Hill help required

ANOTHER TIGHT BUDGET REQUEST HAS GUARD AGAIN LOOKING TO CONGRESS FOR NEEDED FUNDING

After supplying the National Guard with the biggest budget increase in memory last year, the Defense Department this year His saying "no more."

At $9.7 billion, the budget proposed for the Army National Guard in 2004 is a mere 2 percent increase over the $9.5 billion budget approved for this year. That compares with last year's 13 percent increase. With inflation factored in-the Defense Department projects it will be about 1.9 percent next year-the proposed budget will have essentially no more buying power than the current budget does.

Fiscal 2004 "will be a tough one," said Maureen Wylie, the Army National Guard's chief resources management officer. "There's a lot of risk in this budget."

The Air Guard fares slightly better At just under $6.7 billion, the budget it has submitted to Congress for 2004 is about 4 percent more than the $6.4 billion funding plan the Air Guard operates under now.

"It's executable but tight," said Col. Willard Windsor, the Air Guard's deputy director for financial management.

The increase sought for the Air Guard is a bit less than the 4.4 percent increase Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld is seeking for the military overall for 2004.

Rumsfeld's budget comes to $379.9 billion. Of that, $30 billion-- about 8 percent-is earmarked for all of the reserve components.

The "risk" in the Army Guard's penny-pinching spending plan is that costs pushed up by war or inflation could easily exceed funds provided, Wylie said. If that happens, base operations may have to be curtailed and training may have to be trimmed.

And unless Congress intervenes, the budget will not buy new helicopters, humvees, night vision goggles or other needed equipment the Army Guard needs, she said.

Nor does the Army Guard budget allow for hiring additional full-time Guardsmen or civilian technicians-the National Guard's top priority.

The Air Guard's budget, by contrast, provides money for hiring additional full-- time support personnel, and appears sufficient to cover the rising costs and avoid detrimental program cuts, Windsor said.

Wylie and Windsor both describe their respective spending plans as "a peacetime budget," echoing the description Rumsfeld provided when he presented the full defense budget to the House and Senate.

The only problem with that is the National Guard and the rest of the U.S. military, even then, were in the midst of a major mobilization for war.

"We're going to have to come in for a lot more money in a supplemental, there's no doubt about it," Rumsfeld told the House Armed Services Committee.

The Defense Department is also spending about $1 million a month fighting al-Qaeda forces in Afghanistan, and that, too, will have to be reimbursed through a supplemental appropriation.

On March 27, President George W. Bush sent a supplemental wartime appropriation request to Capitol Hill for $74.7 billion to cover budget needs for Operation Iraqi Freedom and the war against terrorism this year. More money will need congressional approval for operations in Iraq in 2004.

Of that, $62.6 billion was for the military and the rest for items ranging from foreign aid to homeland security. The biggest chunk is $53.4 billion for military operations in Iraq, including the cost of activating and deploying National Guardsmen.

The House Appropriations Committee passed its version of the supplemental April 1, by a vote of 59 to 0. Similar to the president's request, the House increased the total supplemental by $3 billion before sending it to the Senate.

Senate appropriators added $4 billion to the request and passed it 29 to 0. Both the House and Senate passed versions of this bill.

The president's request was based on the assumption that war with Iraq would last 30 days, said White House budget chief Mitch Daniels. Bush "reserves the right" to ask for more if the war goes on longer, he said.

Within the House version, $58 million was pegged for Army National Guard and $85 million was earmarked for reimbursements for states whose Guard forces continue to protect airports and other transportation sites.

Tight as they are, the Guard's 2004 spending plans include money for a pay raise that should please most personnel.

On average, Guardsmen would receive raises of 3.9 percent. But some soldiers will get raises of as much as 6 percent, Wylie said.

The higher raises are targeted to E-5s through E-9s in an effort to push midgrade and senior noncommissioned officers' pay closer to pay in the civilian sector. The budget also includes higher than average raises for selected warrant officers.

Air Guard pay would increase an average of 4.1 percent under the 2004 spending plan, Windsor said. And like its Army counterpart, the Air Guard is targeting mid-level and senior NCOs for somewhat higher raises.

The Army Guard budget also includes a bit more money to offset the rising cost of uniforms, Wylie said. And $423 million is allocated for increased training at schools and in special exercises.

Both Guard components are seeking modest funding increases to cover the rising cost of flying hours and ground training miles. But in both cases, the increases are just enough to cover "price growth-it costs more for a gallon of gas and it costs more for parts," Wylie said.

Air Guard flying hours hold steady under the 2004 spending plan, Windsor said.

The same is true for the Army Guard. The budget pays for 9.5 flying hours per helicopter pilot for 2004-the same as in 2003. The budget also allows 177 miles for MI main battle tanks, 180 miles for M2 Bradley fighting vehicles, and 231 miles for M3 Cavalry fighting vehicles-- same as this year's budget.

That's about as good as the news gets for the Army Guard in the 2004 budget. Other parts of the budget are simply bleak.

Operations and Maintenance, or O&M, spending for the Army Guard, for example, actually declines under the 2004 spending plan. O&M this year is funded at $4.239 billion, but drops to $4.211 billion in the 2004 budget. That's going to make it hard for the Army Guard to keep bases operating at the same levels they are operating at during 2003, Wylie said. The O&M account pays for such basics as water, electricity and phone service.

"We're very concerned about risk in base operations," Wylie said. "That's going to be our big challenge. If we fall short, we may have to divert training dollars to keep the doors open" at Guard bases.

The O&M picture is much brighter for the Air Guard. The 2004 budget requests $4.4 billion for operations and maintenance, Windsor said. That's up from $4.1 billion being spent this year, and should be enough to forestall the kind of cuts threatening the Army Guard.

That pattern repeats-the Army Guard suffers while the Air Guard holds steady-on the matters of hiring more full-time support personnel and transformation.

Although increasing the number of full-time Guardsmen and technicians has been a top priority for both components of the National Guard for several years, the 2004 budget does not permit the Army Guard to continue hiring, Wylie said.

The Air Guard budget has enough money to hire 413 full-time Guard members, 311 full-time technicians and 97 civilian employees, Windsor said.

As it has repeatedly in recent years, the Army Guard will appeal to Congress for extra money to hire additional full-time personnel.

A "very generous" congressional addon to the 2003 budget enabled the Army Guard to hire 826 full-time Guardsman and 487 full-time civilian technicians this year, Wylie said. And in 2002, lawmakers approved a $36 million plus-up to hire 724 full-time uniformed Guardsmen and 487 full-time technicians.

Gen. Eric Shinseki, Army chief of staff, told the Senate Armed Services Committee Feb. 25 that "the Army recognizes additional full-time support authorizations as the number-one priority of the Army National Guard."

More full-time personnel are needed to ensure that Guard units can "meet everincreasing demands with trained and ready units," he said. Between now and 2011, the Army plans to add 13,131 more Guard full-time personnel, pushing the total up to 59.721, Shinseki said, or about 71 percent of the figure the Army said the Guard needs to maintain minimum readiness.

He didn't mention, however, that the 2004 budget doesn't include money for hiring added full-timers. It will be up to Army Guard officials to deliver that news.

"If Congress wants to improve the readiness of the Army National Guard, we would ask that they support our full-time manning requirement yet again this year," Wylie said.

In early February when he unveiled the 2004 budget, Rumsfeld described it as "transformational," and some elements of transformation are evident in the Guard budgets as well.

The Air Guard includes funding to complete assembly of the Air Force's the first blended wing. "That's a wonderful example of transformation," Windsor said. The 116th Air Control Wing (STATE ROUNDUP, page ) is a merger of the Air Guard's 116th Bomb Wing and the activeduty Air Force's 93rd Air Control Wing. Based at Robins Air Force Base, Ga., the wing flies E-8C joint STARS ground surveillance planes.

Guard and active-duty personnel will be "integrated across numerous functional areas," from flying to maintenance to administration. "This is a forerunner for transformation. You will see additional instances of this in the future," Windsor said.

The Air Guard also stands to benefit from an Air Force transformation initiative disclosed in the 2004 budget.

In the new fiscal year, the Air Force is to start retiring 114 fighters and 115 refueling tankers and airlift planes. The retirements, which are to continue through 2008, are intended to save nearly $21 billion, which then is to be spent on readiness, personnel and new systems such as unmanned aerial combat vehicles.

Windsor said he is hopeful that planes retired by the active-duty Air Force will be handed down to the Air Guard, enabling the Guard to retire even older aircraft.

Rumsfeld's transformation plans are more ominous for the Army Guard. The 2004 budget suddenly casts doubt on an Army Guard modernization plan that seemed to be a sure thing-the transformation of a Pennsylvania Guard mechanized brigade into the Guard's first Stryker brigade.

Eight-wheeled Stryker armored fighting vehicles are the centerpiece of new lighter, more deployable Army brigades.

More than 300 Strykers were scheduled to be delivered before the end of 2007 to the 56th Brigade of the 28th Infantry Division (Mechanized) in Pennsylvania. But in budget documents delivered to Congress in February, Rumsfeld said he is reconsidering the decision to convert the Pennsylvania brigade and a brigade in Hawaii into Stryker brigades.

News that the Strykers may be in jeopardy leaked from the Pentagon in January, provoking a furious response from Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, and other lawmakers. But Rumsfeld hasn't backed down.

Shinseki, the Army chief, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that while "the Army has resources six Stryker brigade combat teams-the secretary of defense has only authorized the procurement of the first four." The Army may have to come up with a new plan for brigades five and six, he said.

Rumsfeld's 2004 budget includes $955 million to be spent buying 301 Strykers, and $46 million to continue Stryker development. The fate of the Guard's 56th Brigade "will continue to be reviewed," Rumsfeld said.

Other elements of Army transformation included in the 2004 budget include $1.7 billion to continue developing a family of future combat systems, $1 billion to continue work on the Comanche helicopter, now in its 20th year of development, and $456 million to develop a replacement for the now-canceled Crusader artillery system.

But it will almost certainly be a decade or more before any of that transformational equipment finds its way into the Army National Guard. "The Guard is typically a legacy force," Wylie said.

Ordinarily, annual defense budgets produced by the Pentagon include few new weapons for the National Guard, and 2004 is no exception. So as it does most years, the Guard is counting on Congress to fill out the sparse procurement account.

Black Hawk helicopters are at the top of the Army Guard's list of equipment that is needed but not budgeted.

Last year the House and Senate added enough money to the defense budget to buy the Army Guard 10 Black Hawks.

But economic times were better then. Now, confronted with deficits, war costs, tax cuts and other economic woes, it is unclear how many Black Hawks Congress is likely to support. "Any would be appreciated," Wylie said.

Last year Congress added $30 million to the 2003 budget for buying new equipment for all Guard and reserve components, and the Army Guard is hoping for similar support for 2004. Its list of needed equipment runs from SINCGARS (Advanced Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System ) radios and night vision goggles to humvees, medium tactical vehicles and large equipment haulers.

"It's not exotic stuff, but it provides immediate benefit for soldier readiness," Wylie said. "We're short something like 13,000 humvees."

As Congress prepares to take up requests for humvees, helicopters and other equipment, Rumsfeld has asked House and Senate members to also consider some fundamental questions about National Guard force structure.

'After Vietnam, the Defense Department put 100 percent of certain skills in the reserves so they would have to be called up for war," he said. But the repeated callups in recent years have raised questions about whether that is still a good idea.

With tens of thousands of Guard members called to active duty for war with Iraq, members of Congress have begun asking some of the same questions.

The Defense Department "has mobilized practically all of the Guard members in my state for a year," Sen. Jack Reed, D-- R.I., said in February. "What happens a year from now if people don't want to revolunteer?"

"Alabama has the highest per capita activation in the country-and they are proud to serve-but are they being overused?" asked Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala. "I'm concerned about the force mix."

"Callups are depleting the ranks of first responders," said Sen. Hillary Clinton, DN.Y Many police and fire fighters are also Guard members, she said. Recent activations have also left the U.S. Customs Service and the Federal Emergency Management Agency short-handed, Clinton said.

"There is no question about their professionalism and readiness, but there is a question about their obligation," said Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla.

Guard personnel are being used "a lot more in recent years than I expected," Shinseki told the senators. "After this set of mobilizations, we will have to look at the force mix."

Rumsfeld said he may ask Congress to transfer personnel slots for some of the most frequently activated troops from the Guard to the active-duty military.

Some Guard officials are wary. Keeping needed capabilities in the reserve components "has been working well for a long time," Wylie said. And even with the operations tempo stuck on high, "there has not been a mission where a National Guard unit has not shown up when it has been called," she said.

William Matthews is a Springfield, Va., freelance writer who specializes in military matters.

Copyright National Guard Association of the United States Apr 2003
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved