Pentagon says urgent action needed on defense spending bill

Efforts to counter radio-controlled roadside bombs in Iraq, contracts for aircraft carrier overhaul and C-130J transport plane production, and the Dec. 1 military pay day could all be jeopardized if lawmakers cannot agree on fiscal 2006 Defense spending before the Thanksgiving break, according to a memo sent by Pentagon officials to congressional staff.

If Congress has to resort to another continuing resolution -- the current one runs through Nov. 18 -- Marine Corps and Air Force operating accounts will be increasingly stressed, the memo says. Spending on depot maintenance, facility repair and civilian hiring is already being deferred, and increased fuel costs continue to be an added burden.

Delays in approving additional funds for rebuilding after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita are also having an impact on Pentagon spending, the memo states. Without the additional money the Defense Department cannot begin repairs to facilities such as Keesler Air Force Base, Naval Station Pascagoula and Stennis Space Center in Mississippi, nor replace storm-damaged equipment such as trucks, generators and computer hardware.

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., had not seen the memo but said Wednesday he still hopes to complete conference negotiations on the Defense appropriations bill by the Thanksgiving recess. If conference is not wrapped up, Lewis added that he would consider the defense bill a "high-level prospect" for a year-long CR.

Lewis and Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran, R-Miss., are discussing how to move the hurricane-aid package, aides said, and have not decided whether to move a stand-alone bill or attach it to a spending bill already in conference.

House and Senate appropriators are nearing a compromise on one of the biggest differences in the two versions of the defense spending bills: funding for the Navy's DD(X) destroyer program. House members have long been wary of the pricey program and slashed $1 billion from its spending bill earlier this year. Instead, they added $1.4 billion to purchase another Arleigh Burke Class DDG-51 destroyer. For its part, the Senate added $50 million for advanced procurement to the program.

House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee ranking member John Murtha, D-Pa., said Wednesday he believes the conference report will more closely resemble the Senate-passed legislation, largely because of support from Cochran. Several of the next-generation destroyers will be built in Cochran's home state of Mississippi.

"DD(X) finally will prevail because Cochran wants it," said Murtha, who added that the additional $1.4 billion in funding the House earmarked for another DDG-51 was merely a placeholder for negotiations. "Nobody wants the DDG," Murtha said.

The DD(X), the first of which will cost $3.3 billion, is considered a technological test bed for many of the Navy's future technologies. Systems incorporated on the destroyer will later be installed on other ships, including the CVN-21 aircraft carrier now in development.

"Whatever happens to the DD(X), whatever the decision is on the DD(X), will probably have more of an impact on the total shipbuilding budget than any other near-term decision," said Robert Work, a naval analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

While the House likely will defer to the Senate on DD(X), Murtha said he still hopes to secure funds for two additional Littoral Combat Ships and one additional T-AKE cargo carrier, as provided by the House bill. The Senate bill cut funding for the T-AKE because of construction delays, and did not increase purchases of the LCS above the one vessel sought by the Pentagon.

Overall, the Pentagon requested $8.7 billion for shipbuilding in FY06. House appropriators increased that to $9.6 billion, while the Senate set aside $8.7 billion.