REPUBLICAN BUDGET PROPOSAL

[Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@igc.org>]

SENATE REPUBLICAN DEFENSE PLAN INCLUDES
FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL CUTS

by Lenny Siegel

 On December 5, two senior Republican members of the Senate
Armed Services Committee, John Warner (Virginia) and John McCain
(Arizona) proposed drastic changes in the Defense budget, ostensibly to
promote "readiness" at the expense of "non-defense" programs and "pork."
As a whole, it contains both good and bad ideas. On environmental issues,
it is unclear and potentially disastrous.

 First, Warner and McCain call for a prohibition on "non-defense"
spending in the Defense budget, but they do not clearly explain whether
environmental programs belong in this category. I think environmental
spending is in fact Defense-related: Private companies treat environmental
cleanup spending as a cost of doing business; government agencies should
do the same. More important, building a sewage treatment plant or installing
pollution control equipment at an aircraft maintenance center is as much as
part of essential Defense operations as providing electrical power to the
bases, fuel to the planes, or uniforms to the troops.

 Second, the two Senators propose that $930 million in
environmental programs at the Defense Department and Energy
Department's defense activities be transferred to "readiness" accounts each
year. They don't explain how much should come from each department, or
whether the cuts should come from cleanup, compliance, or other
programs. Over five years, they calculate the total savings at $5.0 billion,
but they include that amount in a list suggesting the "terminiating" [sic] of
six major programs. The numbers don't add, since the DOD/DOE
environmental programs exceed $10 billion each year.

 McCain and Warner are swinging a blunt axe. Environmental
spending, to them, is a soft target, so they don't need to carefully target
their blows. In the wake of the election, they will be heard. But they must
be forced to demonstrate that environmental spending is inappropriate or
unneeded. Unless one believes that hazardous wastes and beneficial to your
health, that's a difficult proposition.

 The Defense Department has been working to streamline its
environmental operations, promote public involvement, improve
management, and field new technologies. A cut of the magnitude proposed
by the two Senators, however, could undermine those initiatives and cost
the taxpayer more in the long run.