Question cost

GOP senators question cost of Army’s parade spectacle

The chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee said he “would have recommended against” it.

By Lisa Kashinsky, Joe Gould and Paul McLeary

The top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee is expressing skepticism over the Army’s plan to hold a multimillion-dollar parade in Washington on June 14 — even as service leaders defend it as a vital recruiting tool.

“I would have recommended against the parade,” Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi said in an interview Thursday, shortly after learning from Army Secretary Dan Driscoll in an Army budget hearing that the event would have an estimated price tag in the range of $25 million to $40 million.

“On the other hand, the secretary feels that it will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for thousands of young Americans to see what a great opportunity it is to participate in a great military force, that it will be a recruiting tool,” Wicker added. “So, we’ll see.”

Driscoll defended the cost of the parade to members of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday morning. “We believe we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to fill up our recruiting pipeline,” he said.

But he was not able to provide an exact cost, he said, because the Army will also need to cover whatever damage its tanks do to Washington’s streets.

The Army plans to roll 25 M1 Abrams main battle tanks and 150 vehicles down Constitution Avenue for a massive parade that will mark the Army’s 250th birthday — which also falls on President Donald Trump’s 79th birthday. Critics have questioned the cost and potential harm to the capital city’s infrastructure, which the Army hopes to prevent by placing heavy metal plates at key points.

The Army is also bringing about 6,600 troops to Washington and will house them in several vacant federal buildings downtown, said one Army official granted anonymity to share private logistics. Those troops will hail from every active-duty division in the service, and each soldier will receive three meals a day and a $69 daily per diem for any other costs they incur.

A WWII-vintage B-25 bomber and a P-1 fighter will join the parade, along with Vietnam-era Huey helicopters. Soldiers marching in the parade will wear uniforms from every conflict the U.S. has fought, from the Revolutionary War to the present day.

Wicker isn’t the only Republican to question the parade plans. Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she supports celebrating the Army’s 250th birthday but raised eyebrows at the cost estimate.

“I’m glad that we’re honoring the Army. I think that’s really important to recognize such a significant anniversary,” Collins said in a recent interview. But, she added, “the cost does seem a bit steep.”

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), one of the chamber’s most outspoken fiscal hawks, was blunt: “If it costs money, I won’t go,” he said.

Democrats were also, predictably, critical. Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) questioned during the hearing with Driscoll the “exorbitant” cost when the federal government is laying off workers, including veterans.

“Wouldn’t your preference be to save money in light of the budget cuts we’re seeing for training programs, freezes on hiring, shrinking staff levels, deferring maintenance, jeopardizing equipment maintenance fees,” Blumenthal said. “These problems are not theoretical.”

The Army would better spend the cost of the parade on services for military families, such as child care and tuition reimbursement, Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), a veteran, argued at the hearing.

“Let’s be clear: You’re not doing it to celebrate the Army’s birthday, you’re doing it to stroke Donald Trump’s ego,” she said. “There are lots of ways to celebrate the Army’s birthday without blowing it all on a parade.”