Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-OK) has an ambitious list of priorities all built around a central line of effort -- increasing the defense budget, despite newly empowered Democrats and a White House looking for spending cuts to offset skyrocketing deficits.
Inhofe, in an interview with Inside Defense, said total fiscal year 2020 defense spending should be “at least” $733 billion, not the $700 billion for which the White House Office of Management and Budget has directed the Pentagon to plan.
Inhofe said he expects the White House to eventually reverse course once GOP defense hawks have a chance to engage more with President Trump.
“I don't think they're going to end up on $700 [billion],” he said. “One reason is everyone on our side on defense. It's zero growth. That's something they have not really considered.”
Meanwhile, Inhofe said he expects Democrats in the House who have signaled they intend to oppose increasing the defense budget to ultimately negotiate based on concerns over defense-related jobs in their individual districts.
“This is the House, not the Senate we're dealing with. We're going to be fine on the Senate,” he said “In the House . . . they will actually vote for the jobs in their district.”
Inhofe also said Democrats will be vulnerable to political messaging that they are being weak on defense in the face of new threats posed by China and Russia.
“The very nature of surviving is more important,” he said.
Inhofe said he intends to push for defense to be exempt from mandatory budget caps set to return in FY-20 should Congress fail to reach a budget bipartisan deal. Winning an exemption for defense, however, is unlikely as it requires the support of Democrats, who continue to argue that any cap relief granted to defense should be matched by boosts in non-defense priorities.
Inhofe said he plans to the use a new report from an independent commission on the National Defense Strategy as his “blueprint” for moving forward on his committee's version of the FY-20 defense authorization bill, which he wants to pass in the Senate in late spring.
Ships
Inhofe wants the FY-20 defense authorization bill to put the Navy on a path for a 355-ship fleet by 2040, rather than 2060, which was initially estimated by the Congressional Budget Office.
To get there, Inhofe wants to begin with the procurement of one additional Navy destroyer for a total of 11, rather than 10. He also wants to accelerate the building of aircraft carriers to achieve delivery every three-and-a-half years, rather than five.
Additionally, Inhofe wants to procure the first new Navy frigate and increase the production rate as much as possible, while funding service life extensions for destroyers, attack submarines and possibly aircraft carriers.
Inhofe is also seeking new investments in shipyard readiness. The Government Accountability Office reported Nov. 19 that attack submarines have incurred 10,000 days of idle time and maintenance delays resulting in $1.5 billion in spending that provides no additional capability.
Aircraft
Inhofe said he is fully committed to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and wants the Defense Department to triple procurement by FY-24.
He also seeks to increase ally participation in the program, sharing 20 percent of sustainment and follow-on development costs with partner nations.
Further, the chairman wants to accelerate fielding of the B-21 bomber to meet the Air Force's desired increase of five bomber squadrons.
Inhofe also seeks to boost investment in DOD's testing infrastructure, pointing out that only a single wind tunnel in Langley, VA, is capable of adequately testing hypersonic systems.
Space Force
Inhofe said he had a conversation with President Trump late Monday night about the Space Force. The chairman said he remains “on the fence” and told Trump there are two questions he needs answered before he can fully support the president's call for a sixth, independent military service: How much does it cost and in what way will it improve current military capability?
“I still don't have the answer to those questions,” he said.
The Pentagon is expected to release a full cost estimate and additional details when it submits its FY-20 budget in February.
Nuclear
Inhofe said nuclear modernization has to be a major priority for Congress and wants new spending to update the triad and Energy Department infrastructure.
Acquisition reform
Like the late Chairman John McCain (R-AZ) before him, Inhofe said he wants to reform the way the Pentagon acquires goods and services, with a special focus on removing regulations on contractors and barriers on new innovation.
A written list of Inhofe's priorities includes the Pentagon's new Section 804 acquisition authority, which was provided in the FY-16 National Defense Authorization Act to bypass traditional procurement processes to rapidly prototype new systems.
The list also praised the streamlined nature of other transaction authority as it is “generally not subject to federal laws and regulations that apply to government contracts.”
The list also notes Inhofe's support for GAO's recommendation that DOD develop a new data-collection strategy to measure the time it takes to award contracts.
“The committee intends to explore whether congress should provide DOD additional flexibilities or authorities to streamline and simplify the contracting process,” the list states.
To accomplish most of what he wants, however, Inhofe will have to work in bipartisan fashion with Rep. Adam Smith (WA), the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee expected to become chairman next year.
Smith has been clear about his view that the defense budget is already too large at $716 billion. He has also said he wants to cut spending on DOD's nuclear arsenal.
Inhofe said he would oppose any cuts in nuclear spending and highlighted the independent commission's report, which stresses the importance of a strong nuclear deterrent.
“We sat back for 60 years, 50 years and didn't do anything,” he said. “A nuclear deterrent has got to have priority.”
Inhofe said he supports the committees' traditional bipartisan approach to legislation, but admitted that he is not fond of “taking risk” when it comes to defense spending.
“Risk equals lives,” he said.