Carrier Battle Group Formation in the Pacific – a multi trillion dollar investment over time, not including weapons and maintance. Note: There is debate in naval warfare circles as to the viability of carrier battle groups in 21st century naval warfare. Proponents of the CVBG argue that it provides unmatched firepower and force projection capabilities. Opponents argue that CVBGs are increasingly vulnerable to arsenal ships and cruise missiles, especially those with supersonic or even hypersonic flight and the ability to perform radical trajectory changes to avoid anti-missile systems. The NDAA doesn’t address this issue.
On December 18, 2013 Senator Carl Levin asked for and was granted permission to address the full Senate regarding the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014.
There he discussed certain provisions in the bipartisan bill which he thinks are important.
“The bill before us is not a Democratic bill and it is not a Republican bill. It is a bipartisan, bicameral defense bill. It is a good bill and one that deserved the strong support it received in the House of Representatives and that I hope will receive a strong vote in the Senate tomorrow.
The bill includes hundreds of important provisions to ensure that the Department can carry out its essential national defense missions.
Here are just a few examples: Our bill extends the Department of Defense authority to pay out combat pay and hardship duty pay.
The bill extends supplemental impact aid to help local school districts educate military children.
The bill extends existing military land withdrawals at China Lake, Chocolate Mountain, and Limestone Hills that would otherwise expire, leaving the military without critical testing and training capabilities.
The bill includes a new land withdrawal, which is critical to the Marines, to expand its training area at 29 Palms.
Our bill provides needed funding for the destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons stockpile and for efforts of the Jordanian Armed Forces to secure that country’s border with Syria.
Our bill enables the Department of Defense to save more than $1 billion by authorizing a number of multiyear contracts.
Our bill includes more than 30 provisions, as our Presiding Officer well knows, to address the problem of sexual assault in the military. For example, we provide every military sexual assault survivor a special victim’s counsel–a lawyer who works not for commanders, not for prosecutors or defense attorneys or a court but for the victim.
We include strong new protections for survivors, for those people who have been victims, making it a crime under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice to retaliate against a serv ice mem ber who reports a sexual assault and requiring that the Department of Defense inspector general review and investigate any allegation of such retaliation.
Our bill requires that commanders who become aware of a reported sexual assault immediately forward that information to criminal investigators.
Our bill ends the ability of commanders to modify findings and convictions for sexual assaults and other serious crimes.
Our bill provides that any decision by a commander not to prosecute a sexual assault complaint undergoes an automatic review by a higher command authority, which in nearly all cases would mean a general or a flag officer.
Our bill includes the Boxer amendment to make the article 32 process more like a grand jury proceeding in which the purpose is to determine probable cause rather than the current process which is used as a discovery tool by the defense”, said Senator Levin (source: Congressional Record http://thomas.loc.gov).
See complete statement of remarks made by Senator Carl Levin regarding the NDAA on Dec 18, 2013 http://www.levin.senate.gov/newsroom/speeches/speech/levin-floor-statement-on-national-defense-authorization-act-for-fy14
See related article: House passes NDAA 2014 – saves taxpayers money http://shea-porter.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/house-passes-national-defense-authorization-act
See related issue: Report: Costly USN Aircraft carriers may be too vulnerable to keep: http://www.defensenews.com/article/20130312/DEFREG03/303120015/Report-Costly-USN-Aircraft-Carriers-May-Too-Vulnerable-Keep