On the recordJune 10, 2015
Our committee strongly supports the Ohio class submarine. We have done it for years. Both the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Visclosky) and I not only serve on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and provide its leadership, but we have also supported this program on Energy and Water, which is the other part of the package. With respect, the gentleman from Virginia's amendment proposes to strike a provision of the bill, prohibits the transfer of funds to the national sea-based deterrence fund, a reserve established but not funded last year in the NDAA. We recognize this submarine will be expensive; however, the national sea-based deterrence fund will not make the submarine any less expensive, and it will not increase resources available to the Department of Defense. This Congress has an important responsibility to provide resources to all of our military services and the intelligence community. Under the structure of this special fund, the Secretary of Defense has the authority to divert dollars into this new fund from the Army, Marines, Air Force, Special Forces, missile defense, ISR, and other types of essential programs. This is the wrong approach. It removes, furthermore, congressional oversight from the Secretary of Defense. Secondly, if the President determines the Ohio class replacement is a must-fund platform, then the Navy should buy it, just as it has every other submarine in its inventory that our committee has supported.…
Source
govinfo.gov




