TOPICS
TOPICS
Senators urge bigger 2008 budget for Navy shipbuilding
Sixteen senators from both parties have urged Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to boost the Navy's fiscal 2008 shipbuilding budget to $14 billion -- more than $3 billion more than the Navy wants to spend on new ships in fiscal 2007 and a hefty increase during a much anticipated period of fiscal belt tightening.
The senators' generous request represents roughly the amount the Navy has said is needed each year to carry out Chief of Naval Operations Michael Mullen's 30-year plan to build enough advanced submarines, destroyers and other ships to field a fleet of 313 ships.
The Navy's current fleet is at 280 ships, down from 341 five years ago and the fewest ships since the 1930s.
"Capability is important for sure, but numbers also matter because of the need for continued global presence," the senators said in a letter last Thursday to Rumsfeld.
The lawmakers signing the appeal hail from states with heavy shipbuilding interests, such as Connecticut, Maine, Mississippi and Rhode Island. Senate Appropriations Chairman Thad Cochran, R-Miss., usually a champion of shipbuilding programs, was not among them.
In their letter, the senators argued that the defense budget has grown more than 50 percent since 2001, but the ship procurement budget has declined by 17 percent.
They also pointed to China's rising naval power, which analysts expect will exceed the size of the U.S. fleet by 2015. In addition to the projected growth of its fleet, China's shipbuilding technologies are maturing rapidly, the senators added.
"A robust U.S. fleet, and the funding required to build and maintain that force, is essential to our nation's security," the lawmakers wrote.
The letter comes just weeks after the Congressional Budget Office concluded the Navy would have to spend $15 billion each year to maintain a fleet of just 260 ships by 2035 -- significantly short of the Navy's goal.
Indeed, the Navy needs far more than $14 billion -- perhaps as much as $21.7 billion annually -- to buy all the destroyers, submarines and other ships it needs to carry out Mullen's plan, according to analyses by CBO and the Congressional Research Service.
To pay for the ship plan, the Navy has said it needs operations and maintenance and personnel accounts to remain stagnant in real terms, research and development dollars to decrease for several years, and industry to stick to current prices for ships.
"If one or more of the four required things does not happen ... it might become difficult or impossible to execute the Navy's shipbuilding plans," CRS concluded in a report last Thursday.
COMMENTS
- We need a much larger naval presence around the world. The Navy is much better than land-based posts and more versatile. I propose 2000' to 4000' long or more battle carriers, with high-speed support and defense ships. Michael Henderson Posted December 24, 2006 12:10 AM
- This should be good news to all Americans. Current deployments are stretching the Navy greatly, causing crews to be away from loved ones for longer and longer periods. Also, let's not forget that for every ship that is at sea, another is in dry dock for necessary maintenance, and still others are either in training or in transit. Thus, to keep even one ship on station, you need another three in various states of readiness. Given those mission requirements, a fleet of 280 ships is not very capable. In addition, to prevent the loss of critical infrastructure and knowledge in the vital shipbuilding industry, we need to build ships! It's as simple as that. In World War II, we were able to mobilize and build ships quickly because we had hundreds of shipyards then that contributed to the war effort -- many on a 24 hour a day, 7 day a week schedule. Today's warships are much more sophisticated, and can't be built overnight. Also, there are only a handful of shipyards left that are capable of building these ships. If they're not built, the shipyards will go out of business like all the others in the last 50 years. Finally, shipyard workers are aging. In order to make sure that new workers are hired, and learn these skills from senior workers before they retire, we must keep building ships! This is a vital defense industry, and very necessary for our national security today and in the future. This nation depends on uninterrupted international commerce, the vast bulk of which travels by sea. The seas of the world must be kept open, and safe for international trade. We also need to be prepared militarily, especially with the ongoing war on terror, the tense situation with North Korea, and the looming threat of Communist China, which is continuing its own military buildup, including a greatly expanded fleet. What some call "pork" is actually common sense, and wise preparation, to many others. GovExec.com reader Posted July 10, 2006 11:04 AM
- "The Navy's current fleet is at 280 ships, down from 341 five years ago and the fewest ships since the 1930s." Didn't the sneak attack on a place called Pearl Harbor happen sometime right after that? This is supposed to make America safer?? Larry R. Doane Posted June 28, 2006 8:13 AM
