I would not characterize this as a slush fund. I would characterize it as a management reserve for each of these important programs, and the money that Congress appropriated and authorized is needed at some point for these programs. We have taken the money away. That means at some point in the future we have to restore it. I would also say to the gentleman that we are going through a period where we are reducing the number of programs that we have, we are trying to change the architecture, we are trying to, in essence, invest in more capable systems for the future so that we will be able to save some money. I would argue that all of the money would have been legally spent on the programs as required, eventually, and there is no indication of waste, fraud, or abuse.
Norman D. Dicks: “I would not characterize this as a slush fund. I would characterize it as a management reserve for each of these…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing funding and management reserves for important programs.
Share
More from Norman D. Dicks
I was a very strong proponent of the C-17 even when Douglas Aircraft in Long Beach was building this airplane. I had a chance to go there when they were doing the wooden mock-ups and when they brought in the load masters, who made it such…
I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey), the ranking member of the Foreign Operations Subcommittee.
One issue that didn't come up today was this question of what are we going to do at the end of this year with sequestration, and there was some discussion of an amendment that didn't happen because of points of order and other possible…
I demand a recorded vote. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio will be postponed.