Defense

Defense

As a member of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC), I make the defense of our country and the support of our women and men in the military a top priority.

Bases

The Second Congressional District is fortunate to have Naval Station Everett and Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, two critical military installations, within its borders.

Naval Station Everett, located in Everett, Washington, serves as home to over 5,000 sailors and their families. Homeported at the base are three frigates, two destroyers, one guided missile destroyer, the U.S. Naval Ship Shasta, one U.S. Coast Guard buoy tender, and the nuclear aircraft carrier the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln. Naval Station Everett is one of the newest bases in the Navy, and is considered "The Sailor's Choice" because of its incredible location, high quality of life, and supportive community.

Naval Air Station Whidbey Island, located in Oak Harbor, Washington, has been a critical piece of our nation's defense for over 60 years. The base mainly serves as home to the majority of the Navy's EA-6B Prowlers and the P-3 Orions. There are over 7,800 active duty sailors and Marines based at NAS Whidbey, and nearly 2,100 civilians, 13,000 dependents, and more than 10,000 military retirees in the NAS Whidbey community.

BRAC

The president requested, and the Congress approved, a Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) round for 2005. The Puget Sound region and its dispersed bases play a key role in our nation's security, and Naval Air Station (NAS) Whidbey and Naval Station (NS) Everett are key assets to the region and the nation. While all bases in the U.S. armed forces will be reviewed and all communities around these bases should be prepared, it is my belief that both NAS Whidbey and NS Everett will be seen as critical to our national security and not be closed. I am working very hard to ensure that everything possible is done to make the case that these bases not only be spared, but grow as well.

Pay Increase for our Women and Men in our Military

We can never fully repay the sacrifices of our women and men in the military. However, as a member of the House Armed Services Committee, it is my belief that Congress must provide adequate pay, appropriate housing, and the weaponry to protect our nation. For this reason, I have strongly supported every pay increase proposed for our troops and will continue to fight for improvements to their quality of life.

Iraq

In October of 2002, I voted against the Iraq war resolution, believing the United States should not take a "go it alone" approach to developing peace in Iraq. Now that we are in Iraq, I believe we have an obligation to fulfill in making Iraq a stable democratic country within the international community.

This past September I joined a bipartisan Congressional Delegation trip to Iraq to monitor the status of military activity and reconstruction. As you may know, I have criticized the administration for its miscalculation in its planning for post-war Iraq.

It is fair to say that progress is being made on security and reconstruction issues, but there is a long way to go. In my opinion, the United States is nowhere near the end of its commitment to build a peace in Iraq that is as successful as the military action that took down Saddam Hussein, and that is one of the reasons I supported the $87 billion Iraq reconstruction supplemental.

I believe that the administration underestimated the magnitude of the reconstruction efforts and lacked a plan for post-war efforts. Where the administration got these wrong, Congress must move forward in Iraq to try to get things right.

Weapons of Mass Destruction

I believe that the greatest national security threat to the United States, particularly in this age of terrorism, is poorly secured weapons of mass destruction (WMD), WMD materials, and WMD expertise. For this reason, I am a strong supporter of programs like the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program. This program was devised in the early 1990s to ensure that the nuclear, chemical, and biological arsenal of the former Soviet Union would not fall into the wrong hands. Its purpose was to dismantle and destroy weapons and weapons-usable materials, as well as to secure and safely store weapons-grade material in Russia and the newly Independent States of the former Soviet Union.

What about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq?

Every person has an obligation to embrace our military victory in Iraq, thanks to the brave women and men serving in our armed forces. The military victory in Iraq was a success, and the people who suffered under Saddam Hussein's brutal dictatorship are better off without him. The women and men who serve in our nation's armed forces should be proud of their role in bringing freedom to the Iraqi people.

Our military success does not let the administration off the hook on weapons of mass destruction. As I have told many constituents, either the intelligence was wrong that indicated there were weapons of mass destruction spread over Iraq, or those weapons really were there but are now in the hands of someone else. Either answer has critical implications for our national security.

Disconcerting reports have surfaced detailing declassified information that indicates there was some doubt among U.S. intelligence officials about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles. It is critical that the administration honestly and truthfully answer all questions about weapons of mass destruction and the intelligence the U.S. had about Iraq.

To that end, I have cosponsored a bill that would establish an independent commission to look into the intelligence we had about Iraq.

Congress has an obligation to ask these appropriate questions as we work to make our nation more secure. National security has become personal security. Therefore, it is in the security interest of each American that we get answers to the critical national security questions surrounding the lack of weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq.

http://www.house.gov/larsen/issue/defense.shtml