You limited your search to:

 Collection: Congressional Research Service Reports
Military Base Closures: Where Do We Stand?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1547/
Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5808/
Military Base Closures: Where Do We Stand?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1131/
Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1130/
Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs604/
Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2401/
Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2400/
Defense Industry in Transition: Issues and Options for Congress
The U.S. government and the defense industry continued to adjust to the post-Cold War era. Complicating the transition was the restructuring of the U.S. and other industrialized economies, and questions concerning the future direction of U.S. defense policy. The 104th Congress grappled with how to ensure that the U.S. retained a smaller, but capable, defense industry. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs400/
Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4152/
Military Base Closures: Agreement on a 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4151/
Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4154/
Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4153/
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC): Property Transfer and Disposal
The Defense Base Realignment and Closure Act of 1990 and the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 provide the basic framework for the transfer and disposal of military installations closed during the base realignment and closure (BRAC) process. This report provides an overview of the various authorities available under the current law and describes the planning process for the redevelopment of BRAC properties. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7745/
Military Base Closures: A Historical Review from 1988 to 1995
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7095/
Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7845/
Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7423/
Department of Defense Trends in Overseas Contract Obligations
The Department of Defense (DOD) has long relied on contractors to support military operations. Contractors provide the U.S. military with weapons, food, uniforms, and logistic services, and without contractor support, the U.S. would currently be unable to arm and field an effective fighting force. DOD spends more on federal contracts than all other federal agencies combined. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc40162/
Defense: FY2011 Authorization and Appropriations
The President's FY2011 budget request, released February 1, 2010, included $733.3 billion in new budget authority for national defense. This report discusses and break downs these defense appropriations. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc31360/
The Berry Amendment: Requiring Defense Procurement to Come from Domestic Sources
This report examines the original intent and purpose of the Berry Amendment and legislative proposals to amend the application of domestic source restrictions, as well as potential options for Congress. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc272083/
Department of Defense Energy Initiatives: Background and Issues for Congress
The Department of Defense (DOD) spends billions of dollars per year on fuel, and is pursuing numerous initiatives for reducing its fuel needs and changing the mix of energy sources that it uses. DOD's energy initiatives pose several potential oversight issues for Congress, and have been topics of discussion and debate at hearings on DOD's proposed FY2013 budget. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc87241/
The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11
This report analyzes war funding for the Department of Defense (DOD) and tracks funding for USAID and Veteran's Affairs (VA) Medical funding. Information on costs helps Congress to assess the FY2010 Supplemental for war costs for the Department of Defense (DOD) and State/USAID FY2011 war requests; conduct oversight of past war costs; and consider the longer-term costs implications of the buildup of troops in Afghanistan and potential problems in the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc99090/
Defense Acquisition Reform: Status and Current Issues
The end of the Cold War and its impact on defense spending has created a strong need to reform Department of Defense’s (DOD) acquisition system. With procurement spending down, DOD expects to depend on savings from acquisition reform to help finance future force modernization. Policymakers believe that DOD should use more commercial products because, in many instances, they cost less and their quality is comparable to products built according to DOD military specifications. Many such reform proposals are based on recognition that DOD regulatory barriers and a Cold War acquisition “culture” have inhibited the introduction of commercial products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1129/
The Berry Amendment: Requiring Defense Procurement to Come from Domestic Sources
This report examines the original intent and purpose of the Berry Amendment and legislative proposals to amend the application of domestic source restrictions, as well as potential options for Congress. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc84034/
Department of Defense Energy Initiatives: Background and Issues for Congress
Report that provides background information and identifies issues for Congress on Department of Defense (DOD) energy initiatives. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc227770/
Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
The Navy wants to procure three new classes of surface combatants -- the DDG-1000 (formerly DD(X)) destroyer, the CG(X) cruiser, and a smaller surface combatant called the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). The Navy wants to procure 7 DDG-1000s, 19 CG(X)s, and 55 LCSs. The Senate Appropriations Committee, in its report (S.Rept. 109-292 of July 25, 2006) on H.R. 5631, recommends approving the Navy's request for FY2007 procurement funding for the first two DDG-1000s and increasing the Navy's request for FY2007 DDG-1000 research and development funding by a net $1 million. This CRS report explains the above as well as other budgetary recommendations made by the Senate Appropriations Committee. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10430/
Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
The Navy wants to procure three new classes of surface combatants -- the DDG-1000 (formerly DD(X)) destroyer, the CG(X) cruiser, and a smaller surface combatant called the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). The Navy wants to procure 7 DDG-1000s, 19 CG(X)s, and 55 LCSs. The Senate Appropriations Committee, in its report (S.Rept. 109-292 of July 25, 2006) on H.R. 5631, recommends approving the Navy's request for FY2007 procurement funding for the first two DDG-1000s and increasing the Navy's request for FY2007 DDG-1000 research and development funding by a net $1 million. This CRS report explains the above as well as other budgetary recommendations made by the Senate Appropriations Committee. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10428/
Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
This report details the number and cost of three different naval vessels which the Navy is interested in procuring: the DDG-1000 (formerly DD(X)) destroyer, the CG(X) cruiser, and a smaller vessel called the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). The report also explains two different pieces of defense legislation (H.R. 5122/S.2766 and H.R. 5631, respectively) which discuss different financial approaches to funding the procurement of said vessels. These pieces of legislation also explore more cost-efficient methods of achieving equivalent results with less costly vessels, as well as funding research for future designs. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10427/
Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
The Navy wants to procure three new classes of surface combatants -- the DDG-1000 (formerly DD(X)) destroyer, the CG(X) cruiser, and a smaller surface combatant called the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS). The Navy wants to procure 7 DDG-1000s, 19 CG(X)s, and 55 LCSs. The Senate Appropriations Committee, in its report (S.Rept. 109-292 of July 25, 2006) on H.R. 5631, recommends approving the Navy's request for FY2007 procurement funding for the first two DDG-1000s and increasing the Navy's request for FY2007 DDG-1000 research and development funding by a net $1 million. This CRS report explains the above as well as other budgetary recommendations made by the Senate Appropriations Committee. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10429/
Costs of Major U.S. Wars
This CRS report provides estimates of the costs of major U.S. wars from the American Revolution through current conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. It gives figures both in "current year dollars," that is, in prices in effect at the time of each war, and in inflation-adjusted "constant dollars" updated to the most recently available estimates of FY2008 prices. All estimates are of the costs of military operations only and do not include costs of veterans benefits, interest paid for borrowing money to finance wars, or assistance to allies. The report also provides estimates of the cost of each war as a share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) during the peak year of each conflict and of overall defense spending as a share of GDP at the peak. This report will be updated periodically to reflect additional appropriations for ongoing conflicts and to adjust constant dollar figures to prices of the current fiscal year. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10777/
Defense Acquisition Reform: Status and Current Issues
The end of the Cold War and its impact on defense spending has created a strong need to reform Department of Defense’s (DOD) acquisition system. With procurement spending down, DOD expects to depend on savings from acquisition reform to help finance future force modernization. Policymakers believe that DOD should use more commercial products because, in many instances, they cost less and their quality is comparable to products built according to DOD military specifications. Many such reform proposals are based on recognition that DOD regulatory barriers and a Cold War acquisition “culture” have inhibited the introduction of commercial products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1544/
Military Base Closures: Socioeconomic Impacts
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8443/
Navy Ship Procurement: Alternative Funding Approaches - Background and Options for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9801/
Navy Ship Procurement: Alternative Funding Approaches - Background and Options for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9800/
Navy Ship Procurement: Alternative Funding Approaches - Background and Options for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8472/
Defense: FY2006 Authorization and Appropriations
This report is a guide to one of the 13 regular appropriations bills that Congress considers each year. It is designed to supplement the information provided by the House and Senate Appropriations Subcommittees on Defense. It summarizes the status of the bill, its scope, major issues, funding levels, and related congressional activity, and is updated as events warrant. The report lists the key CRS staff relevant to the issues covered and related CRS products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8120/
FY2005 Defense Budget: Frequently Asked Questions
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5742/
Navy DD(X), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8646/
Defense: FY2007 Authorization and Appropriations
The House passed its version of the FY2007 defense authorization bill, H.R. 5122, on May 11. The bill authorizes $513 billion for national defense, including $50 billion in emergency funding for operations in Iraq and elsewhere in the first months of the fiscal year. The Senate Armed Services Committee marked up its version of the bill, S. 2766, on May 4. It also authorizes $513 billion, including emergency funding. Senate floor action appears likely in June. House subcommittee markup of the defense appropriations bill is tentatively scheduled for June 7. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8948/
Navy DDG-51 Destroyer Procurement Rate: Issues and Options for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8890/
Defense: FY2007 Authorization and Appropriations
The House passed its version of the FY2007 defense authorization bill, H.R. 5122, on May 11. The bill authorizes $513 billion for national defense, including $50 billion in emergency funding for operations in Iraq and elsewhere in the first months of the fiscal year. The Senate Armed Services Committee marked up its version of the bill, S. 2766, on May 4. It also authorizes $513 billion, including emergency funding. Senate floor action appears likely in June. House subcommittee markup of the defense appropriations bill is tentatively scheduled for June 7. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8964/
Defense: FY2007 Authorization and Appropriations
The House passed its version of the FY2007 defense authorization bill, H.R. 5122, on May 11. The bill authorizes $513 billion for national defense, including $50 billion in emergency funding for operations in Iraq and elsewhere in the first months of the fiscal year. The Senate Armed Services Committee marked up its version of the bill, S. 2766, on May 4. It also authorizes $513 billion, including emergency funding. Senate floor action appears likely in June. House subcommittee markup of the defense appropriations bill is tentatively scheduled for June 7. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8963/
Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)) and CG(X) Programs: Background and Issues for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8972/
Military Base Closures and Affected Defense Department Civil Service Employees
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8971/
Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)) and CG(X) Programs: Background and Issues for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8974/
Defense Procurement: Full Funding Policy - Background, Issues, and Options for Congress
The full funding policy is a federal budgeting rule imposed on DOD by Congress in the 1950s that requires the entire procurement cost of a weapon or piece of military equipment to be funded in the year in which the item is procured. Although technical in nature, the policy relates to Congress’ power of the purse and its responsibility for conducting oversight of Department of Defense (DOD) programs. Support for the policy has been periodically reaffirmed over the years by Congress, the Government Accountability Office, and DOD. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs8973/
Navy DD(X), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6395/
Defense Acquisition Reform: Status and Current Issues
The end of the Cold War and its impact on defense spending has created a strong need to reform Department of Defense’s (DOD) acquisition system. With procurement spending down, DOD expects to depend on savings from acquisition reform to help finance future force modernization. Policymakers believe that DOD should use more commercial products because, in many instances, they cost less and their quality is comparable to products built according to DOD military specifications. Many such reform proposals are based on recognition that DOD regulatory barriers and a Cold War acquisition “culture” have inhibited the introduction of commercial products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2395/
Defense Acquisition Reform: Status and Current Issues
The end of the Cold War and its impact on defense spending has created a strong need to reform Department of Defense’s (DOD) acquisition system. With procurement spending down, DOD expects to depend on savings from acquisition reform to help finance future force modernization. Policymakers believe that DOD should use more commercial products because, in many instances, they cost less and their quality is comparable to products built according to DOD military specifications. Many such reform proposals are based on recognition that DOD regulatory barriers and a Cold War acquisition “culture” have inhibited the introduction of commercial products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2397/
Defense Acquisition Reform: Status and Current Issues
The end of the Cold War and its impact on defense spending has created a strong need to reform Department of Defense’s (DOD) acquisition system. With procurement spending down, DOD expects to depend on savings from acquisition reform to help finance future force modernization. Policymakers believe that DOD should use more commercial products because, in many instances, they cost less and their quality is comparable to products built according to DOD military specifications. Many such reform proposals are based on recognition that DOD regulatory barriers and a Cold War acquisition “culture” have inhibited the introduction of commercial products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2398/
Defense Acquisition Reform: Status and Current Issues
The end of the Cold War and its impact on defense spending has created a strong need to reform Department of Defense’s (DOD) acquisition system. With procurement spending down, DOD expects to depend on savings from acquisition reform to help finance future force modernization. Policymakers believe that DOD should use more commercial products because, in many instances, they cost less and their quality is comparable to products built according to DOD military specifications. Many such reform proposals are based on recognition that DOD regulatory barriers and a Cold War acquisition “culture” have inhibited the introduction of commercial products. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2399/