POLISCOPE
Back to feed
FEDERALhearing transcript
High Impact

Review of the 2016 Missile Defense Agency Budget Request

Original title: Department of Defense Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2016

January 1, 2015

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

The proposed $8.1 billion budget for the Missile Defense Agency exceeds federal spending caps by $37 billion, and if is triggered, the agency faces a potential $1.4 billion budget reduction.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

Missile Defense Agency

The agency is subject to the proposed budget, potential sequestration cuts, and oversight regarding its procurement and testing practices.

U.S. Military

The military relies on the agency's systems for protection against missile attacks.

Israel

Israel receives funding for the Iron Dome missile protection system through U.S. appropriations.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 1, 2015.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

The Senate Subcommittee on Defense Appropriations held a hearing to review the Missile Defense Agency's (MDA) proposed $8.1 billion budget for fiscal year 2016. The hearing focused on funding priorities, the impact of federal spending caps, and concerns regarding testing and procurement practices.

Key Facts

  • The President requested $8.1 billion for the Missile Defense Agency for fiscal year 2016, a 3% increase over the previous year.
  • The total defense budget request exceeds 2011 Budget Control Act caps by over $37 billion.
  • Sequestration would trigger a $1.4 billion reduction in the Missile Defense Agency's budget.
  • The agency aims to field 44 operational Ground-Based Interceptors by 2017.
  • The agency plans to complete two international Aegis Ashore sites by the end of 2015 and 2018.
  • The subcommittee previously provided $225 million in emergency funds and $175 million in base funds for Israel's Iron Dome system.
  • The Government Accountability Office (GAO) raised concerns regarding 'concurrency' in MDA acquisition, specifically the procurement of interceptors and missiles before adequate flight testing.
  • The subcommittee hearing took place on March 18, 2015.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Missile Defense Agency's budget request for 2016?
The request is for $8.1 billion, which is a 3% increase over the previous year's enacted level.
What happens if sequestration is triggered?
The Missile Defense Agency's budget would be reduced by approximately $1.4 billion across its programs and projects.
What are the main concerns raised by the committee regarding the agency's procurement?
Senators expressed concern about ',' or the practice of purchasing equipment like interceptors and missiles before they have been adequately flight-tested.

Why It Matters

The proposed $8.1 billion budget for the Missile Defense Agency exceeds federal spending caps by $37 billion, and if is triggered, the agency faces a potential $1.4 billion budget reduction.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Sponsors

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

policy shift90% confidence

Procurement Testing Standards

The committee is actively pushing back against the agency's 'concurrency' model, demanding a return to 'fly before you buy' standards.

Connected Entities

personJames D. SyringVice Admiral and Director of the Missile Defense AgencyMap →
personThad CochranChairman of the Subcommittee on Defense AppropriationsMap →
personRichard J. DurbinVice Chairman of the Subcommittee on Defense AppropriationsMap →
organizationMissile Defense AgencyThe federal agency requesting the budgetMap →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance85
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy60
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment20
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz30
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record