Pentagon Spending Bill: The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Sept 27, 2006
CONTACT:
Travis Sharp, Communications Director, (202) 546-0795 ext.123
tsharp AT armscontrolcenter DOT org
Washington, D.C. - The annual defense bill now before Congress has a little good in it, a lot of bad, and a bunch of ugly, according to the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, a Washington-based Pentagon watchdog group.
The bill, the Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2007, contains $436.6 billion for the Department of Defense, including $70 billion in emergency funding for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also contains language that will allow the government to continue to operate when Congress leaves Washington at the end of this week for some last-minute campaigning before the November elections.
The Good - The legislation does not include $127 million requested by the Pentagon to begin converting submarine-launched nuclear missiles to carry conventional warheads. "This plan is terribly provocative," said Christopher Hellman, Military Policy Analyst at the Center. "If a U.S. submarine suddenly pops up and fires one of these, how are you supposed to know if its nuclear or not? And if you're a country with nuclear weapons, it's pretty obvious how you're going to respond. You have to assume the worst." Instead, the legislation includes $5 million to fund a study of the mission requirement, and an additional $20 million to look at other long-range strike alternatives.
The legislation also includes language barring the creation of permanent U.S. military bases in Iraq, or to allow the United States to control any Iraqi oil resources. "This language is critical," said Hellman. "The Iraqi people need to know that we are not simply moving in to take over their oil. Hopefully this will help start to restore their confidence in our goals."
The bill also includes language prohibiting the use of funds for activities that would contravene U.S. laws and treaty obligations regarding torture.
The Bad - Congress continues to fully fund Cold War-era weapons programs like missile defense, the F-22 fighter, the "Virginia" attack submarine, and many others. "These programs do little to meet our security needs in the 21st century," said Hellman, "and do nothing to protect the American people from future terrorist attacks."
The Ugly - Although the $70 billion emergency funds are intended to support our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, Congress has gotten into the habit of using these supplemental spending packages to fund non-war related items. For example, this year Congress added $2 billion for 10 C-17 aircraft the Air Force didn't request. Seven of these were added after the House and Senate had already voted on the package. Boeing, the company that makes the aircraft, had announced that it would begin closing its C-17assembly line down without additional orders.
"This is a corporate bailout, pure and simple," said Hellman. "And funding these planes as part of the emergency war spending package is pork-barrel politics at its worst."
RSS Feed