The Hill:
Serving as a member of Congress on the Appropriations Committee is both an honor and a challenge. An honor, because it allows you shape the priorities of the government to benefit the nation, and a challenge, because it forces you to make difficult choices that can have a profound impact on the American people and the world. No doubt, the spending power of the United States is formidable.
During my time in Congress I served on the subcommittee that oversaw the budget of the Pentagon. It was a source of great pride for me. It gave me a front row seat to shape the priorities for the single largest portion of the federal budget: defense spending.
The defense subcommittee is perhaps also the most complex subcommittee on which to serve, because the spending levels are so vast and the consequences of making a mistake are so great.
Part of that responsibility was making tough decisions, and that included eliminating funding for programs that were deeply flawed. Ending projects can be especially hard, because often times, American taxpayers have already spent millions – even billions – on these programs. Walking away can result in a total loss on the investment. But sometimes, it is the right decision if the program won’t ever live up to its potential and its continued failure risks the safety of our armed forces, and/or the nation.
One program the Congress is currently looking at closely is the U.S. Army’s Integrated Air and Missile Battle Command System (IBCS). Essentially, ICBS was created as a replacement for our current air and missile defense system and would connect all military branches various systems to work together seamlessly to carry out missions and deter threats — primarily incoming missiles.
In 2009, development of the Army’s IBCS began. The program’s initial timeline was 80 months or just over six and a half years at a cost of $5.4 billion.
Regrettably for IBCS, it is now 2017, and the system won’t be operational for at least another four years, and because of the cost overrun, its total price will likely reach $7 billion dollars, and maybe even more. According to a recent article in Defense News: “A Milestone C decision, which would decide whether the program enters a production and deployment phase, was planned for the end of FY16, according to the FY17 budget request, but is now expected at the end of FY20.”
Now, I understand delays and missed milestones are a common problem that plagues the defense industry, engineering these complex technologies is no easy feat. By all accounts, there are many successful weapons programs currently in use by our Armed Forces that faced many significant delays before they could be used in the field. Hence, being delayed does not necessarily mean that any weapons system is fundamentally flawed. Nor does it mean that the Congress should eliminate the program because it is years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget.
That being said, the delays in IBCS do raise some serious questions and concerns that lawmakers should consider as Congress re-assesses funding the continued development of IBCS…
