Senate Passes Pentagon Budget, War Funding Bill

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Senate Passes Pentagon Budget, War Funding Bill stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 10- 6-09 08:03 PM   |   Updated: 10- 6-09 09:15 PM

What's Your Reaction?

WASHINGTON -- As President Barack Obama weighs major shifts in strategy in the deteriorating mission in Afghanistan, the Senate on Tuesday passed a bill bringing total U.S. tab for that war to about $300 billion.

The $626 billion measure, passed 93-7, also would ban outright any transfer of accused enemy combatants from the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, detention facility into the United States. Current law permits transfer of detainees to face trial or go to prison.

(C-SPAN: Watch the Senate debate and vote on the bill)

The underlying bill combines $128 billion for overseas military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan with $498 billion for the rest of the Defense Department's budget. An analysis by congressional researchers puts the tally for Afghanistan at about $300 billion and for Iraq at more than $700 billion since Sept. 11, 2001 -- totaling more than $1 trillion.

This winter, Obama approved 21,000 more troops to Afghanistan, which would bring the total number of U.S. forces there to 68,000 by the end of the year. The Pentagon bill approved Tuesday funds that deployment.

The bill must now be reconciled with a measure that passed the House this summer and will then be presented to Obama for his signature.

Besides Guantanamo, the most controversial issues to be resolved in House-Senate talks may involve efforts by House lawmakers to skirt a promise by Obama to veto the legislation for funding over-budget replacement helicopters for the presidential fleet. Obama has issued a weaker threat to veto efforts to keep funding a program to develop a second engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the Air Force's major new weapons system.

On Afghanistan, Obama is weighing a request from Gen. Stanley McChrystal for as many as 40,000 additional troops. The request is being met with skepticism from many lawmakers in Obama's party and would eventually need separate funding in a future war appropriations bill.

Story continues below
advertisement

The measure would bring to more than $1 trillion approved by Congress for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to the latest analysis by the Congressional Research Service.

And there's also ample skepticism in Congress that Obama's Iraq and Afghanistan funding request will be sufficient to last the entire 2010 budget year, which began Oct. 1. A key lawmaker, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., predicts that additional money will be needed next spring.

The measure does, however, give Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates a partial victory in their drive to kill off weapons systems that are behind schedule and over budget.

The Senate bill, for instance, follows Obama's push to kill the F-22 air-to-air combat fighter and the VH-71 replacement presidential helicopter. And it does not contain money for the second engine for the F-35 fighter, which would be built by General Electric Co. and Rolls-Royce in Ohio, Indiana and elsewhere. The main F-35 engine is built in Connecticut by Pratt & Whitney.

The House bill contains $560 million for the alternative engine. The White House issued a squishy veto threat, saying Obama would kill the bill if it would "seriously disrupt the F-35 program." It's widely expected that the final House-Senate measure will include funds for the second engine.

Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates have staked their prestige on killing several over-budget weapons systems, especially the F-22, which has its origins in the Cold War era and is poorly suited for anti-insurgent battles in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But in twin victories for the Boeing Co., the Senate measure includes $2.5 billion to fund 10 C-17 cargo planes assembled in Long Beach, Calif., which were not requested, and $512 million for nine more F-18 Navy fighters than Obama requested. They would be assembled in St. Louis.

A White House position paper on the bill says the administration "strongly objects" to the decision for additional C-17s, but that fell far short of the veto threats that have been the key to killing the F-22 program and the much-criticized presidential helicopter.

An effort by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., on Tuesday to kill the additional C-17s failed by a 30-68 vote.

The Senate's strict language on Guantanamo meant that the chamber avoided a difficult floor fight. The companion House bill would permit transfer of Guantanamo prisoners for trial or imprisonment after a two-month delay and an assessment of the risks.

But just last week, the White House was on the losing end of a lopsided vote to ban all transfers of Guantanamo detainees to the U.S., and it looks increasingly unlikely that the administration will be able to close the Guantanamo Bay prison by January as Obama has promised.

The measure also contains $2.7 billion worth of pet projects sought by senators, commonly known as "earmarks," including funding for-profit companies to develop new technologies. The Senate by voice vote rejected a bid by McCain to require earmarked for-profit companies to be subject to competitive bidding, in keeping with reforms instituted by the House.

WASHINGTON -- As President Barack Obama weighs major shifts in strategy in the deteriorating mission in Afghanistan, the Senate on Tuesday passed a bill bringing total U.S. tab for that war to about $...
WASHINGTON -- As President Barack Obama weighs major shifts in strategy in the deteriorating mission in Afghanistan, the Senate on Tuesday passed a bill bringing total U.S. tab for that war to about $...
Featured Comments:
photo ObamAtomic
Senate must closed its doors,war funding bill passed,while schools are closing!
Who will be fighting wars with uneducated soldiers?
Senators!

 Favorite Reply
Have something to say?

Filed by T.J. Ortenzi  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
79
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
- duxguts I'm a Fan of duxguts 24 fans permalink
photo

That's really fantastic news. I was starting to worry that we wouldn't be able to invade anyone next year.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:44 AM on 11/07/2009
- Wallysmom I'm a Fan of Wallysmom 86 fans permalink
photo

This makes me angry. It takes them such a short time with little resistance to fund a war to the tune of $300 billion dollars (this excludes the money spent previously by GW). My gawd, then they nickel and dime healthcare reform, fretting over the CBO numbers. And the same folks talk about death panels....­war is nothing but a giant death panel.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:05 AM on 10/08/2009
- TomPaine07 I'm a Fan of TomPaine07 5 fans permalink

The old men and women in the senate like nothing better than spending money on fighting wars-- how else would their friends in the defense industry give them the big campaign election payoffs? I'm tired of the mantra "support our troops" spoken by those who for the most part never served. We should support the troops by bringing them home. Forget the generals- they are just CEO's of a major corporation.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:35 PM on 10/07/2009
- sherbug I'm a Fan of sherbug 55 fans permalink

Where are all the fiscal conservatives? Where are all the teabaggers? Who is going to pay for this war? Where does the money come from? Why are the conservatives silent on war spending and so very vocal on domestic spending? Where is all the concern about putting debt on your grandchildren?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:29 PM on 10/07/2009
- pup sydney I'm a Fan of pup sydney 12 fans permalink

they worry about the cost of treating cancer while spending lavishly to cause death maiming and cancer too. how can we even speak on any forum of intelligent people?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:52 PM on 10/08/2009
photo

Why do our lawmakers have such little faith in our prison system? There's an empty one in Hardin, Montana (Hey, Baucus!) just begging for the detainees so the town will have jobs ... WTF is going on with the Senate?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:55 PM on 10/07/2009

It seems a though money (100s billions) for more bloodshed was easy to be vote on, but money for those who will have to pay for it are far down on the politicians’ agenda. This is maddening politics. They vote easily for more money for war, contractors and more war machines, but the nations’ people are left struggling for existence. It is a shame and disgrace, and they wonder why people get frustrated with the political process.

It seems as though there is little difference between the rampaging elephants and the wildly kicking jackasses. It’s just two different animals with different means at getting to the same old agenda. Change I Can Believe In, where do I find it, when does it arrive, and who will bring it. All that I see now is the same old agenda redux.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:05 PM on 10/07/2009
- DuPageDem I'm a Fan of DuPageDem 19 fans permalink

Interesting how this money for killing people was approved fairly smoothly, yet health care for all -- which would far less than what they're spending here -- is still all gummed up in controversey and division. Does this spending add "not one dime to our deficit," as demanded for health care reform?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:49 AM on 10/07/2009
photo

I want to know who authored the portion that puts restrictions on the housing of Gitmo detainees and attached it to this bill. This person or persons no longer deserves a seat in our congress.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:32 AM on 10/07/2009
photo

I don't understand why the detainment of GITMO captives has anything to do with the funding of the war. Someone please explain why this was part of the funding bill?

And why hasn't the media been covering this travesty of American politics until it's been passed? This has Cheney's fingerprints all over it.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:27 AM on 10/07/2009
- RomeoMD25 I'm a Fan of RomeoMD25 51 fans permalink

Are you afraid of Al-CIA-duh?

Read a book by Obamas foreign policy adviser ZBIG called "The Grand Chessboard"

what happens under darkness will come to light
can't silence freedom even though you try

O=Bush 2.0.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:05 AM on 10/07/2009
- Apov I'm a Fan of Apov 13 fans permalink

We seem to be spending the nation into oblivion.

We will end up like the Soviet Union.

No more.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:03 AM on 10/07/2009
- ETSpoon I'm a Fan of ETSpoon 22 fans permalink
photo

Why don't the "teabaggers" and the rest of the loony Ayn Rand-cultists and Grover Norquist-fellow travelers raise hell about the defense budget?

I mean, talk about pouring taxpayer money down a sewer!

And the major defense contractors, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman etc., have unionized work forces. So you'd think "teabaggers," Ayn Rand-cultists, Grover Norquist-fellow travelers and Glenn Beck-acolytes would be livid at that arrangement, wouldn't you?

But nooooo. The "teabaggers," Ted Nugent-fans, Sarah Palin-skirt sniffers and the rest of that crowd yell about the government spending money on ACORN, school libraries and bicycle paths. They're nuts I tell ya.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:40 AM on 10/07/2009
- RomeoMD25 I'm a Fan of RomeoMD25 51 fans permalink

O was Big Finances top recipient in 08 to the tune of $40 million. Might explain why 9 months later there has been virtually nothing done to reign in Wall St's excesses.
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/recips.php?ind=F&cycle=2008&recipdetail=A&mem=Y&sortorder=U

don't trust the Messiah

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:04 AM on 10/07/2009
- ETSpoon I'm a Fan of ETSpoon 22 fans permalink
photo

And how is this comment germane to the topic at hand, namely the Pentagon budget?

And why all the brouhaha about Wall Street CEOs' bonuses? What about the bonuses that the CEOs of the top defense contractors will be giving themselves at the end of the fiscal year?

And I thought Ayn Rand-cultists believed that the rugged-ind­ividualist­s who claw their way to the top of the economic heap should be rewarded beyond the dreams of avarice?

Do "teabaggers" now endorse big government intervention into one portion of the "free market," i.e. Wall Street executive compensations, while leaving the rest of it alone? That makes no sense!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:16 AM on 10/07/2009

Congrats Pentagon!

Meanwhile, Pittsburgh, PA has no funding for its libraries!

Whoo hoo! USA! USA!

(A side note: Where did all that phantom profit from the G-20 go? Ravenstahl probably spent it on a private Nickelback concert.)

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:37 AM on 10/07/2009
- Diogenes08 I'm a Fan of Diogenes08 28 fans permalink
photo

Great, they can't send the Guantanamo prisoners anywhere now. What do they propose to do with them? Try them there? Set them all free?

Does anyone else get the feeling that a particularly virulent H1N1 outbreak in Gitmo will be the next announcement?

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:28 AM on 10/07/2009
photo

It wouldn't surprise me. Dead men tell no tales.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:37 AM on 10/07/2009
- robjh1 I'm a Fan of robjh1 21 fans permalink
photo

Dang! That could have been my healthcare money!

"and we are not saved..."

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:24 AM on 10/07/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect