Hearing of the Readiness and Management Support Subcommittee of the Senate Armed Services Committee

SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING

HEADLINE: HEARING OF THE READINESS AND MANAGEMENT SUPPORT SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE SENATE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE

SUBJECT: MILITARY READINESS PROGRAMS IN THE DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005

CHAIRED BY: SENATOR JOHN ENSIGN (R-NV)

LOCATION: 232A RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C.

WITNESSES:

GENERAL GEORGE W. CASEY, JR., USA, VICE CHIEF OF STAFF, UNITED STATES ARMY;

ADMIRAL MICHAEL G. MULLEN, USN, VICE CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS, UNITED STATES NAVY;

GENERAL T. MICHAEL MOSELEY, USAF, VICE CHIEF OF STAFF, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE;

LIEUTENANT GENERAL JAN C. HULY, USMC, DEPUTY COMMANDANT OF THE MARINE CORPS, PLANS, POLICIES, AND OPERATIONS

BODY:
SEN. JOHN ENSIGN (R-NV): Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome. The Subcommittee on Military Readiness and Management Support meets today to begin our hearings, Fiscal Year 2005 Defense Authorization Request. Before we begin-and Senator Akaka will be with us in just a moment-I'd like to thank him. We worked together, had a great team last year, worked across party lines and put the Armed Services and the defense of our country first and foremost before any political considerations. And I just want to say thank you to him and to his staff publicly today.

This subcommittee enjoys a broad charter, the result of which oversight responsibility in areas that are as diverse as they are plentiful. Over the next five weeks, the subcommittee will be examining a number of issues relevant to ensuring the readiness of the Armed Forces and the effective management of the Department of Defense and the four services. In addition to today's discussion on military readiness programs, the subcommittee's agenda for this session includes on March 23rd, a hearing on Defense Department financial management policies and practice, on April 1st, a hearing on issues related to military installations and the department's budget request for military construction, on April 6th, a hearing to examine Defense Department's acquisition policies.

We have a great deal of work ahead in this session and I'm looking forward to getting started. Our focus this afternoon will be to discuss key military readiness programs of the services. These include programs that support operation and maintenance of ships, aircraft, tanks and related systems, trained personnel, provide for logistics and maintain base facilities. I am looking forward to candid assessments from each of the witnesses on the current status of these programs and their assessment on how these programs are supporting the overall readiness of the services today.

The president has proposed a $102.6 billion request for the readiness programs of the Active and Reserve components for Fiscal Year 2005. This is a 5.1 percent real increase over current spending plan for Fiscal Year 2004. While we have received the services' list of requirements for Fiscal Year 2005 that were not included in the budget request, I am particularly encouraged to see that the president was able to meet over 96 percent of the funding requirements for the coming fiscal year for each of the services with his budget proposal.

Given the challenges facing the military today to maintain a fully ready force while defending the homeland, fighting the war on terrorism and supporting the transition to peaceful democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan, I believe this request is right on the mark. We will be specifically interested to learn from the witnesses today their assessment of how the president's budget request for Fiscal Year 2005 will support readiness programs and what the potential implications would be of any reduction in the president's request.

In addition to your thoughts on the budget for readiness programs, we will also be interested in learning about the progress that each of your services has made in resetting units that have returned to their home stations from deployment in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Finally, we look forward to hearing your views on any long-term readiness issues that could develop as a result of the sustained deployment of military units for contingency operations.

I am convinced that we must support the department's manpower enhancement initiatives. With Active Component-Reserve Component rebalancing and the military to civilian conversion initiative, we can fully maximize the talents and skills of at least 70,000 service members that are resident today within the Active Reserve and National Guard. We simply cannot afford to have today's servicemen and women serving in billets and occupational specialties that are not essential for the 21st century challenges.

Further, I believe that time is of the essence. The cost of not implementing these initiatives are simply too high. Every day, someone decides either to continue in the service or to seek relevance in the growing civilian economy. We have such a tremendously capable group of men and women in uniform and I don't want to lose them. The Defense Department's initiatives will greatly increase the readiness, responsibility and flexibility of the force. For me, this is the bottom line.

I look forward to each of the witnesses taking a moment to share their views on these initiatives. We are privileged to have testifying before us a panel representing each of the services. All are exceptionally qualified officers joining us today. General George W. Casey, Jr., vice-chief of staff, United States Army, Admiral Michael G. Mullen, vice chief of Naval Operations, United States Navy, General T. Michael Moseley, vice chief of staff, United States Air Force and Lieutenant General Jan C. Huly, deputy commandant of the Marine Corps for Plans, Policies and Operations, United States Marine Corps. Many thanks to each of you for joining us today.

And now I turn to the distinguished ranking member who I said some nice things about before you got here. But welcome, Senator Akaka.

SEN. ENSIGN: I think what we'll do is maybe have another brief round of questions for those who want to stay, but try to get the generals out of here as quickly as possible. I just want to follow up-first of all I want to thank you. You know, in the round of BRAC, we're going to preserve Pine Bluff, but I understand some other bases in Arkansas are going to close, so I appreciate you all -- (laughter, cross talk.)

MR. : We just have one other one left. (Laughs.)

SEN. ENSIGN: But anyway, what I want to follow up on-first of all, I want to remind-because I think we always have to remind ourselves. And the two meetings that I had earlier this week, we talked a little about this. We have to constantly remind ourselves that the taxpayers deserve good stewardship. The primary function of the federal government is the defense of our country. And to that end, we need to do everything that we can to fund the services in the way that they need to be funded, but I just want to constantly remind all of you when you bring things to us that you have scrubbed it in every possible way that you can scrub it.

Admiral Mullen, this is just a reminder because you did say-I remember earlier in your testimony where you said, you know, that there is no fat in readiness. There's fat in everything, okay. The total number may not be fat, but there's fat in every kind of program that we have within the federal government, just like there is in the private sector.

We constantly have to be looking and challenging ourselves, how can we do it better, more efficiently, less money? Sometimes we need to spend more money, but we constantly need the reminder that these are the taxpayers' dollars that they worked hard for, and we want to do our best with them. That's just a brief commentary.

When-I do want to follow up just a little bit along the lines of the follow-up, what Senator Cornyn talked about, because there were statements made in the press this last week about that we sent in our military into Iraq without being prepared. And, as a matter of fact, the-there was a quote here. Yeah, just basically we're, quote, "not prepared for the present conflict in Iraq." I had a little trouble with that statement, considering how extraordinarily well our military did.

But could each of you-if they weren't prepared and then we don't give them the money, the $67 billion-you know, we found some-there's always deficiencies, I mean, no matter what. If we go in right now, we go in 10 years from now, we're always going to find areas of weakness. I mean, that's part of a military conflict in doing analysis. Were we weaker where we could have been stronger? But could each of you address, first of all, did you feel that the services were doing their utmost, along with the Congress? Whether we were prepared for the conflict in Iraq. Just a brief comment from each one of you on that.