Weapons' high cost in the cross hairs

WASHINGTON — Facing a tight budget, Congress and the Pentagon want to rein in weapons costs by revamping the way the government buys ships, planes and tanks.

Differences over the way to accomplish that raise questions about how successful the effort will be.

Some 20 years ago a commission determined that weapons systems were too expensive and did not reach the battlefield quickly enough. This year, the Government Accountability Office, Congress' auditing arm, reached the same conclusion.

"Two decades later, major weapons systems programs still cost too much and still take too long to field," the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. John Warner, R-Va., said last week at hearings on overhauling weapons buying.

Officials have tried before, memorably after the Pentagon drew criticism in the 1980s for buying $435 hammers and $640 airplane toilets.

Still, the process is marred by cost overruns, production delays and product malfunctions. That has resulted in cancellations of big-ticket weapons programs such as the Army's Comanche helicopter and its Crusader artillery project after billions of dollars were spent.

"It's a real question of who's minding the store. It creates doubt in the investments we're making," said Keith Ashdown, a military expert with Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Lawmakers and the Defense Department agree on the need to do a better job of holding down costs at a time when the military budget is strained by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, hurricane response, rising health care costs and a ballooning federal deficit.

Pentagon officials favor simplifying existing purchasing requirements. Congress wants more checks and balances.

A House bill would require the defense secretary to certify that all rules were followed when the Pentagon and contractors produce a weapons system. The legislation would make the Pentagon submit alternatives to Congress if costs exceed initial estimates by 15 percent.

A bill in the Senate would require added oversight of contracts and further approvals if the Pentagon wanted to buy a weapons system under relaxed rules meant only for commercial purchases.

"They tend to become more cost conscious in periods of shrinking dollars," said Jacques Gansler, an undersecretary of defense for acquisition in the Clinton administration.