GovernmentExecutive.com

The Association of the U.S. Army on Thursday chided Senate leaders for leaving town for the August recess without completing work on the fiscal 2007 Defense appropriations bill.

In a letter to Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., retired Gen. Gordon Sullivan, the association's president, stressed the importance of resuming consideration of the bill as soon as the Senate returns Sept. 5 to make passage of the conference report possible by Oct. 1, the start of the new fiscal year.

"It is difficult for me to comprehend that in a time of war, when our Army scrambles daily to reprogram funds to fight a war, that the United States Senate could recess for five weeks with the Defense Appropriations bill unfinished," wrote Sullivan, a former Army chief of staff. "The tactical and strategic success of our Army is dependent on timely defense appropriations and authorizations."

Senate Democrats derailed the spending measure last week, demanding time to debate several amendments when lawmakers return from their summer recess. Reid criticized GOP leaders for setting aside time this year to debate a range of conservative issues, including same-sex marriage, while attempting to push the Defense bill through the Senate in three days.

Frist indicated that he intends to make the Defense measure the Senate's first order of business after the recess, with a final vote the next day. Conference negotiations, however, could be long, as the two chambers are $5 billion apart.

Sullivan's letter echoes concerns voiced in June by Army Chief of Staff Peter Schoomaker, who bemoaned lawmakers' delays in passing annual spending bills and supplemental spending measures for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

If Congress does not pass the Defense appropriations bill by Oct. 1, a stopgap continuing resolution would be needed to fund the military. A continuing resolution would stall new starts of contracts and would temporarily make available a smaller amount of money than would otherwise be appropriated in fiscal 2007.

In his letter, Sullivan also stressed that Congress must adequately fund the Army, which needs $17.1 billion next year to repair and replace equipment damaged or destroyed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Senate last week approved an amendment adding $13.1 billion for Army and Marine Corps equipment to the wartime bridge fund accompanying the bill.

"The bills must meet the Army's baseline budget request and must address the Army's ever-increasing [equipment] reset needs," Sullivan wrote. "Our nation, the wealthiest on earth, can certainly afford to properly fund the Army."

COMMENTS

• I cannot remember a time when we had appropriations (either from Congress or within the Defense Department) at the beginning of the year. Even last year when the appropriation was done before Oct. 1 we didn't get our initial distribution until the end of January, and no one with authority cares! Maybe the general's statement above is correct because we haven't won a war (other than Desert Storm) since World War II. This should indicate that the general is totally qualified to make such statements. Maybe he thinks the military should decide what is spent and what it is spent on. What happened to the civilian control of the military and the elected representatives of the people deciding what to spend on and when? Taxpayer Posted August 15, 2006 7:53 AM
• It really is disgraceful that the Senate won't stay and take care of this. Not going back home to "press the flesh" and campaign versus not funding the military that maintains our freedom (including the ability to press the flesh and campaign) should be an easy choice, but apparently it's not obvious to those in Washington. GovExec.com reader Posted August 11, 2006 10:21 AM