House Seapower Ranking Member Courtney Opening Remarks for Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Hearing on Acquisition Efficiency and the Future Navy Force

Washington, D.C. – Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing today on increasing efficiency in acquisition of the future Navy force.

We are fortunate to be joined today by two distinguished experts on Navy shipbuilding, Dr. Eric Labs of the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and Mr. Ron O’Rourke of the Congressional Research Service (CRS). Both are familiar faces here before the subcommittee, and as always we value and appreciate their input to us on these important issues.

As we know all too well on this subcommittee, we face a compounding series of challenges in achieving the fleet needed to support the needs of our nation. While the number of ships deployed globally has remained constant at about 100 for much of the last two decades, the number of ships in the fleet has shrunk by 20 percent during that same period - from 333 in 1998 to 272 today.

That means the fleet today is working harder than ever to maintain the same level of presence around the world. The result has been deferred maintenance, lengthened deployments, and further straining on our ships and people.

This did not happen overnight – a steady underinvestment in our fleet over many years lead us to where we are today. Between 1993 and 2010, for example, we annually procured ships and submarines in the single digits – often five or fewer. As you both know well, it is easy to divest or defer investment in ships but very difficult to recapitalize them. Doing so takes time and funding, which are both in short supply. That is the challenging situation we find ourselves in today.

I have seen this play out as a member of this committee since 2007. The first defense authorization bill I worked on when I arrived as a new member of the House Armed Services Committee authorized three ships. This was the lowest number of ships procured in a single year since at least 1982, according to the Congressional Research Service. We were able to break the single-digit streak in 2011 when we included 11 ships in that year’s bill and have hovered around 10 since.

This is a good start, but we know we have to do more to get the fleet we know we need. That starts with, at a minimum, ensuring that we can meet the levels of shipbuilding called for in the 2016 shipbuilding plan. That plan would achieve the 308-ship Navy called for in the most 30 year shipbuilding plan by 2022.

However, even as we achieve a 308-ship force in the Navy’s plan, we will not sustain the levels needed to fully support the various components of the fleet. For example we will face a shortfall in small surface combatants through 2027, experience a shortfall in attack submarines between 2025 and 2036, and a shortfall in large surface combatants like destroyers between 2036 and 2045.

At the same time, a pair of looming fiscal pressures threatens to undermine progress to the 308 ship Navy. First is the impact the Budget Control Act and sequestration will have on the ability to invest in shipbuilding. While the recently enacted two year budget agreement provides a measure of stability for 2016 and 2017, the fact remains that the outstanding uncertainty that the Navy and Defense Department faces between 2018 and 2021, when the Budget Control Act expires, remains a downward pressure on our efforts to achieve the minimum force we’ve identified as necessary to meet military requirements.

In fact, the CBO has warned that of the 57 ships the Navy plans to buy between now and 2021, as many as 15 could be eliminated if the budget caps in 2018 and beyond are not addressed.

The second challenge, of course, is the bulge in shipbuilding funding needed to resource the range of ships and submarines we need to build during the period that we acquire the Ohio Replacement Submarine. Some estimates have indicated that without funding above the historic average levels of funding given to shipbuilding, up two 32 ships could be dropped from the plan in order to fund the new ballistic missile submarine.

As one expert put it best, the question is not whether we will build the Ohio Replacement Submarine – it will be built as our nation’s top strategic investment priority – the question is how you support the rest of the fleet that also needs to be built at the same time.

That is what makes today’s hearing so important. As we look ahead to the difficult fiscal picture we face in the coming years, it is going to be more important than ever that we utilize every tool available to us to ensure that we build the fleet we need. This is no time for business as usual, and we must consider every option to provide the resources stability and support needed to make critical investments in our future fleet.

To this end, working on a bipartisan basis, our subcommittee has taken the lead in addressing this challenge. Through the creation and expansion of the National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund, we are working to find a creative and realistic way to ensure that we can build the full slate of ships and submarines that we will need in the future.

We made some important progress this year as we worked on the 2016 defense authorization, including adding to the range of authorities and tools that are available to the Navy and Defense Department to buy and build the submarine in new and cost-effective ways. As we prepare to further address this issue next year, I look forward to greater engagement from the Navy, Defense Department and our colleagues in Congress to embrace and build on what we have started.

Both our witnesses have done significant analysis of the challenges facing the Navy and our shipbuilding budget, and I am sure will have some insightful recommendations for us. I am particularly interested in their views on the potential benefits of the National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund – both have estimated significant savings in the Ohio Replacement Program from the use of the fund. I look forward to hearing their testimony on this topic.

Again, thank you to our witnesses for being here today and I look forward to the discussion ahead.