WASHINGTON — As top US lawmakers fired the proverbial starting gun Wednesday for House-Senate negotiations on a defense policy bill, they expressed confidence they would reach common ground, but the big sticking point is clear.
There is an $18 billion disparity between the bills and no clear path to resolve it, said lawmakers at a rare public press conference hosted by the "Big Four," the armed services chairmen Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, as well as the panels' ranking members Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., and Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash.
"I didn't see a major stumbling block, except the issues of sequestration, which we have not found a way through yet, but we have just begun," McCain said.
Outside of the press conference, McCain said, "I don't know the way through it now, but we always seem to get through it."
The committees hosted a closed "pass the gavel" conference meeting in the bowels of the Capitol on Wednesday wherein lawmakers were able to make brief statements about their priorities. Smith agreed the funding controversy was a "significant stumbling block."
"There is that need, there isn't the money, and each of the four committees has taken a different swing at that, and the White House as well," Smith said, referring to the congressional panels with jurisdiction over defense policy and spending. "Figuring out the money is the most important part of our negotiations."
The Senate bill, in keeping with the funding levels in last year's budget deal, authorizes about $543 billion for national defense programs and $59 billion for overseas contingency operations (OCO).
House Democrats have called that Republican plan risky and irresponsible, and McCain did not support that approach. McCain instead mounted a failed attempt to add $18 billion to the Senate defense policy bill.
On Wednesday, McCain said the military's increased activity in Europe, Afghanistan and the Middle East have added pressures for more defense spending.
Thornberry pointed to reports the Pentagon is preparing a supplemental spending request.
"Our job is to work in these intense discussions, get our bill ready, come back in September and see what the funding landscape looks like— and work our way from there," Thornberry said.
The White House has issued a veto threat over both bills, but the assembled lawmakers said it was too soon to say what role that threat would play in the negotiations.
Reed, whose party leadership is seeking parity for defense and non-defense spending, said that there are national security expenses outside the Pentagon—for agencies such as the FBI.
Smith said the problem is Congress' "desire to spend more than we have" for defense and priorities like the nation's infrastructure—all with a national deficit in the billions. "We can lift the budget caps, but how do we live within our means," Smith said.
In spite of it all, lawmakers circled back to shared optimism. Asked how they would be able to find a solution to persistent sequestration-related funding issues, McCain and Smith said in unison: "Because we always have."
Email: jgould@defensenews.com
Twitter: @reporterjoe
Joe Gould was the senior Pentagon reporter for Defense News, covering the intersection of national security policy, politics and the defense industry. He had previously served as Congress reporter.
