National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1987

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1987
Name	National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1987
Enacted by	99th United States Congress
Signed by	Ronald Reagan
Signed date	1986
Public law	Pub.L. 99-xxx
Title	National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1987

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1987 was comprehensive United States defense legislation enacted during the administration of Ronald Reagan and the 99th United States Congress. The statute affected procurement, personnel, research, development, and strategic posture amid Cold War tensions involving the Soviet Union, Warsaw Pact, and NATO allies such as the United Kingdom, France, and the Federal Republic of Germany. It intersected with contemporaneous initiatives in arms control, space policy, and naval expansion shaped by figures including Caspar Weinberger, Frank Carlucci, and congressional leaders from the Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Armed Services Committee.

Background and legislative history

Legislative origins trace to budget deliberations in the 99th United States Congress, with contributions from the Senate Armed Services Committee, the House Armed Services Committee, and staff from the Office of Management and Budget. Debates referenced strategic concepts articulated by the Reagan Doctrine, the 1986 Reykjavik Summit, and policy papers by the RAND Corporation and the Brookings Institution. Key hearings featured testimony from Department of Defense leaders such as Caspar Weinberger and service chiefs including the Chief of Naval Operations, the Chief of Staff of the United States Army, and the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force. Legislative negotiation involved coordination with the Government Accountability Office and oversight from the Congressional Budget Office while interacting with statutes like the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986 and pending arms-control frameworks such as the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty discussions.

Provisions and military policy changes

The Act codified provisions affecting force structure and procurement, influencing platforms associated with the United States Navy carrier strike groups, United States Air Force bomber modernization, and United States Army mechanized brigades. It authorized research and development funding for programs related to the B-1 Lancer, the F-15 Eagle, the F-16 Fighting Falcon, the M1 Abrams, and the Los Angeles-class submarine. Provisions addressed strategic systems including intercontinental ballistic missile modernization, strategic sealift, and anti-submarine warfare linked to the SSN-688 Los Angeles class. Personnel measures touched on pay scales tied to the Defense Officer Personnel Management Act framework, retirement benefits interacting with the Thrift Savings Plan debate, and changes to recruitment incentives influenced by studies from the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute.

Budgetary authorizations and appropriations

The Act set topline authorizations that framed appropriations allocations across titles for procurement, operation and maintenance, military construction, and research, development, test, and evaluation. Budgetary directives referenced budget control mechanisms overseen by the Office of Management and Budget and auditing by the Government Accountability Office. Funding priorities allocated resources to shipbuilding programs at yards such as Bath Iron Works and Newport News Shipbuilding, aerospace contracts with Lockheed Corporation and Northrop Corporation, and armored vehicle production at facilities tied to General Dynamics and Chrysler Defense. The authorization influenced Department of Defense budget submissions to the Congressional Budget Office and the annual appropriations process conducted by the United States House Committee on Appropriations and the United States Senate Committee on Appropriations.

Impact on U.S. defense posture and operations

Implementation shaped U.S. capabilities during the late Cold War, affecting deterrence vis-à-vis the Soviet Navy, Strategic Rocket Forces, and Eastern Bloc militaries. Expanded shipbuilding and Air Force modernization influenced deployments in the Mediterranean Sea, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization forward presence, and contingency planning in theaters including the Persian Gulf and Korea. The Act’s procurement decisions had downstream effects on defense industrial base relationships with firms such as Boeing, Raytheon Technologies, and General Electric, and on allied interoperability with partners like Canada, Italy, and Japan. Training, readiness, and basing provisions interacted with agreements such as the Status of Forces Agreement arrangements and installations including Fort Bragg, Naval Station Norfolk, and Andersen Air Force Base.

Congressional debate and amendments

Floor debates involved prominent legislators from both chambers including members of the Senate Armed Services Committee such as Barry Goldwater’s successors in influence and House figures involved with the House Armed Services Committee. Contentious amendments addressed procurement quantities for the F/A-18 Hornet, shipbuilding rates for the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, and limits on program transfers influenced by oversight from the Government Accountability Office. Budget-cutting proposals referenced bipartisan fiscal perspectives from members aligned with the Budget Committee and advocacy groups including the Cato Institute and Center for Strategic and International Studies. Roll call votes were documented by the Clerk of the United States House of Representatives and the Secretary of the Senate during the enactment process.

Implementation and subsequent legislation

Implementation required coordination among the Department of Defense, the Defense Logistics Agency, and combatant commands such as United States European Command and United States Pacific Command. Programmatic outcomes informed later statutes and amendments in subsequent National Defense Authorization Acts, influenced the trajectory of the Goldwater-Nichols Act reforms, and fed into arms control execution related to the INF Treaty and later bilateral accords with the Russian Federation. Defense industrial policy shifts affected mergers and acquisitions involving United Technologies Corporation and Northrop Grumman, and implementation lessons appeared in reports by the Congressional Research Service and the Government Accountability Office.

Category:United States federal defense legislation