Obama, Navy Lying To Congress On Carriers: Seapower Chair Rep. Forbes

[unhappycamper]

http://breakingdefense.com/2014/03/obama-navy-lying-to-congress-on-carriers-hasc-seapower-chair-rep-forbes/



Obama, Navy Lying To Congress On Carriers: Seapower Chair Rep. Forbes
By Sydney J. Freedberg Jr. on March 12, 2014 at 6:26 PM

CAPITOL HILL: “I think this is a papering-over of their dismantling of the Navy,” House Armed Services seapower subcommittee chairman Randy Forbes told me this afternoon. “They aren’t having the courage or the straightforwardness or transparency to call it what it is.”

~snip~

Shrinking budgets may be forcing hard choices on the federal government, but Forbes believes the Obama administration is imposing needlessly painful choices on the Pentagon without being honest about it. The outspoken and ambitious Virginia Republican, in the running for chairman of HASC, is particularly incensed about aircraft carriers — icons of American power that are built and overhauled exclusively in his home state — because the 2015 budget request punts the decision about whether to refit or retire the USS George Washington.

Without the Washington, the Navy’s carrier fleet falls to a historic low of just 10 flattops. Administration officials say they may buy back Washington in fiscal 2016 if Congress rolls back the automatic spending cuts known as sequestration (which is itself politically unlikely), but Forbes won’t buy it.

~snip~

That’s not an easy fit: It will cost $7 billion over three years to overhaul George Washington, not to mention keep her and her associated air wing operating, none of which is in the current FYDP. The overhaul alone costs enough money to build two or three new Virginia attack submarines or Arleigh Burke destroyers.


--

A few minor point: Virginia-class submarines cost around $7 billion dollars.

[shraby]

1. Why are they blaming Obama? Congress holds the purse strings..totally.

[TwilightGardener]

2. They want the sequester to cut domestic spending, and then blame Obama

for cutting military spending under the same sequester. It's a law they support, but want to use it as a political weapon at the same time.