Robert Byrd

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. I thank the distinguished Senator. I now yield to my friend from Alaska.

Mr. BYRD. Yes, without losing my right to the floor.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, since before this war began, I have asked repeatedly of this administration what their estimate of the cost of this war is. Do you have any estimate? We get a blank stare. I cannot believe that an administration is going to lead a country into war without having some inside estimates by the very capable people who surround the President about what this war would cost. Of course, nobody--least of all me--would ever expect the administration to be able to say it is going to cost $2.785 trillion. But I, others, and the American people were seeking some kind of a realistic range-- and now more so than then. Now we know that it has been testified to in the Armed Services Committee that the war in Afghanistan is costing $3.9 billion a month. We know that. That wasn't known just at the beginning of that day. I am sure the Defense Department had already run the estimate and had come out with the figures. Why couldn't the administration use those figures and say to the Congress, well, we estimate that it is costing in Iraq $3 billion, $3.5 billion, between $3.5 billion and $4.1 billion, or something like that? We just get stonewalled when we ask questions of that kind. I think Congress is entitled to better than that.

Mr. BYRD. Absolutely.

Mr. BYRD. We approved it in the omnibus bill.

Mr. BYRD. We approved it in the omnibus bill. That is the information I have.

Mr. BYRD. They should have. The President, I say, should send up a supplemental budget request today for $58 billion.

Mr. BYRD. Yes. Well, I thank the distinguished Senator from Florida for his thoughtful observations. I would hope that the administration would send up a supplemental request. Otherwise, I think we ought to try to add to it this bill. Why not? Why not? That is the anticipated cost. In any event, let me finish my statement. I am almost at the end. The administration has reported to Congress that we are spending $4.8 billion each month in Iraq and Afghanistan. These costs can be anticipated, can be budgeted, and can be controlled. They are costs driven by policy emanating from the White House. There is absolutely no reason why they should not be included in the Defense appropriations bill that is now before the Senate. If we truly want to support our troops, we should have truth in budgeting. My amendment calls on the President to be up front about the costs of our deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan. It would stop the practice of gimmicks and secrecy which hide the true cost of these foreign entanglements from the American people, the American taxpayer. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BYRD. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have an amendment which I shall send to the desk shortly. This January, in his State of the Union Address, President Bush announced a 5-year, $15 billion global AIDS initiative. The President received a lot of praise for that announcement, as he should have. AIDS is a dreadful disease which is currently inflicting an almost unimaginable toll on the African continent, devastating entire populations. Sub-Saharan Africa has been far more severely affected by AIDS than any other part of the world. According to UNAIDS--the Joint United Nations Program on HIV/AIDS--in 2002, there were 29.4 million people living with HIV and AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa. Africa has about 10 percent of the world's population but more than 70 percent of the worldwide total of infected people. In fact, the infection rate among adults is about 8.8 percent in Africa, compared with 1.2 percent worldwide. More than 17 million Africans have died from AIDS since its emergence, and UNAIDS estimates that by 2020, an additional 55 million Africans will lose their lives to the epidemic. The sheer brutality of these statistics is hard to fathom and must tug at the hearts and souls of all of us in this body. AIDS' severe social and economic consequences are depriving Africa of skilled workers and teachers while reducing life expectancy by decades in some countries. An estimated 11 million children in Africa have been orphaned by AIDS--having literally watched their AIDS-inflicted parents slowly slip away before their eyes. These AIDS orphans are now facing increased risk of malnutrition and reduced prospects for education. AIDS is being blamed for declines in agricultural production in some nations, and is regarded as a major contributor to the famine threatening southern Africa. The United Nations Development Programme Annual Report for 2003 states that, ``HIV/AIDS is a catastrophe for economic stability and may be the world's most serious development crisis.'' For far too long, the world has turned a blind eye to the suffering on the African continent. Does the United States, as the wealthiest Nation on Earth, not have a special moral responsibility to act to alleviate some of the worldwide misery caused by AIDS? Americans have always been generous and caring people, and I have no doubt that they would expect their elected officials to rise to the occasion and take the lead in ridding the world of this horrid disease, wherever it takes root. I am pleased by Congress' initial response to the President's call for action to combat the AIDS crisis in Africa--with passage of the United States Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of 2003. And I was encouraged that our President publicly touted the legislation's passage as a moral triumph. However, I have seen far too many fancy White House bill signing ceremonies and dressed-up press releases in the last 2\1/2\ years to be entirely confident that this Administration would simply keep its promise to fully fund this legislation. Once the cameras stop rolling and the headlines fade away, this administration seems to have established a troubling pattern of repeatedly making promises but failing to deliver the dollars needed to keep them. The drastically underfunded No Child Left Behind Act and the President's skimpy funding requests to meet our homeland security needs are perfect examples. Last week, as President Bush visited five African countries, he again pledged that the United States would play a leading role in combating AIDS. The President repeatedly promised to do all in his power to make sure that Congress fully financed his proposed 5-year, $15 billion program to attack the disease in the world's poorest countries. I commend him for having gone to Africa, and for promoting greater efforts to fight AIDS. He should be held to his commitment to those in Africa who are suffering from AIDS. Clearly, an expectation has been created that the administration and Congress will provide $3 billion toward this noble initiative in fiscal year 2004, as language explicitly authorizing that amount for fiscal year 2004 is spelled out in the new Global AIDS law that the President proudly signed. Unfortunately, despite all the recent headlines, photo-ops, and White House promises regarding the African AIDS crisis, the simple fact remains that the President did not put enough money behind his promises, as he failed to include $3 billion to fight AIDS in his fiscal year 2004 budget. That is right! He requested only $1.9 billion, not the $3 billion that the world now expects. That is $1.1 billion less than what he promised. Just last Thursday, Members of this body went on record, by a vote of 78-to-18, in support of a Sense of the Congress Resolution that stated our intent to provide full appropriations for the $15 billion AIDS initiative touted by our President, including $3 billion in fiscal year 2004. The lives of millions worldwide are at stake. Now is the time to honor the financial commitment made by Congress and the President to combat Global AIDS. My amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill would do just that by allocating $750 million in fiscal year 2004 to the Coordinator of United States Government Activities to Combat HIV/ AIDS Globally for the purpose of making a contribution to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria and $350 million for the Secretary of Health and Human Services for programs to combat AIDS overseas. This amendment would be completely offset by a $1.1 billion across-the-board cut in the amounts appropriated for the Department of Defense under Titles III and IV of this legislation for Procurement, as well as for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation. The bill before the Senate includes $73,976,000,000 in procurement spending, an amount that is $1,255,000,000 above the President's request. This bill also includes $63,565,000,000 for research and development programs, a level that is $1,738,000,000 above the President's request. Certainly, the Senate should be willing to reduce the current procurement and research funding by less than eight-tenths of 1 percent in order to fulfill the President's promise. It is his promise. He had pledged our Nation's help with one of the most dreaded and destructive scourges on the globe. But he is trying to shift the burden to Congress to make up the difference in the underfunded budget request. Congress should step up to this challenge and appropriate the money that we have already authorized by an overwhelming vote. My amendment would allow us to fulfill the humanitarian promise made by our Government to fight the worst public health crisis that history has ever known with a total $3 billion appropriation in fiscal year 2004. This amendment would help to alleviate some of the misery endured by millions of AIDS-inflicted families around the globe for roughly what we spend in a single day to fund the Department of Defense. Mr. President, AIDS is a catastrophe for millions around the globe. What better message can we send than to reduce our behemoth military budget ever so slightly in order to keep our national word to help fight this dread disease. It is the right thing to do. It is the noble thing to do. Let's do it.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I send to the desk an amendment. I ask unanimous consent that the following cosponsors be added.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the cosponsors are Senators Clinton, Pryor, Lautenberg, Murray, and Corzine. I ask they be added.

Mr. BYRD. Yes, I do, and there are other Senators who wish to speak on this. Has the Senator yielded the floor?

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the facts are staggering. More than 5 million people are infected with HIV/AIDS each year. That is 15,000 people infected each day, 625 people infected every hour, more than 10 people every minute--people of virtually all ages, people in every corner of the world. Last year, more than 3 million people died from AIDS. The longer we wait to find a cure, the longer we wait to fulfill the pledge to the global HIV/AIDS trust fund, the longer we wait, the greater the tragedy. The Byrd amendment would allow the Senate to fulfill the humanitarian promise made to fight HIV/AIDS. This amendment would help to alleviate some of the misery endured by millions of AIDS-inflicted families around the globe for roughly what we spend in a single day to fund the Department of Defense. This amendment would make good on the Government's pledge to the world and the effort to combat the global HIV/AIDS epidemic. The President promised $15 billion in the next 5 years. Congress has authorized $3 billion for the next fiscal year. But the authorization without appropriation is a will-o'-the-wisp. The President's budget only provides $1.9 billion. This amendment would increase funding for the global AIDS/HIV initiative by $1.1 billion to $3 billion. The amendment would be offset by a $1.1 billion across-the-board cut in the amounts appropriated for the Defense Department procurement as well as for research, development, test, and evaluation. We are spending more than $1 billion a day for defense in this bill. Surely we can afford to spend $1 billion more in a year to combat AIDS and HIV. I reiterate that a few days ago--last week it was, I believe-- President Bush visited five African countries. He again pledged that the United States would play a leading role in combating AIDS. The President repeatedly promised to do all in his power to make sure that Congress fully financed his proposed 5-year, $15 billion program to attack the disease in the world's poorest countries. This is the President's chance. Why wait? He may not be around here for 5 years. Who knows, right? The President may not be in power for 5 years. He may not be around here 5 years. Why not help him to fulfill his commitment today? Three billion dollars in 1 year--$3 billion--to attack this disease. On July 10, 2003, the Senate voted in a sense-of-the-Senate resolution 78 to 18 to provide full appropriations for the $15 billion AIDS initiative touted by our President, including $3 billion in fiscal year 2004. Now is the time, Senators, to step up to the plate and honor your commitment. Now is the time to help the President to honor his commitment. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment and to vote no on the motion to table. I yield the floor.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, last year, Senator Grassley and I had an amendment included in the Fiscal Year 2003 Defense Appropriations Act to crack down on the abuse of credit cards that are issued to Pentagon employees. Today, we offer an amendment to extend those provisions through fiscal year 2004. The General Accounting Office has completed numerous studies on Government-issued charge cards. These reports have highlighted the Department of Defense as one of the worst abusers of those cards. Defense Department employees have been caught red-handed using their Government-issued credit card to pay for personal expenses such as luxury cruises, concert tickets, Internet gambling, and even adult entertainment. Incredibly, these abusive charges are being underwritten by the U.S. taxpayer, to the tune of untold millions each year. Based on this evidence, the GAO has recommended that DOD employees should undergo credit checks before they are issued a Government charge card. That is exactly what the amendment offered last year by Senator Grassley and me required. The GAO recently reported to our staffs that despite progress in cracking down on some types of abuse, the Pentagon has not complied with last year's Byrd-Grassley amendment. That is why we offer an amendment to this Defense bill to extend last year's provision of the Defense Appropriations Act to apply in fiscal year 2004. The Pentagon should be on notice that it has to straighten out its act with regard to charge card abuse, as well as a whole host of other accounting problems. Ignoring laws that require the Department of Defense to crack down on these problems is a serious mistake. Congress should send the message loud and clear that we expect them to comply with the Byrd-Grassley amendment on credit card abuse.

Mr. BYRD

Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. BYRD. The distinguished Senator speaks of our forces being deployed in various and sundry continents, countries, and climes. Are these guardsmen and reservists whom the Senator is talking about?

Mr. BYRD. He speaks of Kosovo. Are those National Guardsmen and Reserve deployed there?

Mr. BYRD. Are they limited to 6 months?

Mr. BYRD. But the time there, are they limited to 6 months?

Mr. BYRD. Then why shouldn't the people in the hot sands of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iraq be likewise?

Mr. BYRD. Is the Senator aware of any complaints from his National Guard in Alaska or other Reserve units there that they are being held longer than the 180 days and being redeployed for a longer period?

Mr. BYRD. I am trying to get some predictability worked into the equation. That is the reason I have offered this amendment. I am getting these letters from the men and women from West Virginia who are in Iraq. They want to come home. They think they have served the time that was indicated to them they would serve and yet they are serving longer.

Mr. BYRD. Do I have the floor, Mr. President?