Committee grills Army leaders on cuts

Concerned the Army's fiscal 2007 budget does not adequately address operational and strategic needs, House lawmakers Wednesday grilled Army leaders on a proposal to cut the number of planned combat brigades by nearly 10 percent while the service continues heavy deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Criticism came from both sides of the aisle, including one of the House Armed Services Committee's staunchest supporters of the administration's military policies.

"As a layman, I read that as a budget-driven change," said Armed Services Tactical Air And Land Forces Subcommittee Chairman Curt Weldon, R-Pa., who added that it is the committee's duty to "scrutinize" Pentagon decisions.

The Defense Department's budget request -- including the combat brigade cut -- hinders the Army's ability to transform itself into a more nimble fighting force while responding to current and future threats, said House Armed Services ranking member Ike Skelton, D-Mo. "The Army is stretched thin and there is a potential that we could break the force if we are not careful," Skelton said.

The proposed cut in Army combat brigades came as part of the Quadrennial Defense Review, a study of the Pentagon's strategy and objectives released just days before the fiscal 2007 budget request.

The study recommends keeping 18 to 20 combat brigades ready for deployment at all times. Having a total of 70 combat brigades, as proposed in the 2007 budget, would meet the low end of that readiness requirement, and give the Army the flexibility to surge temporarily to 36 to 38 deployed combat brigades, Army Secretary Francis Harvey said.

While the decision was "primarily strategic driven," Harvey acknowledged that creating 70 combat brigades cost less than 77. But even if the Army had unlimited funds, Chief of Staff Peter Schoomaker said he would not necessarily recommend pouring more money into the combat units.

Instead, Schoomaker argued, the new plan allows the service to shift Guard and active-duty personnel into high-demand specialties, such as special operations and combat support. A different world, Schoomaker said, "requires a different kind of Army."

Recruiting and retention campaigns also took center stage during the hearing, with lawmakers concerned that the Army in fiscal 2005 accepted significantly more recruits without high school diplomas than in previous years. In the active-duty Army alone, the percentage of recruits who graduated high school dropped from 92 percent in 2004 to 87 percent in 2005, 3 points below the Defense Department goal, said Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee Chairman John McHugh, R-N.Y.

Personnel problems may be exacerbated by what McHugh said are proposed cuts in the Army's 2007 recruiting accounts. Harvey countered that the Army's objective is to achieve the Defense Department's recruitment goals. He added that the service's recruiting budget will be supplanted by the upcoming wartime supplemental spending request.