Space

AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MS. FURSE

Ms. FURSE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Ms. Furse: Page 40, line 22, strike `$9,526,918,000' and insert `$9,376,918,000'.

Mr. MURTHA [during the reading]. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be considered as read and printed in the Record.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania?

There was no objection.

Ms. FURSE. Mr. Chairman, I stand before you today in support of the Furse-Penny amendment. Our original amendment would have reduced funding for Ballistic Missile Defense by 10 percent--$329 million--from a little over $3 to $2.7 billion.

It is our desire that all of the considerable savings from this amendment be devoted to deficit reduction and we hope the appropriators will share that opinion in conference.

We arrived at the $2.7 billion BMD spending level because it is consistent with the findings of Defense Secretary Aspin's Bottom-Up Review, which was just released September 1. The review, in Mr. Aspin's words, is `the vehicle by which my Department will focus on the new dangers and opportunities of this post-cold war world.' It is the document which projects our national defense needs for the fiscal year 1995-99 period.

The $3 billion funding level for BMD in this will was established in the authorization by the Armed Services Committee in its late July markup. Unfortunately, our committee did not have the benefit of the Bottom-Up Review's findings at that time.

In this review, Secretary Aspin stated new funding goals for BMD , and called for `a redirected BMD program that will provide a robust theater missile defense capability.' The review calls for spending $18 billion over 5 years on BMD . A majority, $12 billion, would be spent on TMD. That is an average of $2.4 billion a year for TMD.

In addition, we are also concerned that at the present level of spending--over $3 billion--we are funding the development of systems that we cannot afford in the outyears. Earlier this year, the head of the Strategic Defense Initiative Office testified that the $1.8 billion in the administration fiscal year 1994 request for TMD would grow to an average of $3.3 billion over fiscal years 1995-99. The increase is a result of TMD's expected transition from research into the production phase later in the decade. Because it is universally acknowledged that production is more costly than research, it would be irresponsible of us to incubate more scientific BMD eggs than we can actually hatch. BMD supporters and opponents alike do not want to waste scarce Federal funds on programs that will end up being cancelled.

If we are to arrive at the Bottom-Up Review's recommended level of an average $2.4 billion a year for fiscal years 1995-99, then $1.3-$1.5 billion is the proper level for fiscal year 1994, based on the ratio provided by SDIO.

The other categories in BMD are being funded at steady levels. Those are national missile defense, research and support, and follow-on technologies; they add up to $1.2 billion. So, we add to that $1.2 billion the proper TMD funding level of $1.3-$1.5 for a total of $2.5-$2.7 billion. We chose $2.7 billion to give maximum flexibility to program planners.

The chairman of the Defense Subcommittee expressed his willingness to work with me on this amendment and has indicated that he will accept our amendment, with a change to a $150 million reduction in total BMD spending. I appreciate his interest in this issue and I look forward to continuing to build on this success next year. With the impact of compound interest, the $150 million we are saving today is actually a saving of $1.15 billion over 30 years. I am proud of what we have accomplished today and I urge my colleagues to support the Furse-Penny amendment to reduce BMD funding by $150 million in fiscal year 1994.

[Page: H7290]

Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Ms. FURSE. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.

Mr. MURTHA. Mr. Chairman, we accept the amendment.

Ms. FURSE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the committee for accepting the amendment.

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Oregon [Ms. Furse].

The amendment was agreed to.