Senate Appropriators Approve FY 2008 Defense Appropriations Bill

The Senate Appropriations Committee has completed work on an FY 2008 Defense Appropriations bill that would reduce total spending for the 6.1 Basic Research, 6.2 Applied Research, and 6.3 Advanced Technology programs by 12.6 percent. Under this bill, funding for all three programs would decline (in some instances, by a very small percent) in all three services, as well as Defense-Wide programs under the Office of Secretary of Defense. In all but two instances, program funding in the Senate bill would be greater than that requested by the Bush Administration.

The Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee is chaired by Senator Daniel Inouye (D-HI); the Ranking Member is Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK).

The below figures were compiled by the Coalition for National Security Research to which AIP and several of its Member Societies belong. The Senate committee report is available at http://thomas.loc.gov/home/approp/app08.html . The House has already passed its bill; see http://www.aip.org/fyi/2007/081.html A review of the Bush Administration’s request for the defense science and technology programs is available at http://www.aip.org/fyi/2007/023.html The Senate hopes to pass its bill by October 6.

AGGREGATE 6.1 (basic research) funding in the House bill would decline 0.7% to $1,553.4 million. Senate funding would decline 0.2% to $1,561.0 million. The Administration requested $1,428.1 million.
AGGREGATE 6.2 (applied research) funding in the House bill would decline 4.7% to $5,080.9 million. Senate funding would decline 12.7% to $4,654.2 million. The Administration requested $4,356.7 million.
AGGREGATE 6.3 (advanced technology development) funding in the House bill would decline 13.6% to $5,558.0 million. Senate funding would decline 15.6% to $5,427.4 million. The Administration requested $4,986.9 million.
TOTAL AGGREGATE 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 funding in the House bill would decline 8.5% from $13,325.2 million to $12,192.2 million. Senate funding would decline by 12.6% to $11,642.6 million. The Administration requested $10,771.6 million.

ARMY 6.1 funding in the House bill would decline 3.3% to $354.0 million. Senate funding would decline 3.2% to $354.1 million. The Administration requested $305.8 million.
ARMY 6.2 funding in the House bill would decline 7.4% to $1,114.3 million. Senate funding would decline 25.3% to $899.5 million. The Administration requested $686.2 million.
ARMY 6.3 funding in the House bill would decline 5.0% to $1,200.7 million. Senate funding would decline 20.6% to $1,003.6 million. The Administration requested $735.9 million.
TOTAL AGGREGATE ARMY 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 funding in the House bill would decline 5.8% to $2,668.9 million. Senate funding would decline 20.3% to $2,257.2 million. The Administration requested $1,728.0 million.

NAVY 6.1 funding in the House bill would decline 0.4% to $489.8 million. Senate funding would decline by 0.2% to $491.0 million. The Administration requested $467.3 million.
NAVY 6.2 funding in the House bill would decline 4.4% to $751.6 million. Senate funding would decline by 1.0% to $778.1 million. The Administration requested $677.5 million.
NAVY 6.3 funding in the House bill would decline 19.4% to $619.1 million. Senate funding would decline by 10.9% to $684.3 million. The Administration requested $521.8 million.
TOTAL AGGREGATE NAVY 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 funding in the House bill would decline 9.1% to $1,860.5 million. Senate funding would decline by 4.5% to $1,953.4 million. The Administration requested $1,666.6 million.

AIR FORCE 6.1 funding in the House bill would decline 6.3% to $382.7 million. Senate funding would decline by 1.1% to $403.9 million. The Administration requested $375.2 million.
AIR FORCE 6.2 funding in the House bill would decline 2.7% to $1,124.6 million. Senate funding would decline by 2.6% to $1,126.1 million. The Administration requested $1,011.1 million.
AIR FORCE 6.3 funding in the House bill would decline 46.6% to $553.9 million. Senate funding would decline by 38.2% to $641.2 million. The Administration requested $577.3 million.
TOTAL AGGREGATE AIR FORCE 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 funding in the House bill would decline 20.8% to $2,061.2 million. Senate funding would decline by 16.5% to $2,171.2 million. The Administration requested $1,963.5 million.

DEFENSE-WIDE (DARPA, etc.) 6.1 funding in the House bill would INCREASE 9.9% to $326.9 million. Senate funding would INCREASE 4.9% to $312.1 million. The Administration requested $279.9 million.
DEFENSE-WIDE 6.2 funding in the House bill would decline 4.3% to $2,090.4 million. Senate funding would decline by 15.3% to $1,850.5 million. The Administration requested $1,981.8 million.
DEFENSE WIDE 6.3 funding in the House bill would decline 5.3% to $3,184.3 million. Senate funding would decline by 7.9% to $3,098.3 million. The Administration requested $3,151.8 million.
TOTAL AGGREGATE DEFENSE-WIDE funding in the House bill would decline 4.2% to $5,601.6 million. Senate funding would decline by 10.0% to $5,260.9 million. The Administration requested $5,413.5 million.

Regarding the proposed reduction to DARPA funding within the Defense-Wide account, the Senate report states: “The Committee reduction is primarily based on DARPA’s underexecution of previously provided funding. For example, with one quarter remaining for the obligation of fiscal year 2006 funds, over $500,000,000, or 17 percent, of funds appropriated in fiscal year 2006 for DARPA were unobligated or reprogrammed for higher priorities. This trend of underexecution continues in fiscal year 2007, where despite a congressional reduction of $199,000,000 to the budget request more than 7.5 percent of appropriated funding has been identified as excess to DARPA requirements within the first 9 months of availability for obligation. Therefore, the Committee does not believe that additional program growth is justified at this time and recommends funding DARPA’s fiscal year 2008 program at a level consistent with current expenditures in the fiscal year 2007 program. The Committee notes that the recommended fiscal year 2008 amount provides $400,000,000 more than is being executed in the fiscal year 2006 program.”

The Senate Report also contained the following language regarding Science and Technology: “The Committee notes that the changing warfighting environment requires continued investment in new, forward-looking capabilities. The Committee directs the Secretary of Defense to provide a report to the congressional defense committees that details the Department’s mid- and long-term science and technology strategic plans to address the changing threat environment and to ensure that our warfighters continue to maintain the technological edge over our adversaries. The report is due with the fiscal year 2009 budget submission. “

The House version of the FY 2008 Defense Appropriations bill contained language setting a 20% cap on indirect cost rates for basic research (see http://www.aip.org/fyi/2007/081.html .) The Senate version contains no language regarding indirect cost rates. A conference between House and Senate appropriators will resolve differences between the two bills in the coming months.