House panel backs Defense spending, salary increases

Trying to defuse anxieties surrounding this year's crop of appropriations bills, Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., on Thursday brought a guest to the full committee session on Thursday: a musical, fin-flapping fish that sings "Don't Worry, Be Happy."

And with nearly $289 billion to spread around, who wouldn't be happy? Certainly not the bulk of House appropriators, who on Thursday gave voice-vote approval to the massive defense bill, which is more than $19 billion over current-year spending and $4 billion above the president's request.

Lewis said the bill would send the Pentagon "hurtling" into the future, helping to make a new generation of weapons and upgrading virtually the entire Defense Department, while providing a significant pay raise (3.7 percent) to military personnel.

Subcommittee Ranking Member John Murtha, D-Pa., also praised the contents of the bill but said for it to be complete, it would need the extra funds provided for the Kosovo military operation in the fiscal 2000 supplemental appropriations bill. That legislation, which passed the House in March, has languished in the Senate, though the two chambers are expected to iron out differences and attach defense spending to the conference reports of the military construction (H.R. 4425) and agriculture (H.R. 4461) spending bills for fiscal 2001.

Lawmakers offered no amendments to the defense bill, deferring any member requests for when the bill reaches the floor. But full committee Ranking Member David Obey, D-Wis., said he would oppose the legislation because the bill's large increase jeopardizes the passage of smaller bills funding domestic programs.

Obey called Lewis and Murtha "real pros," and said the bill as a whole was a good one. But he criticized both men for moving forward with funds for the Air Force's controversial F-22 program. The F-22 would receive the budget request of $3.96 billion under the bill.

Obey cited several independent studies that throw doubt on the program's effectiveness, and he questioned why Lewis and Murtha funded the program after last year's bold, but ill-fainted attempt, to axe its procurement money from the Pentagon budget.

Obey also criticized Congress and the White House for pushing the development of a ballistic missile defense system, saying neither side has fully justified why the United States needs it or what its possible consequences might be. The program is appropriated at $530 million, $130 million over the budget request.

According to figures released by the committee, the defense bill's major accounts include:

• $75.9 billion for military personnel, a $102 million increase over the budget request.
• $97.5 billion for operation and maintenance, a $1.2 billion increase over the budget request.
• $1.87 billion to help transform the Army into a more mobile, technologically advanced force, a $1.129 billion increase over the budget request.
• $61.5 billion for procurement, a $2.28 billion increase over the request.
• 40.1 billion for research and development, a $2.3 billion increase over the budget request.
• $12.1 billion for defense health programs, a $542 million increase over the budget request. The money includes an expansion of health benefits for military retirees, including a prescription drug benefit for those age 65 or over who qualify for Medicare.
• $2.4 billion for procurement of the National Guard and Reserve, an increase of $622 million over the budget request.