The CHAIRMAN. We want to thank you and all the officers with you for the magnificent manner in which you have presented your case. Mr. GAVIN. Mr. Chairman, if they have no greater problems than these here today, I had another question I wanted to ask. The CHAIRMAN. We have great problems before the committee, Mr. Gavin. Mr. GAVIN. This is a brief question, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead. Mr. GAVIN. Back in 1949, the Department of Defense sent over a budget of $17 billion, if my memory serves me correctly. The Bureau of the Budget cut it back to $14 billion and then the new Secretary came in after Mr. Forrestal, and he cut it back a little more. Suddenly we precipitated into Korea and we had nothing very much except a few bazookas and some obsolete tanks. The reason I am trying to impress upon you this fact is that if we get into trouble again, after this committee is willing to cooperate to the fullest extent of its ability to do so, to get the money to get the craft we do not want to be caught short. I am not quite satisfied on the B-52's that you are getting enough B-52's and you are not moving along fast enough on the B-70's. I just bring that incident to your attention that we do not want to get ourselves into a position such as we were in in 1949 and you better have the equipment because you are going to be responsible for action in the event we have an emergency. Secretary ZUCKERT. Mr. Gavin, I was here in 1949 and I remember very well. This is a $50 billion budget and while there may be differences of opinion on particular items, I think that the amount of this budget and its distribution provides a substantial defense for the country. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. I want to thank the Secretary and all of his able staff for the magnificent way in which they presented this phase of this authorization bill. Mr. Kelleher, read the bill. H.R. 9751 A BILL To authorize appropriations during fiscal year 1963 for aircraft, missiles, and naval vessels, for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That funds are hereby authorized to be appropriated during fiscal year 1963 for the use of the Armed Forces of the United States for procurement of aircraft, missiles, and naval vessels, as authorized by law, in amounts as follows: For aircraft: For the Army, $218,500,000. The CHAIRMAN. All right, members of the committee, I think the testimony developed on that amendment, in the neighborhood of $55,200,000 be put in there for the Army and raising it from $218,500,000 to $273,790,000. Everybody be quiet. One man talk at a time. This is for acquiring [deleted] Sioux/Raven helicopters, $7,747,000; [deleted] Iroquois helicopters, $18,513,000; [deleted] Caribou airplanes, $7,747,000; [deleted] Mohawk airplanes, $14,844,000; [deleted] Seminole airplanes, $6,439,000, for a total of $55,290,000. I think the facts warrant us to put the amendment in the bill and without objection, it is agreed to amend the bill in the Army section from $218,500,000 to $273,790,000. Read the next one, Mr. Kelleher. Mr. KELLEHER. For the Navy and the Marine Corps, $2,134,600,000. The CHAIRMAN. In my judgment there were no facts brought out to warrant the committee's disturbing in the slightest degree this amount of money. You will recall that later on, there was $2.8 million we will subtract from the ship construction, and that the only amendments that the facts warranted in the Navy's matter of the bill Mr. BATES. Mr. Chairman, I do not think we should pass on this item without recognizing very clearly the very serious problem that lies ahead. Seventy-five percent of these ships are World War II vintage and we are going to have block obsolescence with a total bill of The CHAIRMAN. We are not to that. Mr. BATES. All right. Let us put that in the right place in the record, then. The CHAIRMAN. The next, Mr. Kelleher? Mr. KELLEHER. For the Air Force, $3,135 million. The CHAIRMAN. Members, I propose to offer an amendment to raise that sum from $3,135 million to $3,626 million of which the Secretary of the Air Force is directed to utilize authorization in an amount not less than $491 million during fiscal year 1963 to proceed with development production planning and long leadtime procurement for an RS-70 weapon system. That takes care of the important ones. The $3.3 billion has already been spent, or will be spent on the B-70 and does not produce any weapons systems. It is merely to find out if that machine will fly. The development of the facts probably show we needed three more and in this three more the weapons system would go in. Mr. KELLEHER. That takes care of all. Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Chairman, let me ask this question: Does that take care of the objective General LeMay said he needed to give him the minimum capacity to fulfill his responsibilities? Mr. KELLEHER. Right. The CHAIRMAN. In other words, we are trying to capitalize on an investment of $1.3 billion to get a weapons system? Mr. RIVERS. That is it. The CHAIRMAN. Which raises this authorization $491 million. If you do not do this, you are in this kind of position: You will go before the House and not one thing with reference to bombers will be in the bill. Everybody knows that if the bombers are up to date and maintained, they maintain the security and peace of the country. The B-47 fades away and the B-52's are not going out until October, and the B-58's will go out, too. This is only a continuation of the bomber concept and a strategic development. It ought to be put in the bill. Mr. ARENDS. In other words, to clarify, this $491 million that you propose to put in here leaves three B-70's blank as far as instrumentation is concerned and this is to see whether they will fly or not, but the equipment is provided for the next three hereby authorized? The CHAIRMAN. That is right. If this $1.3 billion will produce something that will fly, then we want to have a long leadtime and we want to go forward into a weapons system of this type of plane. Mr. Hébert? Mr. GAVIN. On this particular point, I want to say agree with me, which pleases me immensely. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. Hébert? Mr. HÉBERT. Mr. Chairman, which Secretary did you direct this language to? Mr. KELLEHER. The Air Force. Mr. HÉBERT. He is not the man to direct the question to, is he? The CHAIRMAN. You make contracts through the Secretary. Mr. HÉBERT. I know, but the man holding the money and not carrying the direction is the Secretary of Defense. Suppose we direct the Secretary of the Air Force to do so and the Secretary of Defense tells him he cannot do it? Mr. RIVERS. The act does not permit the Secretary of Defense to have any command The CHAIRMAN. Members of the committee, without objectionMr. BRAY. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. BRAY. I am very happy the chairman offered this amendment. I think it is very fine and that is what I offered over a year ago and it lost by one vote. I am proud that now we are all together on this very important matter. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. RIVERS. Without objection Mr. HARDY. I would like to understand a little bit better the $491 million. This will not produce any more aircraft? Mr. SMART. Three more. Mr. HARDY. Three more aircraft? Are we going to build six then? Are you going to actually get them for $491 million? The CHAIRMAN. If the first three fly. Mr. RIVERS. These are to follow on? Mr. HARDY. These three will be equipped with all that? Mr. RIVERS. That is why I asked Mr. Smart the question. Mr. HARDY. Actually we are providing six B-70's instead of three. Mr. RIVERS. If they fly. Mr. HÉBERT. Are you sure this cannot be aborted by the Secretary of Defense? Mr. KELLEHER. It has never been tested in this fashion. Mr. HÉBERT. This is a test now that we have which will bring into sharp focus when the Congress directs a certain Secretary to do a certain thing, and then if his superior voids the action of the Congress, we know he is in defiance of the Congress? Mr. KELLEHER. In my opinion, if the Secretary of the Air Force is directed, so is the Secretary of Defense. There is no way he can avoid it. Mr. HÉBERT. I want to be sure we are doing it. Mr. HARDY. Following that up, let me understand what we are going to do. There is not a bit of use to put a lot of idle words in here. I have had a lot of experience in this same area myself. Are you going to be prepared in the event that he refuses to do this under the direction of the Congress, are you going to be prepared to make that The CHAIRMAN. Let us cross those bridges when we come to them. This man is on the way now. Mr. HARDY. If you do not do that, you might just as well not put it in there. Mr. GAVIN. Mr. Chairman ? The CHAIRMAN. All right. Mr. GAVIN. We have taken action here on the House side and the Senate will take action. Then we will go into conference and reach a program, but is there anybody in the Department of Defense, say they have reached that program, going to cut it back in any way or does this legislation as we propose stand and they follow through and does the Congress respect fully ask them to do so? The CHAIRMAN. Well, let us wait. Mr. GAVIN. Then what do we do? The CHAIRMAN. We will all hope to be back here and we will do something. We are getting tired of the views of Congress being swept aside by people who are not elected by the people. Go ahead and read the bill, Mr. Kelleher? Mr. KELLEHER. For missiles: For the Army, $558,300,000. The CHAIRMAN. I think this should be amended because of the testimony. Of course, the committee has to defend each one of these amendments on the floor and if the facts warrant these amendments. I suggest that this be increased by $31,182,000. It will do this: The SERGEANT [deleted] at a cost of $1.030 million; HAWK [deleted] missiles, at a cost of $18,552,000; repair parts for HERCULES and PERSHING, at a cost of $11.6 million, for a total of $31,182,000. The Army certainly made a case out for that and we ought to carry it to the floor and make a fight. We will win it. Without objection, that amendment is agreed to. Mr. STAFFORD. What is that figure? Mr. KELLEHER. $589,482,000. The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead. Mr. KELLEHER. For the Navy, $930,400,000; for the Marine Corps. $22,300,000; for the Air Force, $2,500 million. The CHAIRMAN. That should be increased by $10 million to buy more MINUTEMAN missiles. The facts justified that so I offered an amendment to increase it from $2,500 million to $2,510 million. Mr. HARDY. Where did you get those facts from, Mr. Chairman? Mr. KELLEHER. It will start the buying of 100 additional missiles. The CHAIRMAN. You were not here that morning. There was testimony on that. Mr. ARENDS. What about the NIKE ZEUS? The CHARMAN. The NIKE-ZEUS has all it can use. Mr. KELLEHER. There is nothing here, and nothing proposed. Mr. ARENDS. I know, but are your satisfied? Mr. KELLEHER. I do not think the Army is happy. Mr. ARENDS. That is the whole question. Mr. BRAY. Are these extra MINUTEMAN missiles going to form another squadron or backup missiles? Mr. KELLEHER. It is going to end up with [deleted.] Mr. BRAY. That is backup missiles? Mr. KELLEHER. This is a start on an additional 100 missiles to achieve a greater end strength. Mr. BRAY. That is what I thought. The CHAIRMAN. Read the next section. Mr. ARENDS. Before you do, could you repeat what was said a moment ago about unhappiness on the part of the Army as to NIKEZEUS? I just wandered, and it is all right with me if they are satisfied, and if we have everything in here they can use advantageously. The CHAIRMAN. The only thing the Army is unhappy about is the development of who is going to handle it and that is the only thing the Army is worried about, who is going to operate it. They are developing it and the next question is, are they going to make these tests? When that happens there is going to be a fight among the services, and I hope the Army is going to continue. Mr. WINSTEAD. I did not understand the general that way. I thought he was concerned Mr. WICKERSHAM. He said he was ready to produce now if he had the money. The CHAIRMAN. The next item is naval vessels. Mr. KELLEHER. Naval vessels, $2,982 million. The CHAIRMAN. We subtract from that $2.8 million because they had an item in there with reference to putting defense weapons on merchant ships. Mr. KELLEHER. Not weapons, sir, but certain defense characteristics. The CHAIRMAN. Defense characteristics, the same thing. We will take that out because we reduce that item $2,979,200,000. Now, let us have section 2. Listen to this section because we are taking a new jurisdiction in regard to B-70 and dealing with the question of research and a deduction of these weapons. Mr. BATES. In reference to section 1, the untimely remarks I made about ships, what are we going to do over the long pull? Are we going to phase $25 billion of built-in block obsolescence of the fleet in 5, 6, or 7 years? The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Bates, we have got the conversion program and my recollection is that it is 35 conversion and 37 building. That is a pretty healthy program. Of course, we are all trying to get a new fleet as rapidly as possible. Is it 35 or 36? Mr. KELLEHER. Thirty-five. Mr. BATES. Is that about 23 ships short of what we need to maintain? The CHAIRMAN. Let us have a little investigation on the rapidity of the three and where we stand. We are all in agreement that we have got to have the very best kind of navy in the world. Mr. HARDY. I hope that you will do just that, some very detailed checking on this thing. The CHAIRMAN. That is right, |