For example, how often do you hear a Republican call out the bloated Pentagon budget? Wednesday in the US House Oversight and Government Reform's National Security Subcommittee hearing, US House Rep John Duncan did just that, noting:
According to the Congressional Research Service, we're now spending, when we add in the regular budget, the supplemental bills and we're getting ready to vote on another supplemental bill here either this week or a few days and yet in the emergency appropriations and all the money that they throw into the omnibus -- according to the CRS -- we're spending more on defense than all the other nations in the world combined and it seems to me that a lot of it is generated because the defense contractors hire all the retired admirals and generals and then they caught the revolving door at the Pentagon. But somebody is going to have to -- I don't think we can just keep on wasting and blowing money in the way that we're doing.
Thursday at the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the House Veterans' Affairs Committee, Chair Ellen Tauscher declared, "If I could just make one comment because I find myself to be flummoxed. . . . I . .. When I was offered the position of Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, it was one of those bitter sweet moments where I found I could perhaps continue to serve my constituents in work that has become my life's passion and -- but at a tremendous cost that would mean leaving my constituents and my colleagues in the House. It is a true cost. I love the House and I love my colleagues and I love my constituents."
Her statements followed an ambush amendment that Ranking Member Michael Turner snuck in without her knowledge, an amendment commending her for her years of Congressional service. Tauscher is leaving Congress to become the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Democrats and Republicans joined Turner in noting Tausher's accomplishments.
If that was one of the nicer moments, one of the more maddening ones came on Wednesday with the appearance of the do-nothing Commission on Wartime Contracting commissioners before the US House Oversight and Government Reform's National Security Subcommittee. They had nothing. Nothing at all to offer. They had some of the same points the GAO had. They had nothing on their own to offer. Mainly because they pretty much refuse to go to Afghanistan and Iraq (two trips in all this time doesn't count as going -- they've visited only three bases in Iraq). They appear to exist solely to run out the clock and leave the impression in the historical record that they tried, they really, really tried. They accomplished nothing but they tried. In a half-assed, do-nothing way.
Surprisingly that point didn't make the press coverage. Since we were actually present at the hearing, we know what happened. What the press largely reported was prepared statements written ahead of time and released to the press by the committee. Translation, they didn't attend the hearing they 'reported' on. John Tierney attended. He is, in fact, the Chair of the Subcommittee.
He noted, "It is also important that the Commission break new ground. There is no sense in creating an oversight entity that merely duplicates work that is on-going by Inspectors General or the Government Accountability Office. Congress already receives those reports. I look forward to hearing what the Commission is finding that we have not already heard about. In short, I expect our witnesses this morning to ensure us that our investment in their activities was a worthwhile decision. We in Congress --as the sponsors of the Commission -- need to hear about any challenges or hindrances the Commission faces in conducting its work. For example, I am concerned that the Commission will not be able to fulfill its mandate without a semi-permanent presence in theater. I would note that, according to the report, the Commission has only made two trips to date to Iraq and Afghanistan. I am also concerned that the current one year mandate of the Commission might allow responsible government officials and culpable contractors to wait it out. The Commission's charge is too important to suffer defeat at the hands of obstruction. Furthermore, I do not want to see a lack of subpoena power deter the Commission from going after recalcitrant parties." And, as the hearing moved along, it only became more obvious why Tierney stressed those points.
Thursday in the US House Armed Services Committee's Military Personnel Subcommittee mark up session, Chair Susan Davis reminded this is The Year of the Military Family. Someone should have explained that to the US House Veterans Affairs Health Subcommittee third panel.
Despite the fact that the US tax payer pays everyone of the witnesses' salaries and despite the fact that they all work for the VA, Donald H. Orndoff, Brandi Fate, James Sullivan and Lisa Thomas seemed grossly ignorant of the fact that this was The Year of the Military Family.
The first panel was veterans advocates and the second panel was the GAO and both raised the problems the VA has in allowing input and the problems the VA has with poor planning. So when Chair Michael Michaud asks the VA where in the process they intend to seek input from the veterans they are supposed to be serving and the answer is no where, it's not really clear that the VA grasps that this is The Year of the Military Family.
For more on last year's Congressional hearings, you can see:
"Iraq snapshot"
"The do nothing Wartime Contracting Commission"
"Some pretend to cover the Congressional song and dance, most ignore it"
"House Veterans Affairs Strategic Forces Subcommittee"
"Iraq snapshot"
"Assessing CARES and the Future of VA's Health Infrastructure"
"Iraq snapshot"