Fischer on Biden's FY23 DoD Budget & Lack of Transparency, Missing Justification Details

Press Release

U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today participated in the committee's posture hearing on the administration's proposed FY23 budget for the Department of Defense.

During her line of questioning, Sen. Fischer highlighted her frustration with the over-classification of important national security strategy documents, as well as the fact that the administration's specific budget justifications have yet to be released. Sen. Fischer noted these factors make it difficult to have substantive, public debates on our country's approach to national security and what should be prioritized in the budget.

Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley were witnesses before the committee.

A transcript of Sen. Fischer's line of questioning is below (edited for clarity):

Sen. Fischer: Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by noting my frustration with the timing of this hearing. We are here today to review the Department's budget, but we have no detailed budget justification data. My understanding is that the J-Books will be released mid-April.

We can't talk about strategy either. The administration's National Defense Strategy, the Nuclear Posture Review, and the Missile Defense Review were submitted to Congress last week, but all of the documents are classified.

Last year, and in 2017 and 2018, this committee delayed the Secretary's testimony so that there was ample time to review the budget and have a meaningful oversight hearing. I'm disappointed that was not the case this year.

With respect to the NDS and the NPR, I would note that the previous administration released these documents publicly in early 2018, and the committee had almost three months to review them before Secretary Mattis and General Dunford appeared to testify.

Sec. Austin, in your opening comments, you said that in this budget, resources are matched to strategy, matched to policy, matched to the will of the people. I think having this hearing without any detailed information about the budget, and when we are unable to openly discuss any of the administration's strategy documents, directly undermines the committee's ability to conduct its oversight work, and is contrary to the spirit of transparent government that these public hearings are intended to support.

I will be deferring most of my questions to the classified portion, but I do have a few questions that we were able to glean from the toplines that we were given.

Secretary Austin, Section 1684 of the 2017 NDAA directed the Department to designate an acquisition authority to be responsible for defense of the homeland from cruise missile threats, but the Department has still not made such a designation.

What is the status of this? Does the Department intend to make a designation, and when can we expect that to happen?

Sec. Austin: We do intend to make a designation, and we'll move out smartly on that. In terms of being transparent and when the budget is released -- it's our goal, it's our desire, it's our mandate to be as transparent with you as possible.

Sen. Fischer: I would point out that one of my missions I've talked to you about, to all the service chiefs about, and to the joint chiefs about -- is to be able to declassify much of the material that we see as members of Congress. I think there are ways to do that. We have to be able to do that so the people of this country understand the threats that we face. So that the people of this country, when they have that information and can review it themselves -- they will support our national defense and our national security. And I feel that we have gone backwards here in making these classified documents and not being transparent.

But if I could continue -- given the increasing cruise missile threat to the United States, again I think it's important that we make this designation as it was in the 2017 NDAA, which was a long time ago. So I hope you step up and do this.

Also, Secretary Austin, under this budget, the Air Force is divesting 369 aircraft this year and buying 87 -- a net loss of 282. The five-year plan projects buying 467 aircraft and divesting 1,468 aircraft, a loss of 1,001 aircraft. And the Navy's battle force shrinks as well under this budget, dropping from 298 ships today to 280 in FY 2027.

I'm open to the concept of divesting from legacy platforms, but I think that is a dangerous way to put stress on the force that we have. So how are we planning to deal with that dilemma? Are we expecting operational demands to fall, and how realistic is that?

Sec. Austin: First let me just affirm that there will be an unclassified version of the strategy that comes out later. In terms of divestment and investment, we are investing in those capabilities that will enable us to be decisive in the future fight. And those capabilities that are not survivable in that fight, we have to divest of them. And also because they are expensive to maintain. We can use those resources to invest in future capabilities, the kind that we need in the next fight. That's our strategy. So as you match the budget to the strategy, you'll find a direct match.

Sen. Fischer: Thank you -- I hope you remember it has to be matched to the will of the American people as well.

Source