Senate Armed Services Committee leadership change will affect Pentagon policy

OPINION:

The changes in the Senate’s leadership of the Senate Armed Services Committee will lead to a dramatic change in policy going forward. Conservatives know they will dislike the policy changes, yet there is a hope that the committee can get away from a history of cronyism in a way that protects the American taxpayer.

The first big issue the committee faced was a waiver of law necessary to confirm retired Army Gen. Lloyd Austin to be secretary of Defense because the nominee had not served a seven-year cooling off period from service to control of the Pentagon. Despite the promises of Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Massachusetts Democrat, Tammy Duckworth, Illinois Democrat, and Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut Democrat, to vote no on the waiver, the nominee was cleared by the Senate on a 93-2 vote. 

The Committee voice voted Mr. Austin out of committee so objecting senators could vote no by voice and let Mr. Austin go to the full floor for confirmation thus allowing liberal Democrats to save face. This was a first act of favoritism to the Biden administration and a sign that some Democrats on the Committee’s promises of the past can be trusted.

Now that Secretary of Defense Austin is in place, a secondary issue going forward is a break from the cozy relationship between the Pentagon and the leadership of congressional oversight committees for the department. The new Chairman Sen. Jack Reed, Rhode Island Democrat, takes over for Sen. Jim Inhofe, Oklahoma Republican, with a switch in party control of the Senate.  Mr. Inhofe was considered very close to the Pentagon brass and he carried some legislative water for them on many issues.  

Will Mr. Reed be the same?

One example of committee cronyism of the past was the content of the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that carried many of the priorities of the Pentagon. The Hill posted an oped by two Heritage Foundation staffers who pointed out that the Senate Armed Services Committee leadership supported an effort turn a blind eye to “the obvious security threat posed by Chinese-made drones” when the “House and Senate removed a bipartisan effort to restrict such drones from the conference version of the FY2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).”

This provision was in initial drafts of the bill yet was dropped in the legislation that finally passed the Senate and became law. The bill was a giveaway to Chinese-made drones, that take up 80% of the American consumer market, even though China has been caught stealing trade secrets and engaging in unfair trade treatment of American made goods. The stripping of this provision, one that had strong bipartisan support, was a head scratcher.

The NDAA also engaged in some favoritism for a government contractor. Even though the Pentagon has not pushed for more F-35 fighter jets, Reuters reports that Congress added “14 more than the president’s budget request.” This showed cronyism to the lobbyists for that government contract that puts the taxpayer on the hook for billions in new fighter jets that the Pentagon never demanded.

At the same time the Committee deleted the Chinese drone provision and added new F-35s, they added a provision targeting an American company. Reuters reported that, despite FCC approval for a company to build up a low-power nationwide mobile broadband network, the bill barred “the Department of Defense from contracting with companies that use certain satellite communications frequencies.”

This was a special interest carve-out for a foreign company that will end up slowing the rollout of 5G for all Americans. What else besides cronyism explains why members of Congress would drop a provision protecting Americans from Chinese-made drones, add F-35 aircraft to the Pentagon’s that were not requested and punish an American company for the crime of trying to expand 5G to rural areas of America?

The chairmanship of the Senate Armed Services Committee has been a goal of Rhode Island Sen. Reed for years. Will he push the committee in a different direction when it comes to the non-partisan complaint that the House and Senate Armed Services Committees are both too close to the Pentagon at a time when the military budget is growing, and taxpayers are struggling. 

Conservatives understand that they are not going to like many of the policy changes of the Biden administration, but they can hope that the committee will be less close to swampy special interests who seem to have run the committee for the last 10 years.

• Larry Farnsworth is a former congressional leadership staffer who served as speechwriter to the speaker’s office.