{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=D147FF04-8144-43C6-9B8A-60851F6E20D3", "ICYMI: US Navy: Projecting Strength and Building the Fleet of Tomorrow", "2024-10-23", "2024", "2024-10", "Republican", "Senate", "SC", "Lindsey Graham", "G000359", "www.lgraham.senate.gov", "graham", "https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases", "scraper", "US Navy: Projecting Strength and Building the Fleet of Tomorrow\n\nBy Senator Lindsey Graham and Morgan Ortagus\n\nFox News\n\nOctober 23, 2024\n\nhttps://www.foxnews.com/opinion/us-navy-projecting-strength-and-building-fleet-tomorrow\n\nIt\u2019s time for all Americans to grasp a hard truth: in a world that may be on the brink of World War III, our military budgets are inconsistent with the threats we face. This is especially the case with the budget of the Department of the Navy.\n\nThe bad news: the current Navy budget will not make a stronger military or a larger U.S. fleet a reality. The good news: through American innovation and more agile products, we can build a bigger and more efficient Navy.\n\nHowever, President Biden\u2019s proposed FY2025 budget of $257.6 billion for the Department of the Navy is well below inflation and does not provide for a more lethal Navy.\n\nAs both President Biden and President Trump certified, the most direct challenge facing the U.S. Navy today is from the People\u2019s Republic of China. Therefore, strong investments must be made now to ensure the Navy, and most importantly the United States, can meet this threat head-on.\n\nIt comes as no shock to the reader that America and its allies and partners are facing an unprecedented deluge of maritime threats by the People\u2019s Republic of China. The Chinese Navy alone has provoked a U.S. destroyer in the Taiwan Strait with dangerous maneuvers, harassed Taiwan with aggressive military exercises, entered America\u2019s Exclusive Economic Zone in the Bering Sea, developed a jam-resistant submarine torpedo, and injured several Filipino sailors at and around Second Thomas Shoal.\n\nThese developments incrementally set the conditions for a direct conflict on the open seas. Meanwhile, Washington has been lulled into complacency by decades of maritime supremacy. Most concerning, the United States lacks the political resolve to shed the Navy\u2019s Soviet-era mentality and adapt to the new era of great power competition.\n\nTo meet the moment\u2019s maritime threats, America must choose between tough and tougher: make significant investments in our fleet or face the costs of inaction.\n\nSection One: Expanding U.S. Shipbuilding Capacity and Cooperation with Allies\n\nOur shipbuilding industrial base is grappling with significant delays and challenges, affecting major programs like the Columbia-class submarines, Constellation-class frigates, and Ford-class carriers. These delays are not only impacting the procurement of new ships, they are also impacting the ability to maintain the current fleet.\n\nA great first step to combating the maritime threats our nation faces is to expand the physical footprint of the U.S. shipbuilding industry.\n\nThe U.S. shipbuilding industry is first in its class and the men and women that come to work every day in our nation\u2019s shipyards build the world's most lethal and capable warships. In states like South Carolina, there are a wealth of maritime industry suppliers and shipbuilders diligently producing the necessary components to construct our nation\u2019s ships.\n\nBut that alone is not enough. China\u2019s Bohai Shipyard boasts an annual capacity exceeding the total number of ships our Navy has launched since 2014.\n\nIn addition, China is rapidly expanding its existing shipyards and according to experts \"has been investing so much in shipbuilding over the past 18 years that it can now build more ships in a month than the United States can in a year.\"\n\nBy comparison, America only has four public shipyards and these yards focus on maintenance of submarines and aircraft carriers and not the construction of new vessels.\n\nThe Department of the Navy should look at states like South Carolina to build new shipyards to maximize the U.S. shipbuilding capacity and our maritime industry.\n\nIn addition, the Navy must expand maintenance capacity here in the states as well as in the Pacific. The U.S. Navy has already decided to augment its capacity by placing a submarine maintenance facility in Guam. This should be replicated for other vessels elsewhere.\n\nIt is clear that the need for more shipbuilding capacity is great and immediate. Investing here at home will certainly help address the need. At the same time, our nation should also not discount opportunities to work with others when the opportunity presents itself.\n\nThe U.S. Navy cannot afford to leave any stone unturned when thinking of innovative ways to grow the fleet as quickly as possible.\n\nSection Two: Fleet Requirements and Capabilities\n\nA fundamental step toward a 21st-century U.S. Navy is improving both the size and modernity of our existing fleet. The fleet currently consists of carriers, surface combatants, submarines, amphibious warships, combat logistics ships, fleet support vessels and mine warfare assets.\n\nYet this fleet is hardly agile or scalable enough to meet a Chinese maritime threat that includes drones, hypersonic missiles and other high-tech tools of warcraft.\n\nPersistent gaps also remain in amphibious warfare and in contested logistics. Amphibious combat vehicles, landing vessels, and light warships are all needed in higher quantities for rapid and effective landings.\n\nUnmanned and underwater systems are especially relevant to modern naval operations. Often at a fraction of the cost of manned vessels, these vessels \u2013 both large and small \u2013 perform intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance missions, logistics and strike operations.\n\nThey also relieve pressure on our high-demand, low-density assets while augmenting the fleet. The proof is in their success in Ukraine, where naval drones have successfully countered Russia\u2019s Black Sea Fleet, forcing them into safe harbors and destroying dozens of Russian vessels.\n\nIn addition to their combat roles, unmanned systems are revolutionizing naval logistics. Unmanned logistics platforms can autonomously deliver supplies, ammunition, and fuel to forward-deployed forces, significantly extending the operational reach of our fleet.\n\nThese systems reduce the need for manned resupply missions, which are often vulnerable to enemy attacks, thereby enhancing the safety and efficiency of our operations. By integrating unmanned logistics into our naval strategy, we can maintain sustained operations in contested environments, ensuring our forces remain equipped and ready for extended engagements.\n\nA possible way to advance the construction of these unmanned vessels is through an international partnership. Such a partnership could be modeled after the trilateral security partnership between the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia (AUKUS) for submarine production in Australia. An AUKUS-like agreement for unmanned systems could create a new pathway for faster construction of these unmanned platforms and increase the integration between partners.\n\nChina\u2019s naval power is growing at an alarming rate, with close to 400 ships currently in service and projections of 435 by 2030. The impact of this expansion is worsened by our diminishing technology gap, as China advances its naval technology while the U.S. Navy struggles to build ships.\n\nMeanwhile, the U.S. Navy\u2019s latest shipbuilding assessment calls for 381 battle force ships (carriers, destroyers, amphibious ships, submarines, etc.) and 134 unmanned vehicles, totaling 515 vessels.\n\nWhile it is great to have a roadmap, the U.S. Navy\u2019s own shipbuilding plan projects that we would not reach 381 battle force ships until 2043 under the best scenario. This delay poses an unacceptable risk to our national security and could force our sailors into a fight they are underequipped to win.\n\nTo avoid that scenario and reduce the exposure of manned ships to enemy attacks, we must expedite shipbuilding with a focus on unmanned surface and subsurface systems that are affordable and quick to produce. America does not have to win a shipbuilding foot race, but we must strategically invest in both the capabilities and capacities to counter China\u2019s growing maritime capabilities and protect our interests.\n\nSection Three: Funding the Department of the Navy\n\nThe U.S. military budget is woefully underfunded for the threats our nation faces today. The U.S. is on target to spend only 3.1% of total GDP on defense in Fiscal Year 2025 and that percentage is projected to fall to a paltry 2.4% in 2034 under the Biden-Harris budget plan.\n\nBudgetary \"business as usual\" will only widen the gap between U.S. and Chinese naval capabilities. With China\u2019s defense budget growing in both size and sophistication, it is imperative the United States make greater, and smarter, investments of our own.\n\nIncreasing funding for the Navy\u2019s ship procurement, known as the Shipbuilding and Conversion account, alone will not be enough. In order to address the shipbuilding problem, Congress should consider a comprehensive approach that includes strong and consistent funding across procurement, operations and maintenance, research and development, personnel and military construction accounts.\n\nIn order to do this, Congress will need to think outside the box as the current budgetary restraints limit the needed investments. Congress should form a \"Fleet Investment Fund\" \u2013 codifying the Navy\u2019s entire budget growth at least 5% above inflation and more than the department\u2019s topline request \u2013 covering all aspects of naval development and readiness.\n\nMost importantly, this account should not be subject to any caps or restrictions within the president\u2019s budget request to Congress each fiscal year. The formation of this account must be seen as a national imperative.\n\nConclusion\n\nThere is no doubt that the costs of these investments are great and will require tradeoffs and significant political capital, but the costs of inaction will be far greater. History demonstrates that adversaries are emboldened by America\u2019s hesitation and deterred by its resolve. History proves that the U.S. Navy can adapt to evolving defense needs.\n\nSince 1945, America has served as the global guarantor of open seas and freedom of navigation in contested waterways and critical trade routes. President Theodore Roosevelt stated before Congress in 1902 that \"a good Navy is not a provocation to war. It is the surest guaranty of peace.\"\n\nMorgan Ortagus is the founder of Polaris National Security and formerly served as the spokesperson for the U.S. State Department under President Trump.\n\nRepublican Lindsey Graham represents South Carolina in the United States Senate.", 1, "2026-03-30T01:40:41Z", "2026-04-06T18:55:29Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://www.lgraham.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=D147FF04-8144-43C6-9B8A-60851F6E20D3"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 1.9924920052289963, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}