Skip Navigation

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am pleased to be here this afternoon to discuss the issue of redundancy and duplication of capabilities among the military services. My testimony today will provide some background and will then discuss several areas within the Department of Defense (DoD) where changes in current assignments could result in significant savings.
 

BACKGROUND

Nearly 50 years ago, at a meeting in Key West, Florida, military leaders established the broad outlines for the functions that U.S. military services perform today. That outline--basically unchanged since its inception--still guides the division of labor among the services. Concerns over the budget deficit and drastic changes on the international scene, however, now make it vital to review those roles and missions currently assigned to the services.

Two reviews of the services' traditional roles and missions in the past two years have rekindled the debate about the way the Department of Defense allots its responsibilities and resources.

Senator Nunn's Speech

Senator Sam Nunn, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, suggested the need for a review of current service roles and missions in July 1992. In a speech on the Senate floor, he enumerated several areas within the U.S. military where he felt that duplication existed among the capabilities possessed by different services.

For example, with respect to logistic and support activities, Senator Nunn questioned why each service needed its own maintenance depots, legal corps, and medical corps, suggesting that DoD-wide organizations in these areas might be more efficient. "Streamlining the logistics, administration, and management duplication among the services could save tens of billions annually," he said. Regarding combat forces, he cited expeditionary ground forces fielded by the Army and the Marines, forces for power projection within the Air Force and the Navy, and Navy and Marine tactical air forces as areas of possible duplication. According to his estimates, eliminating two divisions of land forces and five wings of tactical air forces, if justified, could save $5 billion annually in operating costs. Although not endorsing any specific reductions in forces, Senator Nunn noted that redundancy and duplication are costing billions of dollars a year and called for a far-reaching review of the U.S. military's roles and missions.

Review of Roles and Missions by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

In the triennial report required by the Goldwater-Nichols Act, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) undertook an extensive review of the services' roles and missions that responded to many of Senator Nunn's questions. In that report, published in February 1993, then Chairman General Colin Powell expressed strong support for maintaining seemingly redundant capabilities among the services. General Powell felt that the availability of similar but specialized capabilities represented by forces in different services allows commanders to tailor U.S. military response to any contingency, regardless of geographic location or the nature of the threat. Although emphasizing the need for duplication in some areas, General Powell conceded that the military establishment could reduce the degree of redundancy. Moreover, he did recommend some reductions and consolidations in forces, including those in areas such as air defenses for North America and repair depots. Nevertheless, he saw no need at that time for major restructuring or fundamental shifts in roles and missions.

The Chairman, however, did recommend further study of more far-reaching changes. These included reducing Army forces for rapid response, relying on the Army to provide fire support for the Marines, and consolidating some maintenance support activities. (Table 1 lists some of the issues raised by Senator Nunn and the Chairman's response to them.) Since General Powell issued his report, the Administration has taken some of the actions that were recommended for further study. Specifically, in the Defense Department's budget request for 1995, the Marine Corps canceled its purchase of heavy artillery pieces and will instead rely on the Army for support in this area. Thus, the military itself is taking steps to reduce needless duplication.

This document is available in its entirety in PDF.