You limited your search to:

 Collection: Congressional Research Service Reports
The Berry Amendment: Requiring Defense Procurement to Come from Domestic Sources
This report examines the original intent and purpose of the Berry Amendment (provisions under the 1941 Fifth Supplemental Department of Defense Appropriations Act) and legislative proposals to amend the application of domestic source restrictions, as well as potential options for Congress. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc98044/
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/metadc40183/
The Berry Amendment: Requiring Defense Procurement to Come from Domestic Sources
The Berry Amendment requires the Department of Defense (DOD) to give preference in procurement to domestically produced, manufactured, or home grown products, notably food, clothing, fabrics, and specialty metals. In order to protect the U.S. industrial base during periods of adversity and war, Congress passed domestic source restrictions as part of the 1941 Fifth Supplemental DOD Appropriations Act; these provisions later became the Berry Amendment. This report examines the original intent and purpose of the Berry Amendment, legislative proposals to amend the application of domestic source restrictions, as well as options for Congress. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10475/
The Berry Amendment: Requiring Defense Procurement to Come from Domestic Sources
The Berry Amendment requires the Department of Defense (DOD) to give preference in procurement to domestically produced, manufactured, or home grown products, notably food, clothing, fabrics, and specialty metals. This report examines the original intent and purpose of the Berry Amendment, legislative proposals to amend the application of domestic source restrictions, as well as options for Congress. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9927/
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/metacrs7152/
Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)) and CG(X) Programs: Background and Issues for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9717/
Military Base Closures: Role and Cost of Environmental Cleanup
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9952/
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/metacrs9689/
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/metacrs9769/
Defense Procurement: Full Funding Policy -- Background, Issues, and Options for Congress
The full funding policy is a federal budgeting rule imposed on the Department of Defense (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. This policy relates to Congress's power of the purse and its responsibility for conducting oversight of DOD programs. In recent years, some DOD weapons--specifically, certain Navy ships--have not been procured in accordance with the above policy. The DOD is requesting that certain procurements take place without keeping with the above and precedented policy. The full funding policy helps keeps DOD procurements streamlined so that they can be easily followed and recorded; deviations from this policy would limit and complicate Congress's oversight of DOD procedures. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10462/
Defense Procurement: Full Funding Policy -- Background, Issues, and Options for Congress
The full funding policy is a federal budgeting rule imposed on the Department of Defense (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. A principal effect of the full funding policy is to prevent the use of incremental funding, under which the cost of a weapon is divided into two or more annual portions. Opponents believed incremental funding could make the total procurement costs of weapons and equipment more difficult for Congress to understand and track. Congress has several options for responding to recent proposals for procuring DOD ships and aircraft with funding mechanisms that do not conform to the full funding policy. These options could have the effect of terminating, modifying, maintaining, or strengthening the full funding policy. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10463/
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/metadc84035/
Military Base Closures: Role and Costs of Environmental Cleanup
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10175/
Comparisons of U.S. and Foreign Military Spending: Data from Selected Public Sources
This report lists and compares military expenditures of the United States and foreign nations using two sources: the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies’ (IISS) The Military Balance, and the U.S. State Department’s World Military Expenditures and Arms Transfers (WMEAT). Although the IISS and the U.S. State Department aim to provide figures that are as consistent and accurate as possible, cross-national comparisons of defense spending are inherently imperfect. Available sets of figures are useful, but often do not correspond with one another for a variety of reasons. This report provides two sets of figures from widely recognized sources in order to offer Congress a sample of the data published on this topic. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5807/
Defense Budget for FY2002: An Overview of Bush Administration Plans and Key Issues for Congress
Details of Bush Administration plans for the defense budget have been on hold for several months as senior officials have undertaken a reassessment of defense policy known as the “National Defense Review.” The initial Bush budget outline, A Blueprint for New Beginnings, released on February 28, and the Administration’s official FY2002 budget request, released on April 9, include $325 billion in new budget authority for national defense in FY2002, but that total remains subject to change as the defense review proceeds. Moreover, official Administration defense budget projections beyond FY2002 simply reflect projected growth with inflation in overall annual funding for national defense fromFY2003 through FY2006 rather than the results of any policy assessment. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1550/
Military Spending by Foreign Nations: Data from Selected Public Sources
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1549/
A Defense Budget Primer
This report is a primer for those who wish to familiarize themselves with the defense budget process. The report defines basic defense budget-related terms, describes the structure of the defense budget, briefly reviews the budgeting process within the Department of Defense (DOD), and outlines the successive phases of the congressional defense budget process. It also provides a short review of the budget execution process. This report will be updated only in the event of significant changes to the defense budget process. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs606/
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/
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/metacrs7845/
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/metacrs7423/
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/
Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4152/
Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5808/
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/metacrs1546/
Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1545/
Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1130/
Military Base Closures: Agreement on a 2005 Round
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs4151/
Military Base Closures: Where Do We Stand?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1548/
Military Base Closures: Where Do We Stand?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1547/
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/metacrs2401/
Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2400/
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/
Defense: FY2012 Budget Request, Authorization and Appropriations
This report discusses legislative action that applied the Budget Control Act (BCA)-mandated spending reduction to FY2012 defense funding legislation was taken by the Senate Appropriations Committee on September 7, 2011, when it adopted discretionary spending ceilings for each of its 12 subcommittees that required the Defense Subcommittee to cut $25.9 billion from the President's request for programs funded by the DOD Appropriations bill. On September 15, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported an amended version of the House-passed DOD Appropriations bill (H.R. 2219) that would cut $29.3 billion from the Administration request. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc93882/
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/
Department of Homeland Security: FY2013 Appropriations
This report describes the FY2013 appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The Administration requested $39.510 billion in adjusted net discretionary budget authority for DHS for FY2013, as part of an overall budget of $59.501 billion (including fees, trust funds, and other funding that is not appropriated or does not score against the budget caps). The request amounts to a $90 million, or a 0.2%, decrease from the $39.600 billion enacted for FY2012 through the consolidated appropriations act (P.L. 112-174). digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc122234/
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/
FY2005 Defense Budget: Frequently Asked Questions
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5742/
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/
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: 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/metacrs8042/
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/
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/metacrs8041/
Navy Ship Procurement: Alternative Funding Approaches - Background and Options for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7185/
Navy Ship Procurement: Alternative Funding Approaches - Background and Options for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7184/
Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs9784/
FIRST PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT LAST