Area’s representatives in Washington weigh in on sequestration

Area's representatives in Washington weigh in on sequestration
Posted: Sunday, May 17, 2015 4:30 am
Jacob Brooks | Herald staff writer | 0 comments
by Jacob Brooks

QUESTION 1: As the Army continues to downsize, the effects of sequestration are putting a squeeze on the Army's budget. As a member of Congress representing Fort Hood and Central Texas, what do you think will happen with sequestration and the ongoing budget cuts?

WILLIAMS: With a national debt of more than $18 trillion, it is crucial that this Congress gets federal spending under control. However, while sequestration may attempt to do that, it implements across-the-board cuts that unfairly, and unwisely, target our nation's defense budget at a time when the United States seems to be facing new security threats each day.

CARTER: As a representative of the "Great Place" and chairman of the Army Caucus, I believe that "hollowing" our force is a proven historical mistake. I believe we need to restrain, cut and find efficiencies to balance our budget, but not on the backs of soldiers and families who provide the freedom and liberty we enjoy. The House of Representatives voted on more than one occasion to replace President Barack Obama's sequestration with common-sense reforms that would reduce spending by the same amount, while protecting our military and focusing more on wasteful domestic programs. I supported and will continue to support these thoughtful solutions to eliminate sequestration.

CORNYN: The Budget Control Act was an effort to contain discretionary spending for several years, but the impacts of sequestration on our military have been too severe. It is clear we will need to find a way to increase spending for the Defense Department to keep our commitment to our men and women in uniform and to ensure our country is kept safe in an increasingly dangerous world.

CRUZ: I supported measures in the recent congressional budget to increase defense spending because the very first priority of the federal government must be protecting our vital national security, and the Obama administration has seriously undermined our military's ability to do so. Of course, we must also be fiscally prudent, which is why I supported an amendment to require Congress to offset any defense increases using other budget reductions and without increasing taxes. Sequestration leads to unpredictability, which in turn makes defense planning difficult and leads to waste. The current workaround of using OCO (Overseas Contingency Operations) funding is not a long-term solution. We must fund our military properly in a fiscally responsible way that does not raise taxes or cut vital programs that ensure we have the best trained and equipped military in the world.

QUESTION 2. An Army report released in 2014, titled "Supplemental Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Army 2020 Force Structure Realignment," gave us a glimpse at some of the impacts if Fort Hood were to downsize by 16,000 personnel. How likely is this decrease at Fort Hood? What are you doing at the congressional level to stop it?

WILLIAMS: As Congressman John Carter and I said in a letter to Commander Lt. Gen. David D. Halverson of U.S. Army Installation Management Command last year, "We believe a decision to proceed with this option (Supplemental Programmatic Environmental Assessment for Army 2020 Force Structure Realignment) would have catastrophic impacts to the Fort Hood community." Specifically, Fort Hood provides the surrounding communities and Texas with an economic impact of more than $44 billion, and it is the largest employer in the state. My staff and I have and will continue to remain in frequent communication with the Department of the Army to promote Fort Hood's capabilities and ensure that it is understood that the Great Place is of vital importance to the surrounding communities, Texas and our nation.

CARTER: Most importantly, the Fort Hood community provides the best quality of life any soldier and/or civilian could ask for. Fort Hood is the premier installation within our Armed Forces and will continue to be. Its strategic advantages include the lowest operational cost in the country, superior training capabilities for ground and air operations and the ability to deploy faster than most installations through rail, air and sea. As a Fort Hood representative, the chairman of the Army Caucus and in my post on the Defense Subcommittee on Appropriations, I'm relentlessly communicating and reminding our congressional leadership, colleagues, the DoD, and the (Obama) administration leadership of our strategic advantages.

CORNYN: I've continued to work in the Senate to find a way to provide our military services with some relief from sequestration, including just recently voting for a budget that increases defense spending. Fortunately, Fort Hood is highly cost-effective for taxpayers, and its "bang for the buck" is a big part of what sets it apart from other posts.

QUESTION 3. If Fort Hood does decrease by 16,000 personnel (along with about 9,000 spouses and 15,000 children), what do you see as the impacts to the Killeen area's economy?

WILLIAMS: Killeen and Fort Hood are the ideal symbiotic community, military base relationship. The local private sector and town of Killeen offer many facilities and services that benefit soldiers and their families stationed nearby, which makes it cost-effective for the U.S. government. For example, Texas has invested nearly $240 million since 2006 in infrastructure on and around Fort Hood. In a way, Fort Hood and Killeen are dependent on each other.

CARTER: The (Obama) administration has an agenda to draw down and hollow our Armed Forces, which would significantly impact the largest single-site employer in Texas. Considering we are the most efficient, effective and productive post, I'd ask what alternative motives are in place here. Why do we want to cut 16,000 personnel while we see (the Islamic State) at our door step, Russian aggression, North Korea's continued defiance? We need to be looking for cost savings in our budget. We need to give our soldiers the ability to be prepared for battle and we need to be able to respond in a moment's notice.

CORNYN: Three out of four Fort Hood soldiers live off-post in the surrounding communities of Central Texas, and these communities play vital roles in providing services to soldiers and their families. I'll continue to work in the Senate to find a way to provide our military services with some relief from sequestration.

CRUZ: We must commit to giving the U.S. military and our soldiers at Fort Hood everything they need to continue to protect freedom and the American way of life. While we can never fully predict what will happen in the legislative process, I will work exceptionally hard to ensure that Fort Hood, and all Texas installations, are protected from the adverse effects of force restructuring and sequestration level budgets, and have the resources they need to complete their mission.

QUESTION 4. Do you favor a base realignment and closure? Why or why not?

WILLIAMS: I believe the federal government must make difficult choices in order to reduce the debt burden that it will inevitably pass on to future generations. I think a full and fair review must completely analyze the impact of any base realignment or closure on the service members and civilians who will be affected, the local economy and our national defense posture. As one of the largest military bases in the world, Fort Hood is of vital importance to U.S. national security, and it truly is the gold standard.

CARTER: BRAC has traditionally been a bad four-letter word. Fort Hood community leaders and top brass have clearly communicated the importance of BRAC and the benefits it could bring to Killeen. Because of its location, size and ability to deploy rapidly, Fort Hood would be positioned at the top of the list to gain more troops, if compared to its competition. In addition, Fort Hood has proven throughout the war on terrorism it can accommodate more than 50,000 soldiers because of its strategic advantages which may provide for more growth.

CORNYN: No. When you cut the Defense Department and national security budgets, it can have a real impact on our military readiness. You don't need to look any further than the recent attack in Garland for a reminder on just how dangerous our world is. We need to maintain maximum military readiness because if the United States is not able to respond to these threats, no one else can.

CRUZ: I support a military that is ready to perform its most essential and basic duty: protecting the security of Americans. Previously I supported amendments to the NDAA that would prohibit a new base realignment and closure round, and won adoption of an amendment in the Senate Armed Services Committee NDAA markup that would have required DoD to conduct an overseas BRAC study before even considering a domestic BRAC round.

QUESTION 5. In light of these ongoing budget issues, what is the best-case scenario for Fort Hood and Killeen?

WILLIAMS: The best-case scenario would be to fully repeal the sequester and find savings by eliminating wasteful spending and reforming the U.S. tax code.

CARTER: The best scenario for Fort Hood and Killeen is that the American people elect an administration to the White House that realizes that we cannot seek to balance the budget on the backs of our soldiers and the DoD. We need a partner who is willing to take a hard look at our growing nondefense-related spending habits and make smart cuts, so that we can end the sequester and provide the necessary resources to DoD to maintain a strong national defense.

CORNYN: Cost-effectiveness and military value should be key factors as the Army decides where to base its soldiers in the years ahead, and I know the nation will be well-served by keeping as many soldiers at Fort Hood as possible.

CRUZ: Fort Hood and the surrounding community in Killeen are home to thousands of men and women who are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice in support of freedom and protecting our nation. As Texans and Americans, we owe them a debt of gratitude for their service and continued devotion to their mission. While the actions of Congress can be unpredictable, I will work exceptionally hard to ensure that Congress and the DoD recognize the vital importance of Fort Hood to our national security mission.