|
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Would Soldiers Really Have Run Out of Funding?
From the Hill:
"No American troop will go without … just so the most liberal activists in the country can be quieted," said a senior House Democratic aide. "If it means Democrats in Congress get tea bags and hate mail, so be it — we will not be irresponsible with the lives of our troops."
I have to call a spade a spade here- that's a total cop-out and disingenous. This CRS report- distributed to every single congressional office, and presumably read by the responsible aide who's quoted here, shows that further delays would not have put soldiers in danger. CRS found that the Army had many options to stretch their funding well into the summer, including invoking the Feed and Forage act, which has been used in the past to finance operations while Congress worked on supplemental appropriations bills.
I've pasted below the fold the section of the report that's most important, and added some bolding (from page 15).
In the mean time, in a memo to the Senate Budget Committee on March 28,2007, the Congressional Research Service estimated that the Army had sufficient money in its Operation and Maintenance accounts to carry on activities at the then expected rate of obligations through May and into June of 2007. The memo also calculated that the Army could carry on operations longer if the Defense Departmentwere to use part of $7.5 billion of general and special war-related transfer authorityavailable in FY2007 to shift money to the Army. The CRS memo also noted,however, that the Army may very well decide that it must slow down non-war-related operations before money would run out by, for example, limiting facility maintenance CRS-15
5 Congressional Research Service Memorandum to the Senate Budget Committee, "How
long can the Army finance is operational needs in FY2007 in advance of supplemental
appropriations?" by Amy Belasco, March 28, 2007. The memo was released by the
requester on April 2. It is available on request to congressional offices.
and repairs, delaying equipment overhauls, restricting travel and meetings, and,
perhaps, slowing down training.
These CRS calculations were based on Army estimates of monthly obligationsthat have since been updated. More recent Army data, discussed above, show obligation of $8.7 billion in March, in part due to the surge of troops to Iraq. This reduced the remaining balance of operation and maintenance funds in Army accounts. Based on recent reports about the rate of obligations, Army O&M funds will run out by about the end of May unless the Army slows down the pace of operations or receives transfers of funds from other defense accounts. The Army now plans both steps. *
Additional transfers of funds into Army operating accounts may also be possible. To date, including the recent request to transfer $1.6 billion to the Army, the Defense Department has requested $4.1 billion of transfers. This leaves a balance of $3.4 billion, including general and special war-related transfer authority. At the rate the Army plans for the final few months of the year, that would cover about three weeks of additional operations. Some of that authority may be needed, however, to restore funds to accounts that were sources of earlier transfers. The $1.6 billion in Navy and Air Force personnel funding, in particular, may need to be restored. That would use a large share of the remaining authority. Congress may expand the amount available, in either a stopgap funding measure or in a full year FY2007 supplemental by restoring funds. The now-vetoed conference agreement includes a provision that restores about $1.6 billion of funding in earlier requested transfers. The Defense Department may or may not decide it is prudent to request additional transfers of funds to the Army in anticipation of future provisions that would restore earlier transfers of funds.
It may also be possible for the Defense Department to extend Army operations by invoking the Feed and Forage Act, 41 U.S.C. 11, which permits the Defense Department to make purchases for some purposes in advance of appropriations. The Defense Department has used the Feed and Forage Act in the past to finance operations when supplemental appropriations were delayed. Congress might also expand the amount of transfer authority available for the Army by approving in the FY2007 supplemental, or in a stopgap funding bill, a measure to restore funds that were sources of earlier transfers — including, possibly, the $1.6 billion in Navy and Air Force personnel funds that DOD has requested be shifted to the Army.
*Note (mine, not CRS)- this suggests that Congress could have succeeded in affecting the course of the war. A longer wait for the supplemental could have decreased the pace at which war spending occurred. Soldiers would not have deprived of necessary materials, as much as the mission would have changed such that they needed these materials less.
Posted by Matt Lewis
|