Office of Management and Budget,
Washington, DC., December 15, 1995
(This statement has been coordinated by OMB with the concerned agencies.)
H.R. 1530--National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 Conference Report, Senators Thurmond (R) SC and Nunn (D) GA.
If the Conference Report on H.R. 1530 were presented to the President in its current form, the President would veto the bill.
The Conference Report on H.R. 1530, filed on December 15, 1995, would restrict the Administration's ability to carry out our national security objectives and implement key Administration programs. Certain provisions also raise serious constitutional is sues by restricting the President's powers as Commander-in-Chief and foreign policy powers.
The bill would require deployment by 2003 of a costly missile defense system to defend the U.S. from a long-range missile threat which the Intelligence Community does not believe will ever materialize in the coming decade. By forcing an unwarranted and unnecessary National Missile Defense (NMD) deployment decision now, the bill would needlessly incur tens of billions of dollars in missile defense costs and force the Department of Defense (DOD) prematurely to lock into a specific technological option. In addition, by directing that the NMD be `operationally effective' in defending all 50 states (including Hawaii and Alaska), the bill would likely require a multiple-site NMD architecture that cannot be accommodated within the terms of the ABM Treaty as now written. By setting U.S. policy on a collision course with the ABM Treaty, the bill puts at risk continued Russian implementation of the START I Treaty and Russian ratification of START II, two treaties which together wi ll reduce the number of U.S. and Russian strategic nuclear warheads by two-thirds from Cold War levels, significantly lowering the threat to U.S. national security.
The bill also imposes restrictions on the President's ability to conduct contingency operations that are essential to the national interest. The restrictions on funding to commence a contingency operation and the requirement to submit a supplemental re quest within a certain time period to continue an operation are unwarranted restrictions on the authority of the President. Moreover, by requiring a Presidential certification to assign U.S. Armed Forces under United Nations (UN) operational of tactical c ontrol, the bill infringes on the President's constitutional authority.
In addition, the Administration has serious concerns about the following: onerous certification requirements for the use of Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction funds, as well as subcaps on specified activities and elimination of funding for the Def ense Enterprise Fund; restrictions on the Technology Reinvestment Program, restrictions on retirement of U.S. strategic delivery systems; restrictions on DOD's ability to execute disaster relief, demining, and military-to-military contact programs; directed procurement of specific ships at specific shipyards, without a valid industrial base rationale; provisions requiring the discharge of military personnel who are HIV-positive; restrictions on the ability of the Secretary of Defense to manage DOD effectively, including the abolition of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity C onflict and the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation; and finally the Administration continues to object to the restrictions on the ability of female service members or dependents from obtaining privately funded abortions in U.S. military hospitals abroad.
While the bill is unacceptable to the Administration, there are elements of the authorization bill which are beneficial to the Department, including important changes in acquisition law, new authorities to improve military housing, and essential pay ra ises for military personnel. The Administration calls on the Congress to correct the unacceptable flaws in H.R. 1530 so that these beneficial provisions may be enacted. The President especially calls on the Congress to provide for pay raises and cost of l iving adjustments for military personnel prior to departure for the Christmas recess.
[from the Congressional Record, December 19, 1995]