Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 5504 - Department of Defense Appropriations Bill, FY 1993

(House Floor)
(Sponsors: Whitten (D), Mississippi; Kurtha (D), Pennsylvania)

This statement of Administration Policy expresses the Administration's views on H.R. 5504, the Department of Defense Appropriations Bill, FY 1993, as reported by the House Appropriations Committee.

The Administration opposes language of the Committee bill that would permit abortions to be performed at U.S. military facilities in cases other than when the life of the mother would be endangered if the fetus were carried to term. The President has stated that he would veto any legislation that would weaken current law or regulation with respect to abortion-related activities. Therefore, if the provision of the Committee bill were to be included in the bill ultimately presented to the President, the President would veto the bill.

Similar language was included in the Senate version of the FY 1992 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill but was deleted in Conference. The Administration hopes that the bill will move forward through the legislative process so that necessary changes could be made to gain Administration support. These would include dropping the abortion-related provision and responding to the other objections discussed below.

Funding Levels

The Administration regrets that the committee has provided funds for unrequested programs at the expense of higher priority programs. As discussed below, the Administration believes that these increases should be re-directed to high priority programs of significance to national security.

The Committee bill would provide unrequested funding for several programs, including the following:

• $1.0 billion for undefined programs that, collectively, the Committee has titled, "Reinvestment for Economic Growth";
  
  
• Over $1.0 billion for aircraft programs;
  
  
• $1,132 million for National Guard and Reserve equipment and $240 million for higher-than-requested Guard and Reserve personnel levels;
  
  
• $1,205 million for an LHD-1 amphibious assault ship, and $300 million for an LSD cargo variant ship; and
  
  
• $200 million for procurement and modification of Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles.

While providing unrequested additions for these programs, the committee has reduced funding from the President's requested levels for a number of key defense programs. The Committee's recommendations would:

• Appropriate only $4,238 million for the strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), $l,075 million less than requested. This funding reduction would undermine last year's landmark "Missile Defense Act of 1991." Under the Committee's funding level for SDI, either initial deployment of strategic defenses would have to be delayed or promising technology programs would have to be canceled.
  
  
• Eliminate all funding for foreign national employees ($1,550 million) and real property maintenance at overseas locations ($801 million). These reductions would inhibit the orderly drawdown of U.S. forces overseas, delay closing of many foreign installations, reduce the readiness of forces stationed overseas, and affect operation of overseas dependent schools.
  
  
• Reduce funding for other operation and maintenance programs by over $2 billion, which would adversely affect operational capabilities and readiness, as well as long-term capability.
  
  
• Make substantial reductions to intelligence funding and personnel. Such reductions would reduce our ability to accommodate critical, high priority requirements, including intentions and plans of world leaders, support to military operations, weapons proliferation, counternarcotics, and counterintelligence.
  
  
• Reduce procurement funding for LANDSAT 7 by $59 million. This would delay launch of LANDSAT 7 and jeopardize the continued availability of LANDSAT-type data for military, scientific, and commercial users.
  
  
• Reduce procurement funding for the DDG-51 destroyer program by $764 million and sealift ships by $400 million. This would delay Navy modernization and needed improvements in sealift capability.

The Administration urges the House to restore funding of $8 billion that was cut from the Administration's request. In addition, the House is urged to re-direct funding provided by the Committee for unrequested programs to these programs that are of critical importance to the objectives of our national security policy.

Language Provisions

The Administration objects to several language provisions of the Committee bill:

• Language included in the Committee bill would prohibit the purchase of the LTV Aerospace and Defense Company by any foreign person. In the Administration's view, such a blanket prohibition would be highly inappropriate.
  
  
• Language in the report indicates that the funding provided in this bill for the National Launch System (MLS) may be the total amount provided. Because the MLS would support the launch needs of both NASA and DOD, development funding should be shared equally, as proposed by the Administration.
  
  
• Section 9126 of the General Provisions would require the Comptroller General of the United States and the Department of the Navy to issue a report on the Navy's accounting practices at its nuclear shipyards. To avoid constitutional problems relating to the separation of powers between the Legislative and Executive branches, the Administration recommends substituting the phrase, "after consultation with the Department of the Navy" for "in conjunction with the Department of the Navy." This recommended language would clarify that the report is a Comptroller General report.

Amendments

The Administration would urge the House to reject potential amendments that would reduce consultant services by $200 million and warehousing funds by $.5 billion:

• The Committee bill would reduce consultant funding by $45 million; further reductions would adversely affect the engineering, technical, and logistics support required by the operating forces.
  
  
• The potential reduction of $.S billion in warehousing funds would reduce resources available for warehousing by one-third.

Preliminary Scoring Issues

Based on a preliminary review, a number of provisions in the Committee bill, particularly portions of the Defense Reinvestment for Economic Growth programs, may be appropriately classified as domestic discretionary under the Budget Enforcement Act (BEA). The Office of Management and Budget ls reviewing the language in the bill and report to determine which provisions should be classified as domestic discretionary spending.

The bill contains language that would provide an indemnification guarantee for any State or a subdivision of a state obtaining real property upon the closure of a military installation. This provision would provide payment by the Federal Government for environmental cleanup or associated costs caused by contamination attributable to the Department of Defense. This is direct spending in an appropriations bill and should be scored against the Appropriations Committee.