Fyi who has how many icebreakers
AT – CP – Incremental Funding
Download 0.8 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- AT – DA – Politics
- AT – DA – DOD budget t/o
- Funding would be through DHS – it’s the most predictable
AT – CP – Incremental FundingNormal means is incremental funding – OMB exceptionO’Rourke 6/14 Specialist in Naval Affairs, Congressional Research Service, Quote from July 2010 Coast Guard High Latitude Study,“Coast Guard Polar Icebreaker Modernization: Background and Issues for Congress,” http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc85474/ Another potential oversight issue for Congress concerns the Coast Guard’s proposal to fund the acquisition of a new icebreaker using incremental funding (i.e., a series of annual funding increments—see “Funding in FY2013 Budget for New Polar Icebreaker” in “Background”) rather than full funding (i.e., placing most or all of the ship’s acquisition cost into a single year). Section 31.6 of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-1147 normally requires executive branch agencies to use full funding for acquiring capital assets such as a new ship. The Coast Guard appears to have received permission from OMB to propose the use of incremental funding for acquiring a new polar icebreaker; Congress may choose to approve, reject, or modify this proposal. AT – DA – PoliticsDC think tanks support the planEwing 11 Philip, DoD Buzz, November 4, “White House: We must keep our icebreakers,” http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/11/04/white-house-we-must-keep-our-icebreakers/ Although all the fashionable D.C. think-tanks and white-paperists love to talk about the growing importance of the melting Arctic, the discussions over the past few years have been mostly disconnected from the reality of America’s ability to operate at the top of the world. The Coast Guard has three Arctic-capable ships: The Polar Star, its sibling Polar Sea and an ice-strengthened research ship, the Healy. The Polars are purpose-built, heavy-duty icebreakers. They’re remarkable ships; they were designed with complex internal water tanks, for example, that enable them to ride up on heavy ice and rock themselves back and forth to crush it, clearing a path for other ships. AT – DA – DOD budget t/oCuts coming nowWSJ 6/28 Market Watch, “Homeland Security FY2013 IT Budget Request Focuses on Mobility, Data Center Consolidation,” http://www.marketwatch.com/story/homeland-security-fy2013-it-budget-request-focuses-on-mobility-data-center-consolidation-2012-06-28 The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) FY2013 IT spending requests are roughly even with FY2012 levels, with budget drivers emphasizing commodity IT, mobility, and data center consolidation. The overall 2013 DHS budget request is just under $40 billion. The department's IT budget request is just over $5.75 billion; down from $5.79 billion in FY2012. These financial statistics and technology trends were discussed at a DHS Market Intelligence Briefing hosted by immixGroup on June 19. immixGroup's Market Intelligence organization, which prepared the content of the briefing, provides actionable information that helps commercial technology manufacturers, resellers, and solution providers identify relevant opportunities to do business with the federal government. While at $40 billion, the total budget request for DHS in FY2013 is significantly lower than in previous years. More cuts are expected in FY2014 -- the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is requesting a 10 percent overall reduction in IT budgets across every agency.
Specialist in Naval Affairs, Congressional Research Service, Quote from July 2010 Coast Guard High Latitude Study,“Coast Guard Polar Icebreaker Modernization: Background and Issues for Congress,” http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc85474/ The prepared statement of the GAO witness at the December 1, 2011, hearing states: Another alternative option addressed by the Recapitalization report would be to fund new icebreakers through the NSF. However, the analysis of this option concluded that funding a new icebreaker through the existing NSF budget would have significant adverse impacts on NSF operations and that the capability needed for Coast Guard requirements would exceed that needed by the NSF. The Recapitalization report noted that a funding approach similar to the approach used for the Healy, which was funded through the fiscal year 1990 DOD appropriations, should be considered. However, the report did not analyze the feasibility of this option. We have previously reported that because of the Coast Guard’s statutory role as both a federal maritime agency and a branch of the military, it can receive funding through both the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and DOD. For example, as we previously reported, although the U.S. Navy is not expressly required to provide funding to the Coast Guard, the Coast Guard receives funding from the Navy to purchase and maintain equipment, such as self-defense systems or communication systems, because it is in the Navy’s interest for the Coast Guard systems to be compatible with the Navy’s systems when the Coast Guard is performing national defense missions in support of the Navy. However, according to a Coast Guard budget official, the Coast Guard receives the majority of its funding through the DHS appropriation, with the exception of reimbursements for specific activities. Also, as the Recapitalization plan acknowledges, there is considerable strain on the DOD budget. A recent DOD report on the Arctic also notes budgetary challenges, stating that the near-term fiscal and political environment will make it difficult to support significant new U.S. investments in the Arctic. Furthermore, DOD and the Coast Guard face different mission requirements and timelines. For example, DOD’s recent report states that the current level of human activity in the Arctic is already of concern to DHS, whereas the Arctic is expected to remain a peripheral interest to much of the national security community for the next decade or more. As a result, the Coast Guard has a more immediate need than DOD to acquire Arctic capabilities, such as icebreakers. For example, with preliminary plans for drilling activity approved in 2011, the Coast Guard must be prepared to provide environmental response in the event of an oil spill. Similarly, as cruise ship traffic continues to increase, the Coast Guard must be prepared to conduct search and rescue operations should an incident occur. For these reasons, it is unlikely that an approach similar to the one that was used to build the Healy would be feasible at this time.54 Deterrence fails—forces don’t prevent terrorism, and countries can defend themselves—at worst we can spot them assistance to prevent escalationFriedman and Preble 10 Benjamin Friedman is a research fellow in defense and homeland security studies at the Cato Institute, and Christopher Preble is director of foreign policy studies at Cato (6/14, Benjamin Friedman and Christopher Preble, “Defense Cuts: Start Overseas”, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11896) But the dirty secret of American defense politics is that we are fairly safe. We are surrounded by vast seas and friendly neighbors. But our military spending is nearly equal to half the world's, and our allies spend most of the other half. Russia, China, North Korea, Syria and Iran collectively spend about a fourth of what we do on defense, according to statistics compiled by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. Even if we cut our military in half, it would still be far bigger than that of any conceivable rival. Encouragingly, members of President Obama's bipartisan commission on the deficit and debt have said that the military ought to be among the items on the table for possible spending cuts. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Walter B. Jones (R-N.C.) and Ron Paul (R- Texas) last month sent a joint letter to the commissioners arguing that the trims to the Pentagon budget should flow from cuts in overseas commitments. The commissioners should take that advice. The Cold War is over. While we were defending our allies in Europe and Asia, they got wealthy. The new status quo is that we offer them perpetual security subsidies — and risk being drawn into wars that do not serve our security interests. The recent trouble regarding the sinking of a South Korean naval ship by Pyongyang is illustrative. Odious as North Korea is, we have no obvious interest in fighting for South Korea, which has grown far richer and militarily capable than its northern rival. South Korea can defend itself. So can our European and Japanese friends. Nor can terrorism justify a huge military. Most of our military spending goes to conventional forces adept at destroying well-armed enemies. Terrorists are lightly armed and mostly hidden. The trick is finding them, not killing or capturing them once they are found. Counterinsurgency enthusiasts claim that we can only be safe from terrorists by using ground forces to rebuild the states where they operate. But we have learned the hard way that theory badly overestimates our ability to organize other nations' politics. Even if we could master that imperial art, it would not be worth the cost. By avoiding the occupation of failing states and shedding commitments to defend healthy ones, we could plan for far fewer wars, allowing cuts in force structure, manpower, procurement spending and operational costs. The resulting force would be more elite, less strained and far less expensive. Even if the commission calls for cutting defense commitments, the Obama administration has shown little interest in following such recommendations. When the Japanese government recently asked us to remove our Marines from Okinawa after 65 years, for example, the administration hectored Tokyo into letting us keep our base rather than wishing the Japanese well and bringing the troops home. Instead of looking to shed missions, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates recently advocated maintaining current funding levels while cutting overhead costs by a few billion to fund frontline forces. Good idea, except that it won't offset the rapidly rising cost of the military's personnel, healthcare and operational spending. The likely result will be that these accounts will continue to take funds needed for manpower and force structure, leaving a shrinking force overburdened even in peacetime. Our deficit problem is an opportunity to surrender the pretension that we are the world's indispensable nation, preventing instability, shaping the international system and guiding history. We should be content to settle for being the big kid on the block that looks out for itself and occasionally helps friends in a bad spot. That approach would take advantage of the security we have, and save money we don't. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 0.8 Mb. Share with your friends:
|