WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House Armed
Services Committee approved a policy bill on Thursday that authorized a
$496 billion Pentagon base budget for next year but rejected many of the
department's attempts to cut spending, including on arms programs and
military pay increases.
Lawmakers on the Republican-dominated panel voted unanimously to
send the measure to the full House of Representatives, where it must
be passed and reconciled with a Senate version before going to
President Barack Obama for his signature.
Representative Buck McKeon, the committee chairman, said the annual
legislation, the National Defense Authorization Act for the 2015
fiscal year, was expected to be considered by the full House in two
weeks.
The measure approved by the panel authorizes a $496 billion Pentagon
base budget, plus $17.9 billion for defense-related nuclear programs
in the Department of Energy. It authorized $79 billion for war
funding, but lawmakers said that was a place-holder because the
Pentagon had not yet submitted a request.
The NDAA sets defense policy and authorizes spending but does not
actually appropriate money. That is done later by the appropriations
committees in the two houses.
The measure approved by the panel included funding to refuel an
aircraft carrier the Pentagon feared it would not be able to afford.
It also added money for a new amphibious assault ship and sought to
preserve the A-10 Warthog close air support plane, rather than
retiring the fleet as the Pentagon proposed.
The Armed Services panel approved a 1.8 percent pay increase for
most military personnel, rejecting a Pentagon plan to reduce the
annual increase to 1 percent because of spiraling compensation
costs, which now make up about half of the department's budget. The
pay of senior officers would be frozen.
In all, the panel cut more than $5 billion from Defense Department
spending plans and shifted the funds around to pay for equipment and
projects the Pentagon sought to trim or eliminate as it tries to cut
$1 trillion projected spending over a decade as ordered by Congress.
McKeon said part of his aim with the legislation was to prevent the
Defense Department from shrinking the size of the force as much as
possible in hopes Congress would reverse some of the spending cuts.
"My underlying goal ... is to hold onto as much of the stuff and as
much of the training as we can," he said, in the hope that "some
miracle happens and we get money ... next year that we don't have
now."
But Representative Adam Smith, the ranking Democrat on the panel,
voiced concern the committee was exacerbating the Pentagon's
problems by not approving its plan to shrink the force to a more
financially sustainable size.
"We can have a larger force, or we can have a ready force," Smith
said. "It's my contention that basically what this committee is
doing is, being presented with that choice, we're closing our eyes
and plugging our ears and saying: 'No, no, no. We're not going to
make that choice.'"
Smith said in trying to prevent program cuts, the committee had
taken $1.4 billion from Pentagon accounts that would have been used
to ensure troops were fully trained and their equipment was
well-maintained and ready for action.
"I think we do continue to put ourselves in a position where we are
jeopardizing readiness," he said.
