Statement of Administration Policy: Military Construction Appropriations Bill, FY 1991

(House Floor)
(Sponsors: Whitten (D), MS; Hefner (D), NC)

The Administration continues to oppose House action on appropriations bills in advance of a budget summit agreement. Such action could unnecessarily and perhaps harmfully complicate implementation of a final budget resolution that reflects the agreement. However, inasmuch as the House is apparently going to take action, the Administration will express its views on these bills. The purpose of this Statement of Administration Policy is to express views on the Military Construction Bill, FY 1991, as reported by the Committee.

The Committee reduced the requested funding level in the bill by $460 million. The Administration urges the House to restore funding to the requested level, especially the $170 million cut from the NATO Infrastructure account. These funds are required to meet our obligations under treaties and agreements with our NATO allies. In addition, the Committee added $226 million for low-priority national guard and reserve construction projects. Adding funds for such low-priority projects is inappropriate, especially at a time when budget summit participants are meeting to try to reduce the deficit.

The Administration supports the Committee's adoption of $286 million in requested rescissions and urges the House to adopt the remaining $41 million of rescissions that have been proposed.

The Committee's addition of language to overturn the moratorium on new military construction projects is not warranted or necessary. The Department of Defense extended the moratorium to allow time to determine which projects are no longer required and can be recommended for rescission. The moratorium will be lifted as soon as the review process is complete. The Secretary of Defense will consider recommending that the President veto the bill if it includes language that would mandate lifting the moratorium.

Finally, several provisions in the bill, including sections 113 and 117, raise constitutional concerns regarding the President's role as Commander-in-Chief and would be treated as advisory if enacted into law.

The Administration urges that these concerns be addressed satisfactorily, and that the House approve a Military Construction Appropriations Bill that is consistent with the Administration's request.