Statement of Administration Policy: S. 1745 - National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997

(Senate)
(Senator Thurmond (R) SC)

The Administration supports prompt congressional consideration of the national defense authorization legislative proposal for FY 1997. As reported by the Committee on Armed Services, however, S. 1745 raises serious budget and policy concerns. The President's senior advisers would recommend that he veto a final conference bill that fails to address the concerns set forth below.

Of particular concern, S. 1745 would: (1) authorize excessive Defense funding levels that are contrary to the President's budget priorities; and (2) infringe upon the President's conduct of foreign affairs by constraining his efforts to maintain a sound policy on ballistic missile defense.

Funding Levels

As proposed in the President's FY 1997 Budget, the Administration firmly believes that it is possible to maintain a strong defense without sacrificing important domestic programs. The Administration strongly objects to the approximately $13 billion increase above the President's request proposed in the reported version of S. 1745. The reported version of the bill would seriously undermine the President's goal of a balanced budget that provides for a strong defense while preserving other programs needed to provide all Americans with a higher standard of living.

About $7.7 billion of the increase above the President's request is for procurement, a significant portion of which funds the acquisition of weapon systems and equipment that are not in the long range plans of the Department of Defense. These items include some National Guard and Reserve Equipment; OH-58D, AH-64 and CH-47D helicopters; F/A-18C/D and F-16C/D fighter aircraft; a SWATH Oceanographic Ship; WC-130J weather aircraft; additional ships for the Marine Corps' Maritime Prepositioning Squadrons; and Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS) launchers. Many of the proposed increases for R&D programs also are not needed, including $300 million for National Missile Defense; an increase of $75 million for the antisatellite (ASAT) technologies program; and an increase of $70 million for the Space-based Laser (SBL) program. The additional $700 million for military construction programs also is objectionable in part because a number of projects, worth about $95 million, are not in the Department's long range plan.

Strategic Defense and Arms Control

S. 1745 contains a number of provisions that would infringe upon the President's ability to conduct foreign relations. These include a legislated unilateral interpretation of the ABM Treaty for compliance purposes, which could frustrate ongoing U.S. efforts to conclude an ABM- Theater Missile Defense demarcation agreement with Russia and other states of the former Soviet Union (FSU). In addition, the bill would require congressional approval of any demarcation agreement, even one consistent with the Senate's compliance interpretation. This requirement would narrow the bipartisan understanding reached with the Senate during consideration of the FY 1996 Defense Authorization Act.

S. 1745 would require Senate advice and consent to any ABM Treaty succession agreement which makes the Treaty multilateral by allowing FSU states in addition to Russia to become Treaty parties. Although the Administration has not determined if it will seek congressional approval of a succession agreement, such a requirement infringes upon the President's conduct of foreign relations. The Senate did not object, indeed it supported, the effort to multilateralize the Conventional Forces in Europe and Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaties as a result of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Furthermore, by casting doubt on their status as equal partners in the ABM Treaty, this requirement could needlessly jeopardize the United States' positive relationships with Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine. These countries have ABM Treaty-related facilities on their territories, and this requirement may put at risk their compliance with denuclearization obligations under START I.

In addition, the bill's provision prohibiting the retirement or dismantlement of any strategic nuclear delivery system during FY 1997 until the START II Treaty enters into force is an unwarranted restriction on the President's national security and foreign policy authority. Until START II ratification and entry into force, the United States will draw down and maintain U.S. strategic forces at warhead levels consistent with START I.

Other Objectionable Provisions

Intelligence Programs

S. 1745 contains several objectionable provisions concerning intelligence. These include a prohibition on expenditure of Department intelligence funds by other agencies. Such a prohibition would make it impossible for CIA or any other government agency to expend funds on behalf of the Department as they currently do through several transfer authorities. In addition, the bill would unnecessarily restrict the President's ability to appoint either a civilian or a uniformed military director of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency.

The Administration also opposes section 1032, which would restrict the Department of Defense's ability to provide assistance to the National Drug Intelligence Center and the Administration's continued assault against illegal drugs. The flow of illegal drugs into and within the country is both a national security and a law enforcement problem requiring technological and financial assistance from both the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice.

S. 1745 also establishes a Director of Military Intelligence and a Defense Intelligence Board. This would restrict the President's ability to manage and structure the defense intelligence community.

Dual Use Applications Program (DUAP)

S. 1745 provides $150 million less than the President's Budget request of $250 million for the DUAP. The DUAP supports development of technologies that can be applied to both commercial and defense systems, thereby reducing costs of defense systems. Authorization of the program at the requested level is important to the affordability of defense systems and to the vitality of the defense industrial base.

Department of Energy (DOE) Programs

The bill would authorize $450 million more than the President's FY 1997 Budget for DOE's Atomic Energy Defense Activities, and would severely limit funding for vital international nuclear safety programs. Specifically, the bill provides:

— $239 million more for Weapons Activities than needed to maintain the safety and reliability of the nuclear weapons stockpile and to meet the requirements of the Nuclear Weapons Stockpile Memorandum, including requirements for tritium production;

— $35 million more than requested for technology partnerships between U.S. industry and Russian scientists;

— $ 198 million more than requested for Defense Environmental Restoration and Waste Management; and

— $51 million less for programs to improve the safety of Soviet-designed reactors and support of international efforts to shut down the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Another serious accident at any of the 15 most unsafe plants where this effort is underway would impose overwhelming economic and social costs on the region's emerging democracies. The Administration urges funding at the President's request to continue this important international effort.

In addition, Section 3154 requires operation of both reprocessing canyons at the Savannah River Site. This requirement presupposes the outcome of an ongoing analysis regarding their utilization.

National Oceanographic Partnership Program

Section 252 creates a National Oceanographic Partnership Program and a National Oceanographic Research Council, composed of representatives of Federal agencies, industry, and academia. Because the Council would have contract and grant authority, this section of the bill should be amended to eliminate constitutional Appointments Clause concerns.

Nonrecurring Cost Recoupment

S. 1745 does not include the budget offset needed to implement section 4303 of the FY 1996 Defense Authorization Act, concerning recoupment, which the Administration identified pursuant to congressional direction.

Coast Guard

Section 314 of the bill would prohibit funding of Coast Guard activities from subfunction 054. This ignores the traditional defense role of the Coast Guard that is properly funded in the National Defense budget function. Section 1004 requires extraordinary certification and audit of Coast Guard spending. This provision is unnecessary and redundant; the Coast Guard already is subject to rigorous oversight and audit procedures as are other Federal agencies. The Administration urges that these sections be deleted.

Additional Comments

The Administration appreciates the Committee's support for the military pay raise and quality of life initiatives to improve military compensation and living conditions. The Administration also appreciates the Committee's support for the Joint United States/Israeli Nautilus Laser program, which is designed to shoot down short range projectiles such as Katyusha rockets.

The Administration appreciates the inclusion of provisions to permit privatization including the provision to increase the portion of depot maintenance work that can be performed by the private sector. The Administration would urge the adoption of the other privatization provisions requested by the Administration which will permit implementation of the privatization initiative in an orderly and cost effective manner.

The Administration appreciates the Committee's strong support for the Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program — an important and highly effective means of enhancing security through eliminating foreign nuclear weapons systems and preventing weapons proliferation. In addition, the Committee's support for the transfer of naval vessels to certain Allied and friendly nations is also appreciated. These transfers are important to national security and defense relations with those countries. Also commendable, is the modification to the Missing Persons

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

Pay-As-You-Go Scoring

S. 1745 would affect direct spending and receipts; therefore, it is subject to the pay-as-you-go requirement of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. OMB's preliminary scoring estimates for this bill are presented in the table below.

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