Washington D.C. – House Armed Services Committee Ranking Member Adam Smith made the following statement at the Army posture hearing today:
“Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’d like to join you in welcoming Secretary McHugh and General Odierno.
“The President’s budget proposal represents a responsible attempt to forge a grand bargain on the budget. The President proposed an “all of the above” deficit reduction strategy, dealing with revenues, entitlements, and discretionary spending, including defense spending, to deal with our fiscal problems. As a member who, with many others around here, has long supported a comprehensive, balanced approach, I am pleased that the President adopted this course of action. Everyone here, I am sure, hopes that a budget deal can be reached, eliminating the damaging effects of sequestration on critical national interests and, especially in the context of today’s hearing, national security.
“Some on this committee have attacked the President’s proposal to reduce the defense budget by roughly $119 billion between fiscal years 2017 and 2023. As we discuss potential solutions to our budgetary problems, it is important to keep a few things in mind. First, the proposed defense spending reductions would be far less painful than what the Department would absorb under sequestration. The President’s budget would allow future Congresses and Administrations to determine where the cuts come from and how they would be implemented, rather than deal with indiscriminate cuts through sequestration. Moreover, the proposed $119 billion is roughly a quarter of the amount that would be sequestered from the defense budget through fiscal year 2021. Many on this committee voted for the Budget Control Act, which created sequestration, and this committee must play an active role in removing the indiscriminate cuts.
“The Continuing Resolution and then sequestration have caused and are causing real damage to the Army this year. So far this year, the Army has had to cancel seven training events at the National Training Center and the Joint National Training Center. These training events are vital to the effort to return the Army to full spectrum combat capability after a decade of conducting counterinsurgency operations. I am sure our witnesses can highlight other cases. We need to be perfectly clear with ourselves and the American people; standing down these capabilities causes real damage to our readiness and will cost more to recreate in the future than it will save in the short term. We owe it to our brave men and women in uniform, our civilian government workers, the American people, and ourselves to fix sequestration this year and reach a budget agreement.
“While I hope we can reach an agreement that provides stability for the U.S. budget in the future and in particular the defense budget, I don’t think we can fool ourselves that the overall defense budget is going up. Under any scenario, we are not going to be spending as much on defense as was planned two or three years ago. While some members of this committee like to talk about defense strategies unconstrained by resources, that option is off the table; the Budget Control Act, which many on this committee voted for, capped resources. Our challenge now is to make those hard choices, in strategy, in support costs, in shared sacrifices, that allow us to live within our means.
“We are all going to have to look broadly to save enough money and position ourselves for the future—we in Congress, in conjunction with our witnesses here, should be considering how to reduce bureaucracy, how to further reform acquisition processes, and where we can stop spending on legacy programs that provide little useful capability at high costs. The Department has asked to close excess infrastructure, and we should listen. We have gotten used to nearly unlimited resources to fight the wars of the last ten years, but that time is over. Funding cuts are painful, but they also provide the opportunity for us to set up the Army for the future and to bring some rationality to the defense budget.
“I look forward to working with the two witnesses here today, and with the other members of this Committee, on exactly these issues in the coming years.
“Thank you again Mr. Chairman, I yield back my time.”