The OMB objected to numerous provisions in the HASC-passed FY13 NDAA. HOW DOES THE SASC BILL MATCH UP?
“the Administration has serious concerns with provisions that would ... (from the Statement of Administration Policy on the HASC version of HR 4310)
“... violate the Budget Control Act of 2011.”
“... impinge on the President’s ability to implement the New START Treaty and to set U.S. nuclear weapons policy.”
“... continue and in some cases expand unwise restrictions that would constrain the flexibility that our Nation’s armed forces and counterterrorism professionals need to deal with evolving threats.”
“... prohibit DoD from spending any funds to propose or plan for additional rounds of BRAC.”
“... adopt unnecessary and ill-advised policies that would inhibit the ability of same-sex couples to marry or enter a recognized relationship under State law.”
“... jeopardize the implementation of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) to missile defense and limit the ability to protect the United States, deployed U.S. Forces, allies, and partners.”
“... prohibit the use of funds for the MEADS program.”
“... limit the President’s ability to determine U.S. military requirements in Europe, negotiate treaties and otherwise conduct diplomacy, and maintain the confidentiality of sensitive diplomatic communications.”
“... require DoD to prepare and submit a plan to augment the presence of the U.S. Fifth Fleet in the Middle East and to conduct military activities in that region.”
“... require the President to create a new unified combatant command for medical operations of the military health system.”
“... would limit the Secretary of Defense’s options to provide security for members of the Armed Forces and military installations and facilities in Afghanistan and would undermine the coalition’s efforts to encourage Afghan assumption of sovereign duties.”
Included in the SASC Bill?
No. The SASC bill actually cuts FY13 DoD spending by $200 million from the budget request.
No. The SASC bill contains little language on START.
No. The SASC bill does prohibit funding for new prison construction in the U.S., but does not prohibit transfers from Guantanamo Bay.
Yes. The SASC bill does not authorize funds for future BRAC rounds.
No. This will be a heated issue in conference.
No. The SASC majority supports EPAA.
Yes. No.
does follow the HASC’s lead in prohibit- ing funding for further Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) rounds or comple- tion of the troubled Medium Extended Air Defense System.
SASC staffers were assured by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) that the FY13 NDAA would be brought to the Senate floor in June. Reid, however, has a track record of postponing action on the NDAA if debate is projected to last longer than a few days.
Given the election year climate in Wash- ington, any Republican efforts to offer amendments on controversial issues like funding increases or gay marriage will probably cause Reid to withhold action on the NDAA yet again.
On the FY13 defense appropriations side, the House Appropriations Committee (HAC) completed its work on the bill May 17 in an open session. During the open markup, the bill was heavily praised by committee members on both sides of the aisle, although some Democrats were critical of overall DoD spending levels at a time when the FY13 Budget Resolution authored by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) would cut funding for domestic programs in educa- tion, health care, and transportation.
No. No.
No. The SASC bill requires a report on security contractors, but there is no prohibition.
The FY13 Defense Appropriations Act was expected to come to the House floor for debate the week of June 19 after a one-week recess for the chamber. The SAC Defense Subcommittee appeared to be preparing for a markup of the bill in mid-June. This timeline would put the appropriators about one month ahead of schedule compared with a typical appropriations cycle.
Content provided by
ASC.ARMY.MIL
163
FOR THE RECORD
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170
