Key Congressman Says Sequestration 'Can Be Avoided'

Jane’s
March 06, 2012

Key Congressman Says Sequestration 'Can Be Avoided'

The US Congress will need a bipartisan agreement to find USD1.2 trillion in savings and avoid automatic defense cuts under 'sequestration', although reversing tax cuts introduced by the previous administration could help the Pentagon avoid a potential USD600 billion slashing of its budget, according to a top lawmaker.

Representative Adam Smith, a Democrat from Washington State and a ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee, said on 1 March that Democrats in Congress are unlikely to propose their own plan this year to find the savings.

"In order for anything to pass it has to be bipartisan. That is the approach [Committee Chairman Howard 'Buck'] McKeon and I have talked about to some extent, something we could come together and agree on.

That would be a better and more useful approach than the Republicans roll out a plan, Democrats roll out a plan, and no one agrees."

The 2011 Budget Control Act states that if Congress cannot trim the budget to find USD1.2 trillion in savings, an automatic reduction of USD600 billion in defense and USD600 billion in discretionary spending will kick in.

Republicans in Congress have said they might look for alternatives to cutting defense by such a large amount. Smith added that he is opposed to separating out defense cuts from sequestration, saying: "It has to be all or nothing." Congress has until the end of 2012 to make a decision.

There is a third option for avoiding sequestration, Smith said: "Let the [President George W] Bush tax cuts expire."

Eliminating the tax cuts would provide the necessary USD1.2 trillion in savings, he believes. Republicans have stood firm in their opposition to any new taxes, or eliminating the Bush tax cuts, and Democrats have been just as resolute in their opposition to cutting social security and Medicare.

Smith acknowledged that there are no easy answers for balancing the tight budget environment with difficult needs. However, he noted it is unlikely that Congress would cut any part of the 'nuclear triad' to satisfy the deficit. In particular, Smith said he supports retaining the US Navy's Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines. "Submarines are the most capable part, more reliable and survivable. Protecting that piece of the triad is important."

He also has concerns about the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme: the most expensive acquisition effort in the US Department of Defense's (DoD's) history.

"We do not yet have a firm idea of when the three variants will be ready," he noted. "It's a difficult situation. We need to get those firm answers. The problem is it is 90 to 95 per cent of our fighter aircraft for the next 40 years. We cannot simply cancel the programme. We have to find a way to make it work."

Moreover, Smith said more has to be done to enable small businesses to compete for DoD contracts. "How do we make sure it isn't the same usual suspects getting to a contract? The reason I am concerned is that you miss out on a lot of new technology if small businesses don't have access."

Many small companies developing new technologies and new manufacturing ideas are often turned off by the bureaucracy of the DoD, Smith noted. "[Small companies] say they can't do business with them," he said. "The idea is to encourage them."

Smith said he is also concerned about the defense industrial base as the DoD, he believes, has started more projects in the last 10 years than the country can probably afford to implement, such as the JSF and the Littoral Combat Ship.

"We are going to have to ramp some of them down certainly with the tight budget picture. But if you ramp it down how do you ensure you don't lose core capabilities?" he asked.

Smith acknowledged that there is controversy over a forthcoming 'procurement holiday' for the M1 Abrams main battle tank and Bradley infantry fighting vehicle. "Are there core capabilities that go away after two to three years: specialized equipment, specialized talent? Do you lose that by not buying new heavy vehicles? "he asked.



###
end



Source;

http://bit.ly/wg3YAa



Copyright 2012 Atkins & Assoc. All Rights Reserved.