Statement of Administration Policy: S. 1026 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996

(Senate)
(Sen. Thurmond (R) SC)

S. 1026 raises serious constitutional, national security, budget, and management concerns. The President will not support the bill unless these concerns are addressed.

Missile Defenses

The bill would prohibit the obligation and expenditure of funds to implement Article VI(a) of the Antiballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty according to any interpretation except the interpretation specified in the bill/ This would infringe upon the President's exclusive responsibility for the execution of the law and would impair the conduct of foreign relations consistent with U.S. treaty obligations. The requirement that the complete negotiating record of the ABM Treaty be provided to the Senate would further intrude on the President's authority for the conduct of diplomatic relations.

In addition, the bill would direct the development for deployment by 2003 of a multiple-site system for national missile defense that, if deployed, would be a clear violation of the ABM Treaty. The bill would severely strain U.S./Russian relations and would threaten continued Russian implementation of the START I Treaty and further Russian consideration of the START II Treaty. These two treaties will eliminate strategic launchers carrying two- thirds of the nuclear warheads that confronted the Nation during the Cold War.

Unwarranted Programs and Restrictions

S. 1026 would authorize appropriations for defense programs that exceed by approximately $7 billion the Administration's FY 1996 request. The bulk of this increase is earmarked for weapons programs that either are not needed at all or are more appropriately planned for procurement in later fiscal years. This increase includes $770 million for missile defense of which $300 million is for national missile defense, $564 million for F- 18C/D aircraft, and $777 million for equipment for Reserve forces. Further, the diversion of funds requested for the purchase and refit of roll-on/roll-off ships for the ready reserve force to other uses would undercut critical improvements in the strategic mobility program.

By requiring that certain export license applications automatically be referred to the Department of Defense, S. 1026 is also inconsistent with the Administration's export control policies and would micromanage the dual-use export control process.

Peacekeeping

The bill's elimination of funding for U.N. peacekeeping assessments would undermine the President's ability to carry out effectively U.S. foreign policy. In addition, the bill seeks to develop command and control guidelines for U.S. forces serving under U.N. authorities. While these guidelines are largely consistent with the President's policies, the authority to establish command and control relationships ultimately resides with the President as Commander-in-Chief.

Technology Reinvestment Project (TRP)

S. 1026 would sharply reduce the Administration's $500 million request for this program, which is critical to harnessing leading-edge technology from the commercial sector for national defense. The Administration is encouraged that the Committee provided $238 million to continue on-going projects, but strongly urges the Senate to authorize the full $500 million request.

Humanitarian and Disaster Relief Reductions

The bill's reductions in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief and its elimination of the Office of Humanitarian and Refugee Affairs would severely restrict the ability of the regional commanders-in-chief to implement their peacetime engagement strategy.

Nuclear Weapons Stewardship

The Administration strongly objects to the initiation of a nuclear weapons manufacturing infrastructure program that would require the Department of Energy to build the capability to refabricate the entire active and inactive nuclear weapons stockpiles in about 15 years. This would be more than twice the number of nuclear warheads that could be deployed under START II. Fabrication at that rate would return the United States to nuclear weapons production levels typical at the height of the Cold War.

S. 1026 does not provide the $249 million requested for technology transfer and education activities. A funding reduction of this magnitude would inhibit the Administration's efforts in implementing the Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program.

The Administration objects to restrictive funding and earmarking provisions that would micromanage the nuclear weapons stockpile stewardship and stockpile management programs. This includes earmarking of funds for specific technologies for tritium production and plutonium disposition, prohibiting funding for education programs, specifying new budget and reporting categories, and prohibiting discretionary funding by Laboratory Directors for innovative research projects that are crucial to maintain the vitality of the weapons laboratories.

The Administration also objects to the bill's provisions that would prohibit international inspections of Department of Energy facilities — the U.S. obligation under the treaty between the United States and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the application of safeguards. This restriction would prohibit the implementation of the U.S. commitment to safeguard fissile material that is excess to our defense needs, would undermine U.S. non-proliferation policy, and would make more difficult efforts to achieve nuclear weapons reductions.

Cooperative Threat Reduction

The bill would delay the obligation of funds to assist the transition of nuclear weapon scientists to other pursuits. In addition, the bill would withhold $50 million until the President certifies that Russia is in compliance with the obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention. These provisions would weaken this program and undermine progress made to date on reducing the nuclear threat to the United States.

Incremental Funding of DDG-51 Destroyers

The bill would fund incrementally two DDG-51 destroyers by authorizing $650 million in FY 1996, the first funding increment, and authorizing a second funding increment in FY 1997. The Administration opposes such incremental funding, as it would expose the Federal Government to significant cost and schedule changes if follow-on appropriations fall short of needs. Moreover, authorizing programs that are not fully funded places budgetary pressures on the Department of Defense to seek further funding, squeezing resources in future years.

Personnel

The bill would micromanage Defense operations by restricting the authority of the President and the Secretary of Defense to reduce full-time equivalent (FTE) employment. Such a restriction would seriously undermine the Administration's ability to manage the size of the Federal workforce as required under the Federal Workforce Restructuring Act of 1994.

International Military Education and Training (IMET)

S. 1026 would create a new Department of Defense-administered and -funded IMET program in addition to and separate from the existing IMET program authorized in the Foreign Assistance Act. The Administration opposes establishment of a new program with the same goals and objectives as the current program because it would inevitably be duplicative and would not be subject to the policy coordination and oversight of the Secretary of State.

Defense Export Loan Guarantees

The bill would require the Secretary of Defense to establish a program to issue loan guarantees insuring against losses arising from the financing of defense exports to certain countries. The Administration opposes this program because the Administration has not found it necessary, given the availability of existing authority for transactions of this type and the substantial American presence in international markets for military equipment.

Strategic Cooperation Between the United States and Israel

The bill includes a provision that would establish as U.S. policy that any weapons system or technology offered a member of NATO must also be made available to Israel unless the President determines that doing so would not be in U.S. national security interests. The Administration opposes this provision because it infringes on the President's authority to select and provide appropriate military technology to our allies. In addition, the provision is unnecessary since the Administration, like previous ones, has worked to ensure that Israel maintains its edge in military technology.

The Administration appreciates the Armed Services Committee's consideration of the Administration's national defense authorization legislative proposal. S. 1026 provides for several Administration initiatives, including alternative authorities to provide housing for unaccompanied military members and those with families, and the removal of arbitrary restrictions on the performance of depot-level maintenance by non-Federal workers. In addition, the Administration supports the privatization of the Naval Petroleum Reserve Number and will move expeditiously to conclude- a sale that maximizes its value to the taxpayer. It is important that adequate time, as is provided in the Administration's bill, be allowed to obtain independently certified estimates of the oil field's reserves to determine their value to the taxpayer and for purchasers to validate the data in preparing their bids.

The Administration, as it continues its review of the bill, may identify other issues, and will work with Congress to address these concerns.

Pay-As-You-Go-Scoring

S. 1026 would affect direct spending and receipts, and is therefore subject to the pay-as-you-go requirement of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. OMB's preliminary scoring estimates of this bill are presented in the table below.

Pay-As-You-Go Estimates
($ in millions)