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 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/
- 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/
- 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/
- 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/
- Military Base Closures: Role and Costs of Environmental Cleanup
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10175/
- Military Spending by Foreign Nations: Data from Selected Public Sources
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1549/
- 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/
- 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/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/
- 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/
- 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/metacrs7152/
- 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/
- 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/
- Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs1545/
- 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: 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/metacrs1548/
- 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/metacrs2401/
- Military Base Closures: Time for Another Round?
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs2400/
- Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs5808/
- 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/
- 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/
- Military Base Closures: Implementing the 2005 Round
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7423/
- 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/
- 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/
- 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/
- Navy DD(X) and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6173/
- Navy DD(X), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6752/
- 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/metacrs6757/
- Navy DD(X), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6753/
- Navy DD(X), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress
- No Description digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs6478/
- 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/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
- 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/
- 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/
- 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/
- Navy Littoral Combat Ship (LCS): Background and Issues for Congress
- The Navy's proposed FY2007 budget requests $521 million to procure two Littoral Combat Ships (LCSs). The House-reported version of the FY2007 defense appropriations bill recommends approval of this request. The Senate-reported version recommends funding one LCS in FY2007 and rescinding funding for one of the three LCSs procured in FY2006. For a longer discussion of the LCS program, see CRS Report RL32109, Navy DDG-1000 (DD(X)), CG(X), and LCS Ship Acquisition Programs: Oversight Issues and Options for Congress, by Ronald O'Rourke. digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs10258/