troops shop for food and clothes.
The request was unpopular among lawmakers, some of whom face
election this year and had hoped to delay a decision until after a
compensation reform panel reports to the Pentagon next year.
"Doesn't it make more sense to see what the study says before we go
about reducing the (commissary) subsidy in a significant way?" asked
Republican Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia.
Senator Kelly Ayotte, a New Hampshire Republican, fenced with
Dempsey and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel over the plan to retire
the Air Force's fleet of A-10 close air support aircraft.
"Some of the biggest advocates for the platform have been your
fellow soldiers," said Ayotte, whose husband was an A-10 pilot.
Dempsey agreed, noting he was probably the only one in the room who
had been rescued by one.
"The A-10 is the ugliest, most beautiful aircraft on the planet,"
Dempsey said. But he added that other planes could provide close air
support for the Army, as Air Force chief General Mark Welsh, himself
an A-10 pilot, would testify.
(Reporting by David Alexander; editing by Lisa Shumaker)
[© 2014 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.] Copyright 2014 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
 |
