DoD faces Democrat curbs

The Republican defeat in the US mid-term elections is likely to lead to stricter controls on Pentagon spending

A phased withdrawal from Iraq, rebuilding the readiness of US forces, and tougher controls on the US Department of Defense are among the priorities of the Democratic politicians who will lead the Congressional committees that oversee US defence spending.

The Democrats' mid-term sweep of the US Congress, which led to the ousting of defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld, will test the party's ability to balance its resolve to control Pentagon spending against its new-found determination to show it is not weak on defence.

Initial statements by the two men who will take over leadership of the key Congressional panels from Republicans illustrate that balancing act, both making clear they support a strong US military, but want more oversight and investigation of Pentagon activities.

The phrase "power of the purse" is an understatement when it comes to the Congressional committees that oversee US defence spending, for they define and control in excruciating detail what the Pentagon and its armed services can buy and what they should pay.

Michigan Democrat Carl Levin, a long-time critic of Pentagon spending and early opponent of the Iraq invasion, will take over the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) from John Warner, who had expected to pass the chairmanship to fellow Republican John McCain. Missouri Democrat Ike Skelton will take over the House Armed Services Committee (HASC), unseating Republican Duncan Hunter, a tireless advocate of "Buy America" and technology transfer controls.

In their first press conferences last week, Levin and Skelton stuck to the same script, calling for a phased "redeployment" of US troops from Iraq, the rebuilding of ground forces worn down by the high operational tempo, a review of whether US forces are properly sized and equipped, and over it all a greater emphasis on oversight of Pentagon activities.

Both avoided getting into details, but Lexington Institute analyst Loren Thompson thinks it unlikely the Democrats would make major changes without close consultation with the general staffs. Big-ticket items such as the Lockheed Martin F-22 and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter could suffer as Democrats shift spending to programmes that directly benefit troops on the ground, he says.

Levin, meanwhile, is "really in command of details" on various programmes, says Teal Group analyst Richard Aboulafia. Democrats in both the Senate and the House have been sceptical of the Bush administration's plans for the militarisation of space and have opposed its missile-defence plans.

Under the US system, one legislator such as Arizona's McCain in the Senate and Pennsylvania's Curt Weldon in the House of Representatives can have much power. McCain used his seniority on the SASC to raise enough questions about the US Air Force's proposed lease of 100 Boeing KC-767 tankers to scuttle the deal. His belief that such deals restrict Congressional power lead to restructuring of the Boeing/SAIC team's contract as lead integrator of the US Army's Future Combat System and renegotiation of Lockheed's commercial contract to supply C-130Js.

On the House side, Weldon championed the Bell Boeing V-22 tiltrotor, partly produced in his Philadelphia district, at times forcing the DoD to budget more for the Osprey than it had requested. Through his chairmanship of a sub­committee, he was able use the Congressional maxim "go along to get along", in effect forcing others to support his projects if they wanted theirs voted through. Weldon lost in the elections.

Incoming Democrats will wield similar power. Skelton is viewed as a staunch defender of strategic air power as the Northrop Grumman B-2 is based in his home state, at Missouri's Whiteman AFB. Meanwhile, Hawaiian Democrat Neil Abercrombie, in line to chair the House subcommittee on tactical air and land forces, has concerns about planned spending on fighters. Seattle-area representative Norm Dicks, sometimes jokingly introduced as "the gentleman from Boeing, er, Washington", is eligible to take over the House defence appropriations subcommittee.

When it comes to the US defence budget, the HASC and SASC are the "authorisers" - they decide the basic spending priorities and whether or not a given programme can go ahead. Another pair of panels, the appropriating committees, sign off on the dollars to be spent and have similarly enormous power. They can simply excise the spending for a programme in closed hearings or last-minute compromise sessions.

But a new dynamic comes with the new Congressional committees. SASC chairman Levin has vowed more oversight and Skelton has said the HASC will reform the oversight and investigations subcommittee disbanded in 1994.

The Democrats do not take over Congress until January, but the House and Senate have unfinished business they will try to conclude. This could include increased funding for aeronautics research and reapproving the research and development tax credit, says the Aerospace Industries Association.

But once Democratic chairmen are in place, Republicans will be helpless to defend the Bush administration in hearings likely to focus on Iraq war spending and Pentagon corruption and inefficiency.

Source: Flight International