Jim Inhofe

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, there is another side to this story, and I think, when you hear those promoting this particular amendment, it is one we all agree--we want an end to the war. We want this to happen. But there are some other reasons that this probably is not the best way to do it. First of all, the amendment directs a calendar-based withdrawal from Afghanistan rather than a conditions-based. We have talked about this quite often. It is something that you can't just say ``It is going to happen by this date'' but, rather, under these certain circumstances. It undermines peace negotiations and the Trump administration's Afghan strategy. He has talked about that publicly. I think a lot of people agree with that. I do. It would also undermine the February 2020 U.S. agreement with the Taliban that tries to map out a path to peace. According to the plan, U.S. forces' reductions must be tied to Taliban counterterrorism commitments. That is part of the plan. Repealing it--the 2001 authorization for use of military force--would undermine the authority of the President of the United States for countering terrorists in Afghanistan but also would undermine the GITMO detention and other global counterterrorist efforts. The DOD and the White House would oppose this because it removes an authority for using military force and would significantly undermine counterterrorism authority. So I move to table the Paul amendment No. 2011, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I have 7 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at 10:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Environment and Public Works The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at 9:45 a.m., to conduct a hearing on nominations. Committee on Environment and Public Works The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Indian Affairs The Committee on Indian Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Veterans' Affairs The Committee on Veterans' Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, July 1, 2020, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a closed hearing.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. 4148, introduced earlier day.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered read a third time and passed, and that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be recognized for such time as I shall consume.

Mr. INHOFE. That is another way of saying I want to complete my remarks. Let me say this about the Senator from Maine: Of all the Members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, he is the one who is always there and getting involved in these things with a sense of urgency that he feels in his heart, and I appreciate him as a very valuable member of that committee. I thank the Senator for all of his service. Russia Mr. President, earlier this morning, I was at the White House with a few other Members to receive a briefing on the reports of Putin putting bounties on troops in Afghanistan. You have been hearing about this. After a very long briefing, I am confident that President Trump did not know about the reporting. There is some confusion in terms of our own intelligence, and it just didn't rise to the level of the President at that time. Another takeaway from the briefing is that our intelligence agencies aren't in complete agreement on this even now. This is going to continue to be a Washington, DC, story--one where they try to make the President look bad. Here is what we also know, and we don't need any special intelligence to tell us. Putin is a murderer, a thug. He hates America. He hates our interests. We know that, and we are doing something about it. President Trump has taken a whole list of steps to protect our troops and stand up against Russia's actions. In the Senate, the NDAA is focused on our top priority of taking care of our troops and also aligning our military to better deter against China and Russia. As we continue consideration, let me just give a brief update as to where we are right now. We talk a lot about our troops and our military strength in this bill. At the end of the day, the bill affects all American families and our communities directly. It is about their security, their freedom, their prosperity. We introduced an amendment last night that included 79 bipartisan amendments. As we speak, we are working on building a managers' package that includes dozens of bipartisan amendments. We are really doing the job the way it is supposed to be done, the way we did last year and the year before. The safety of the American people is not negotiable. With the fiscal year 2021 NDAA, we move one step closer to ensuring the safety of and closing the gap between our military and those of China and Russia. For some reason, this never gets out in the media. Nobody ever talks about this and, to me, it is so significant that during the Obama years--the last 5 years, which would have been between 2010 and 2015-- he reduced spending on defense by 25 percent. That is 25 percent in a 5-year period. I don't think we have ever seen that before. At the same time that we were reducing by 25 percent, Russia was increasing by 34 percent. If you think that is bad, at the same time China was increasing by 83 percent. We reduce by 25 percent and China increases by 83 percent. How do you catch up? It is going to be hard work. As for some things in this bill, it increases funding for weapons procurement programs, including Tomahawk missiles, long-range anti-ship missiles, ground-based anti-ship missiles, and realigning our weapons capability to match the NDS. This is the NDS. I like to take this with me so people understand that this is really a well-thought-out short document. This is put together by 12 Democrats and 12 Republicans. All were considered to be experts and all were coming to agreement. Can you believe that 12 Democrats and 12 Republicans were all in agreement? That is what this is all about. It reestablishes our superiority in the air by focusing on procurement for the Air Force, while also preventing divestment of legacy aircraft like the KC-135. It was envisioned about a year ago that we would be phasing it out, but things have slowed down a little bit. Its replacement is the KC-46. It will take a while for that to get online. In the meantime, we do have an adequate number of working KC-135s. We are talking about a vehicle that is 60 years old, but they are still working and working well. It shows what we are going to come up with when the KC-46 finally comes online. It reestablishes our superiority on the seas by increasing authorization for shipbuilding and authorization for procurement to achieve the 355-ship Navy. We are still talking about that. It supports the Army's focus on multidomain capabilities, especially the modernization priorities, and it keeps our eye on Space. The bill also goes beyond our bases too. A few examples are the Defense Community Infrastructure Program, Impact Aid, STARBASE for science and technology, and research partnerships with universities. This is very significant because I know three universities that have been active in this field for the last 3 years. It also includes research and experimentation in 5G, which is vital to maintaining both our military and our economic advantages. One other thing this bill does that I want to highlight is that it protects our GPS signals. This is very important. Recently, the Federal Communications Commission OK'd a proposal by Ligado Networks to make a new cellular network that jeopardizes GPS signals that so many people rely on. That is not just me saying that; we had a hearing. We had the military, and some 12 agencies of government all joined in. Nobody else on the other side was talking about what Ligado is going to do and the jeopardy it puts on our GPS system. That is not just military. We are not just talking about use in the field for these signals, but the pilots in the sky, construction workers on job sites, and even our farmers use GPS to irrigate and harvest their crops. Even though the Department of Defense and more than a dozen other Federal agencies objected, the FCC went ahead with this deal. To make it even worse, the FCC was aware of the threat that was being posed and the objections that were out there, and they actually had that vote over a weekend. I went back and checked with it and found out that they had never done that before. I don't know. I can't talk about that because I don't have the answers. I have been trying to get the answers. The NDAA makes sure the DOD is not on the hook for the costly updates if Ligado moves ahead with the deal by prohibiting the use of DOD funds to comply with the order until these three things occur: The Secretary of Defense submits an estimate of the costs associated with the GPS interference; two, it directs the Secretary of Defense to contract with the National Academies of Science and Engineering for an independent technical review; and, three, then the bill further directs the Secretary of Defense to create a process to ensure that our Nation's military is reimbursed directly by Ligado for the interference that they caused. In short, it makes sure that we are not wasting taxpayer money to fix the problems that Ligado is causing. These are just a few of the reasons this bill is more than just a military bill. First and foremost, it is what it is--a security bill. Every provision in this bill matters to our national security, but it also goes beyond that. I think it is really important that Americans know that, with the bill, we are leaving a legacy for our children and our grandchildren. It is one that values peace, protects economic prosperity, and safeguards our freedoms. You have to keep in mind that this bill has passed every year for 60 years. It is very unusual that something like this would happen. In fact, this is the only area where that has happened. We do know that the results are there. We know that it is going to pass. It has passed for 59 years, and it will pass for another year We are going to make sure that we put our military back to where it should be--back where it was prior to the last administration. I think everyone should realize that we are still waiting for the last shot of amendments, and we are ready to go ahead and finish it. Conceivably, we can get this thing done before the Fourth of July recess. That could happen. We are talking about this coming Thursday. We are in the process of getting this done now. In my opinion, it is the most important bill of the year, and we are going to get it finished. I yield the floor.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to grant floor privileges for the duration of the consideration of the NDAA to Travis Tarbox, my defense fellow, and Jillian Schofield, our GAO detailee.

Mr. INHOFE

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

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, for 59 years in a row, Congress has passed the NDAA--almost always on a bipartisan basis. This year will be the 60th year in a row. I am proud to say the fiscal year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act continues in that long bipartisan tradition. There is not much around here anymore that passes every single year, let alone with the support of both parties. But we all know what the bill is all about; it is about support of our troops and our national security. I hope we will all keep that in mind, as we discuss the amendments to this bill, to keep them on topic. Last week, I talked a little bit about how we are falling behind China and Russia and how those two countries are now our biggest threats. I think we all know how that happened. It happened in the last 5 years of the Obama administration. During those last 5 years, the President's budget took 25 percent of the military budget away from the military. This has never happened before. Yet that is what happened. What happened at the same time--I don't think a lot of the Members are aware of this, but China and Russia--they are the enemies out there. During the time that our President had defunded the military by 25 percent, Russia actually increased theirs by 34 percent. We went down 25 percent; Russia went up 34 percent. What was China doing during this time? China, while we were going down 25 percent, went up 83 percent. You see what the problem is. They just passed us up in a lot of areas. We can name those--hypersonics and other areas where they were building. They are building up their military capabilities and positioning themselves strategically around the world. We know they are showing up in places they have never been before. Fortunately, we have a strategy to counter them. It is called the national defense strategy. I meant to bring that down with me because I make reference to that. The national defense strategy is a document that is put together by 12 Democrats and 12 Republicans--all very top people in terms of their knowledge of the military--who get together and say: What should be our roadmap? What we are going to do to put ourselves in a position where we can counter Russia and China? We have the national defense strategy. It came out in late 2018. At that time, the military services had been implementing this plan with the support of Congress in previous NDAAs. This is the third year now that we have that. What we did this year was speed up the implementation. We set America on a course to make sure that we are setting ourselves up for success no matter what threat comes our way. We do that by using this document, the NDS, the National Defense Strategy Commission report. What this says is that we need to create a credible military deterrent that tells Russia and China and anyone else who would do us harm: You just can't win. We are going to win. We will beat you--no matter who you are out there. That is what this NDAA does. It says that we need to invest in the equipment, tools, weapons, resources, and training our troops need to succeed in their mission. We also make sure that they are in the right places and at the right time. That is what the NDAA, which we are considering right now--which we are proceeding to right now--will do. It says that our biggest threats come from Indo-Pacific region. The NDAA creates a Pacific Deterrence Initiative to enhance lethality, address key capability gaps, and support our allies and partners over there. This is something that we haven't done before. The strategic Pacific Deterrence is like European Deterrence. It was very successful, and that is what we are doing now in the Middle East. Several of us, including the Chair, have been to the South China Sea. We have watched China doing things, building islands--something that has never been done before--going into areas they have never been before, such as Djibouti. Historically, it has been the practice to do things in China, starting things within their city limits. But that is not the way it is anymore. It is now all throughout Africa, Djibouti, as far south as Southern Tanzania. It says that technology is changing the nature of warfare rapidly and that we have to keep up with China and Russia, who are working hard to build weapons that we have never even heard of. So the NDAA pushes innovation and makes it easier for the Pentagon to harness that innovation throughout the defense industrial base. We harden our supply chains so that China and Russia can't be a threat to us there. We have issues there, but the pandemic really showed us where our weaknesses are. This bill helps us reduce our reliance on foreign countries and protects our supply chain and our key technologies from infiltration and other risks. The NDS Commission report also tells us how the Pentagon's massive bureaucracy sometimes inhibits our ability to innovate and operate. The NDAA helps the Pentagon fully implement the NDS, improving the way they budget, giving them flexibility to hire and keep top talent, but always making sure they are accountable to the taxpayer. No matter what threats we face--no matter who, what, where, when, or how--the one constant is the men and women who make up the force. These are the brave Americans who volunteer to wear the uniform and put themselves in harm's way because they believe in this Nation, and they are willing to give their lives to defend it. At the end of the day, that is the most important thing this bill does: It takes care of our troops and their families. They sacrifice so much, and they risk so much. We are all aware of that. We have to make sure that we are taking care of them right. That is what this bill does. This is a very serious, sacred responsibility we have--one I don't take lightly. While I am on the floor, throughout the debate on this bill, I am thinking about them. When we are talking about this bill, the numbers we are talking about--the $740.5 billion and the 2.1 million servicemembers--the sheer size can make you forget sometimes that these are real people who rely on us to do things and to do things right. That is one of the big differences. We hear people all the time--the anti-defense crowd out there is always talking about how we are actually spending more money on military than China and Russia put together. That is true. The most expensive part of the military is the people. That is the most expensive part. Of course, Communist countries don't care about the people. They just give them a rifle and say: Go out and kill somebody. Here are a few of those people who are counting on us this week. I am thinking about one of my former interns who started his journey at the Air Force Academy last week, as well as all of the other new cadets and midshipmen at the Air Force Academy, the Naval Academy, and West Point. I am thinking about the 40 new soldiers I talked with before they took their oath of office on the birthday of the U.S. Army. They are the future of our military. I am thinking about the sailors and marines serving overseas whom I had the honor of meeting earlier this year. I am thinking about Janna Driver, a tireless military spouse. Her husband was stationed at Tinker Air Force Base. She came to my office. I was thinking it was something that was just happening at Tinker Air Force Base, but she talked about the deplorable housing situation, and it all started with the privatization of housing. She was talking about that. I assumed this is a problem that we needed to address only at Tinker Air Force Base. Then I found out it was all over the State of Oklahoma, in all five of our major military installations. Then we found out it was nationwide. This is something that we started working on. This is the privatization of housing and how it is deteriorating. We got on it right away. Again, this is something that China and Russia don't have to do because they don't care about taking care of their people. They don't have to do that in a Communist country. I am also thinking about Kristie Roberts, a member of the 138th Fighter Wing of the Tulsa Air National Guard, who lost her husband, Staff Sergeant Marshal Roberts, in March. Each of them represents hundreds of thousands of other men and women who are serving our Nation, and we owe it to them to get this done together. I am glad to have by my side the ranking member, who shares my dedication and gratitude to our troops, Jack Reed. I have to thank Jack Reed for being a great partner and friend and for his support of this bill. In fact, Jack Reed and I have worked together for 3 years now, and we are singular in the efforts that we want for our military system. I am sure there are occasionally some differences, and we don't agree on everything, but we resolve the problems. Of course, we wouldn't be here if it weren't for our staff. We have John Bonsell for the majority and Liz King for the minority. I will talk more about them later, but they deserve a lot of praise. They are used to working at night, and they are used to working at odd hours. They are tireless. They have done tremendous work, and the proof of that is the overwhelmingly bipartisan vote out of committee. The vote to move forward with the NDAA last Thursday passed out of committee to the Senate floor by a vote of 25 to 2, and the 2 who voted against it never vote for military anyway, so I call that unanimous. I am looking forward to seeing the same strong bipartisan support and to voting on this bill, hopefully, at the end of this week. We are going to give it careful consideration, and I look forward to working with you all to make it better through the amendment process. That is what we are starting on right now. With that, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I call up the substitute amendment No. 2301.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be waived.

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, for the information of all Senators, Senator Reed and I have reached an agreement on the first managers' package, and we will be hotlining that list on both sides this evening with the hopes of clearing it and adopting those amendments tomorrow.

Mr. INHOFE

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

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to be recognized for such time as I may consume.

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, for the next week, the Senate is going to be debating what I consider to be and what I think most people consider to be the most important bill of the year--the National Defense Authorization Act. It is an act that we passed and have passed every year for 60 years. In just a few days, American families across the country will celebrate the Fourth of July, Independence Day--the day that honors our blessings of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Not all countries share these values; in fact, they reject them. China and Russia would rather have an authoritarian world, one where democracy doesn't exist, where the rest of the world yields to them. The national defense strategy is a document that I refer to all the time. It was put together a few years ago when actually 12 really expert Democrats and 12 expert Republicans came to an agreement as to what our defense should look like in the future. According to this book, China and Russia are our greatest threats right now. They are building up their militaries and expanding their influence around the world. The fiscal year 2021 National Defense Authorization Act is about sending a message to China and Russia that there is no way you can defeat us, so don't try. That is a pretty blunt message. We couldn't have sent that message 2 years ago. We have been building up, but we are still not where we should be. We know the way we preserve peace is by demonstrating our strength. We have the best military in the world, and our enemies need to know that. We can't rest on our laurels. We have to implement the national defense strategy because our comparative military advantage is at risk right now. China and Russia are actually catching up and have surpassed us in some areas. Here is one big reason: China and Russia have invested in their military. This is a shocker when you talk to people because they don't expect it. I learned many years ago--or at least I believed--that we had the best of everything ever since World War II, and it was true for a long period of time. Yet, during the period of time between 2009 and 2018, China increased its military spending by 83 percent. That is just remarkable. Russia has grown its budget by 35 percent. During that same period of time, from 2010 to 2015, for that 5-year period during the Obama administration, we reduced our military by 25 percent. Think about that. China increased theirs by 83 percent, and we reduced ours by 25 percent during that same time period. Don't forget that these countries willfully mislead on many things, including on the actual sizes of their defense budgets. Russia's is almost three times larger than most people think it is. They look at it and think, well, ours is larger than theirs. It is just that we don't get accurate information, and we know the threats that are out there. Because of these investments, China and Russia have grown not just the sizes of their militaries but their capabilities as well. Last October, China paraded a hypersonic weapon. I remember that so well because it was live on TV. I saw it on television. This was state-of- the-art for both offense and defense, and China had it. Some people said China was maybe faking it, but I believe it had it. It was in a parade, and China showed us that it had something we don't even have. We don't have it yet. Their investments aren't restricted by their borders, and I have seen their buildup, actually, across the world. One prime example is that China recently built its first overseas military base. It was in Djibouti. Now, prior to this time in Djibouti and throughout Africa, there was nothing. There was a lot of Chinese presence but not a military operation. In fact, historically, military operations from China have always started in and were evident within its own city limits. I mean, this is where China worked--not in Djibouti, not in northern Africa. In fact, I actually flew over the area. It was supposed to be a restricted area. So there is China over there in Africa, where they have never been before, and in Djibouti, and not just in Djibouti but all the way into southern Tanzania. And so that is what is going on right now. It wasn't going on before. Now we see China and Russia grow more and more aggressive and antagonistic. China, in particular, has used the pandemic to lash out in every direction. They have antagonized and harassed the Taiwanese, the Vietnamese, the Indonesian vessels in the South China Sea, and they have used every tool that they could to harass them. Do you know what they are doing in the South China Sea? And I did witness this. They did something that most people don't know is going on. China has actually built seven islands, and when you see what they have on these islands--they don't hide it--it is as if they are preparing for World War III. Now, we saw 20 Indian soldiers dead, killed by what are essentially baseball bats with spikes when the Chinese conducted a military incursion in territory claimed by China. That just happened. I called and talked to their Ambassador and gave them our condolences, but that is what China is capable of doing. Meanwhile, Russia continues to prop up the murderous Assad regime. Putin has sent mercenaries to Libya and throughout Africa. Both countries have been supporting the corrupt Maduro regime in Venezuela. We have seen warning signs of this for at least a decade. Meanwhile, the previous administration let our military advantage erode. For 8 years, we had a President for whom the military was not a top priority. I respected him because he had other areas that he thought were more significant. Of course, he was President of the United States, and he did it. But I have to remind you of what I just said a minute ago. We went down by 25 percent between the 5-year period of 2010 and 2015. At the same time, Russia was increasing by 35 percent. We were reducing 25 percent, and they were increasing. China was increasing by 83 percent. Defending America wasn't his top priority, but he was honest about it, and we learned that there were areas where we were falling behind. Now we have started turning around. Now we have a President whose priority is keeping American families secure, and over the past few years, we began rebuilding our military. Thanks to President Trump--the guy that everyone criticizes--we are restoring our military might with new planes, new ships, and new weapons. Take what we are doing at Fort Sill, as an example. Fort Sill is in my State of Oklahoma. Right now, we are outranged and outgunned by Russia and China. Fort Sill is leading the Army's modernization efforts on the long-range precision fire to restore our combat advantage. That is what is happening all over the country too. So we are pulling out of this thing. Restoring our might is important, but it is not the only thing that matters. We have to make sure that the planes, the ships, and the weapons are in the right places at the right time, and that is what the NDAA does. That is what we are talking about right now. The NDAA, as I stated before, I think is the most significant bill that we have all year round, and this will be the 60th year that we have passed it. It makes sure that we have a credible military deterrent that signals to any potential adversaries that they don't stand a chance against us. That is what we are in the process of doing. That is what this bill is all about. We introduced it and started talking about it yesterday. We probably should have this finished prior to the 4th of July recess. We should have it passed, although that may be a little bit ambitious. So we are implementing the National Defense Strategy. That is this book that we are all so proud of. It is bipartisan. It is saying what we need to do to defend America, and this document is one that we are following to the letter right now. It is our roadmap. The bill establishes the Pacific Deterrence Initiative. That is kind of patterned after the European Deterrence Initiative. It focuses resources on the Indo-Pacific, addressing key military capabilities and gaps. That is the area that we are concentrating on right now, and that is what our document says we should be doing. That is what we are doing with the Defense authorization bill. The bill ensures that we have a combat-credible forward posture, and it helps us develop and field the joint capabilities needed to take on the conflicts envisioned by this NDS report. We push back on China's and Russia's attempts to expand their influence by building new alliances and partnerships and strengthening existing ones. They are busy. They are out there. We protect against intrusion from China and Russia in space and beyond. That is what we have in the bill. That is what we are envisioning we will be able to do. We safeguard proprietary technology and intellectual property from being infiltrated by the Government of China. We also reduce our reliance on foreign countries like China as a source for a variety of materials and technologies, including some of the microelectronics and rare earth minerals, but also medical devices. Last but not least, we accelerate investment in research and development into technology that would help us catch up with China and Russia--hypersonic weapons, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and more. We are not leading in all areas, as most people in America think we are, but we are making such great progress. Our Defense authorization bill last year put us way ahead of where we were before, and this bill does the same thing. So the bill sends a message--a strong message--to China and Russia and anyone else who would try it: We know what you are up to. We know how to stop you. You simply can't win against us. So I encourage my colleagues, first of all, to get all of their amendments in. We are trying to get our amendments in by Friday. If we can do that, we will probably get this thing done possibly even by a week from today. So we have been working on it all year long, and this is one of the bills that we work on all year long, and we have a whole team working, including Liz King and John Bonsell. John Bonsell is the Republican staff director, and Liz is with the Democratic staff group, working with my partner in this. They have worked very well together, and we should have this bill done and ready to take out. Of course, let's keep in mind what we want to accomplish. We want to put our country ahead of China and Russia and get us out of this problem area that we have--an area where our allies believe they are preparing for World War III. So that is what the bill is all about. Hopefully, we will get this thing done and have the necessary ingredients in there. This should be the year that we actually go ahead of China and Russia. We want to make it happen, and this is the only way to do it. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. INHOFE

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

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, on Tuesday night, Senator Reed and I had the honor of filing S. 4049, the 60th annual National Defense Authorization Act. Think about that--60 years. This is something we are always pretty confident we will eventually get passed. To me, it is the most significant bill of the year, and we have been doing it now successfully for 60 years. It is what we consider every year, and we know it is going to pass because it has always passed, but it is also about taking care of our troops and defending our country. There is a document no one reads anymore. It is called the Constitution. It talks about what our primary responsibility is, which is to defend America. We are in a much more dangerous position today than we have ever been before, so I think it is fitting that we are doing this ahead of the Fourth of July, our Nation's birthday. We wouldn't have our freedoms without our men and women in uniform from the past and present, and that is who we are dedicating this to. They are the beneficiaries of what we are doing as we are the beneficiaries of what they are doing. It is why we can all come together and finish this bill by next Thursday, I would still like to say, even though there is opposition to this. I say that because it would be the last day before the recess that is coming up, the Fourth of July, and I think it would be good if we could do it that way. There is a reason for that, but we are also realistic, and we are not sure we are going to be able to do it, but we are going to make every effort to do it. One thing about working with my partner over here, Senator Reed, is that we have always operated in a very cooperative manner, and we have supported each other. He answers to his Democratic friends, and we bring them together because of the relationship that we have on this committee. So I think there is always a possibility we can get this done Both Senator Reed and I would like to use an open amendment process. This is a process that would allow for all of our Members to come in and do what they have to do and do what they want to do with regard to things they want to have in the bill. We were not able to do that over the last couple of years because we had objections. One thing about the Senate is that everything operates on the basis of unanimous consent, so if we have someone who objects, we are unable to do it. Hopefully, that will not happen again this year, and we will be able to use the open amendment process. In having said that, it is not going to be nearly as significant this year because what we did in this year's bill is to have actually made an appeal way back in February to our Democrats and Republicans, not just to those on the Armed Services Committee but to those in the entire Senate. This last February, we said: Start getting your amendments ready. Don't wait until the last minute. Get them out there so we can talk about them and prepare them for ultimate votes. So people actually started. They were warned at that time that we didn't want to wait until the last minute to do this. This is the first time we have been able to successfully do this. Of all of the items that are in this bill--this bill that I consider to be the most significant of the year--40 percent of the input came from our Members of the Senate, and 40 percent of it came from the administration and the Pentagon, so that all of those things have already been treated once. Now, I have been around here long enough to remember when that 40 percent wasn't 40 percent--it was about 6 percent. We didn't get the input of the Members like we do today. We just operated differently at that time. This is the third year that I have been involved in this when we have been able to get a higher percentage of input from the Members. I think that is something that is working well, and it has already given the Members time to participate. I will put this a different way. The bill includes nearly 600 requests for amendments from the members of the Armed Services Committee and almost 200 requests from Senators who are not on the committee. They are the ones who have put this bill together. With the Members' input already in there, I am confident that we have a solid bill that reflects the needs we have and that it will not be as necessary to have more amendments since that is what we have already done. If we want to finish this bill by the end of next week, we will need to reach a unanimous consent agreement before this Friday. I understand there may be an objection to this that could happen, or there could be a change of mind. It is still my hope that this will take place. There is a reason for that, too, in that the House will be working on its bill right after we come back from the recess. We are just running out of time, so we need to get this started. We are putting in the managers' package a bipartisan set of amendments that we can all agree on. I ask all of our Members to get those in by this coming Friday. Even with that, it is going to be necessary for the staff to work all the way through the weekend to put it in position. We know we want to complete the first managers' package, so the amendments will have to be filed. Keep in mind that Senator Reed and I have that as a deadline for getting those amendments in. In recent years, we have been able to consider many amendments on the floor. As I said earlier, I hope we will be able to do that again, and it may or may not happen. If a Member has an amendment and wants to debate it on the floor, we also need to know that the Member desires to have a debate so that we can work that in. Lastly, as Members are working through their amendments, please be thoughtful that we shouldn't get bogged down with a lot of amendments that have nothing to do with national defense. This is the NDAA, the National Defense Authorization Act. We should be talking about military. Yet one of the things that is characteristic about this is that, for as many years as I have been here and since this is the one bill that is going to be a must-pass bill and a must-pass bill this year, the people who were not able to get their bills in or amendments in on other bills wait until this comes along and try to do this with amendments. I am discouraging that from happening, and I hope that it doesn't happen. What is most important here is that we take care of our men and women in uniform. That is what it is all about. They are all volunteers, and they are deserving of our support. Again, my message to Members is to get their amendments filed as soon as possible. As I noted, this is the 60th annual NDAA. For the last 59 years, Congress has always passed an NDAA on a bipartisan basis. That is a big deal, and it is not a legacy we take lightly. I have been privileged to participate in this process as a member of the big four. I will tell you how that works. We do our bill, and the House does its bill. We go to conference, but we are still not able to get together, so they take the big four, which constitutes the ranking Democrat and Republican in the House and the ranking Democrat and Republican in the Senate, and the four of us sit down and get it done. We have done that several times in the past. It is the stopgap. It is the one last thing that we have to do if we are not able to do it any other way. Every year, we are told there are things we can't accomplish. Every year, we are told there is no way we can find common ground. All of this happens, but, always, we do it, and our grand, bipartisan tradition continues just, as it will this year. The reason is simple: Failure and, worse, failure on the backs of our servicemembers is just not an option. While we are doing this, what I will remind everyone is that our military was hurt pretty badly under the previous administration. I always admired President Obama. He had a different agenda, and consequently we had some problems. I would say this: In the last 5 years of his 8-year administration--that would be from 2010 to 2015-- our defense spending dropped by 25 percent. That has never happened before, and we have been working to rebuild since then. We are not quite there yet, but we have made great headway. It is easy to cut our military, to reduce readiness, to slow down production, and all of that, but it is harder, not to mention slower and more costly, to rebuild it. That is what we are in the middle of right now. So that is what this is all about. It is a significant bill, and it is something we work on all year long. Then it comes time for it to come to the floor, which is where we are now. I have to say this: I can't think of anyone I would rather have as a partner than Senator Reed. Senator Reed and I have worked together for many years, and we have a way of getting along with each other and of coming to conclusions and the right decisions. It has been an honor for me over the years to have worked, as we are this year, with Senator Reed. We are going to get a good bill done I yield the floor.

Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, let me just make one other comment. Senator Reed talked about the staff and what the staff has done. When I talk to people back in Oklahoma about how hard a lot of these people work, they think of people in government as not caring to really spend the time and make the effort. I mentioned a minute ago that our staff is going to be working all this next weekend, and they have been working every weekend, that I can remember, to get this thing done. There are two people in particular--John Bonsell and Liz King. Liz King is the top adviser and manages things for Senator Reed, and John Bonsell has done the same thing for me. He actually was my MLA many years ago. When you see how hard they work and their long hours--early in the morning until late at night and then on weekends--I just really want to say, not just of those two individuals but of the people they have working for them, that I have never seen a harder working group. Their job, I guess--I say to my friend Senator Reed--is to make us look good, but they are the ones who do the work. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Records on the dates indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that these nominations lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to a great leader and an exceptional officer, Rear Admiral Patrick ``Pat'' A. Piercey who will soon retire from the U.S. Navy after over 35 years of dedicated service to the Nation. Rear Admiral Piercey is a native of Clinton, OK, and graduated with distinction from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1985. He is a true professional and a dedicated leader. Throughout his career, he commanded our great sailors at many levels, deployed numerous times in defense of the Nation and served in some of the most critical positions in our Navy. Rear Admiral Piercey has provided outstanding leadership, advice, and sound professional judgment on numerous critical issues of enduring importance to the Navy, Congress, and the Nation. Rear Admiral Piercey commanded USS Howard--DDG 83--USS Bunker Hill-- CG 52--Carrier Strike Group 9, and Naval Surface Forces Atlantic. Due to his sound judgment and intellect, Rear Admiral Piercey served in many critical assignments, including special assistant to the Deputy Director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, executive assistant to the Assistant to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Director for Operations--J3--U.S. Inda-Pacific Command. For the past 2 years, Rear Admiral Piercey has served as the Chief of Staff of U.S. European Command in Stuttgart, Germany. During this period of extraordinary change and challenge in Europe's security environment, Rear Admiral Piercey has improved relationships with NATO allies and European partners. Through his strategic vision, he has successfully positioned U.S. European Command to meet every mission requirement in Europe. On behalf of my colleagues and the entire U.S. Congress, I want to thank Rear Admiral Piercey for his decades of dedicated service to the Navy and our Nation. I am sure that many officers and sailors will continue to emulate him as a role model for service, sacrifice and leadership. I also want to thank his wife, Katherine, and their children, Rebecca and Andrew, for their sacrifices and tremendous support. I join my colleagues in wishing him and his family fair winds and following seas and future success in retirement.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to the outgoing commander of the 71st Flying Training Wing, Vance Air Force Base, OK, Col. Corey A. Simmons. Colonel Simmons led a wing of nearly 3,000 personnel who conducted critical undergraduate pilot training for many of our young Airmen. Corey has quite the resume, beginning when he was commissioned in the Air Force in 1998 after he graduated from the University of Louisville. He earned a graduate degree in 2005 from the George Washington University and is a graduate of Air Command and Staff College. He successfully completed the SECDEF Executive leadership Development Program and a Harvard University National Defense Fellowship. In his interactions with both me and my staff, Corey always displayed a high level of professionalism and actively worked to advance various initiatives and reach solutions. He was ready and willing to collaborate on a task and helped me do my job by making sure I knew the current status down at Vance. Corey's leadership instilled confidence in his airmen, and he laid critical groundwork for the future of the Enid community. Corey has been a dedicated leader in our Air Force, serving in Air Mobility Command as a vice wing commander, squadron commander, operations officer, C-17A instructor pilot, and aircraft commander. He has been stationed all around the country, but I am sure his favorite memories will be of his time spent at Altus and Vance Air Force Bases in Oklahoma. While Corey is an experienced pilot who has spent a respectable amount of time flying. He still falls far short of me in terms of flight hours, but maybe someday he will get close. I want to wish Colonel Simmons the best of luck in his next assignment at Travis Air Force Base in California as the commander of the 60th Air Mobility Wing. This assignment speaks to the caliber of leader that he is, and I personally am grateful to him, his wife Dawn, and his children for their dedicated service to our Nation, to the Air Force, and to the Enid community. Corey, best of luck.

Mr. INHOFE

Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize and congratulate Lt. Gen. Thomas W. Bergeson, of the U.S. Air Force, and the deputy commander of United States Central Command, MacDill Air Force Base, Tampa, FL. Lieutenant General Bergeson is one our Nation's finest military officers, and he will retire from Active military service on September 1, 2020, bringing to a close 35 years of distinguished service to our great Nation. In 1985, Lieutenant General Bergeson commissioned as a second lieutenant upon graduation from the U.S. Air Force Academy. He commanded units at every echelon from fighter squadron to a numbered Air Force. Lieutenant General Bergeson also held various staff assignments, including positions as chief of aviation, strategic operations, Multi-National Forces-Iraq; senior defense official and defense attache in the UK; and director, Legislative Liaison, Office of the Secretary of the Air Force, at the Pentagon. Prior to his current assignment, he served as the deputy commander, United Nations Command Korea; deputy commander, U.S. Forces Korea; commander, Air Component Command, South Korea/U.S. Combined Forces Command; and commander, 7th Air Force, Pacific Air Forces at Osan Air Base. Over the course of his career, Lieutenant General Bergeson flew numerous fighter aircraft to include the F-15, the F-22, and the A-10. He is a graduate of the NATO Defense College in Rome and the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. At a time of great uncertainty in the world, particularly in the Middle East, Lieutenant General Bergeson served as a critical leader in Central Command, a combatant command that has an enormous influence and presence in some of the most volatile parts of the globe. Lieutenant General Bergeson is an exceptional leader and an American patriot who is committed to our Armed Forces, our national security, and our Nation. It is for Lt. Gen. Tom Bergeson that we, with profound admiration and deep respect, pay tribute to for all he has done for the defense of our Nation for over three decades as a leader and selfless servant. Mr. President, it is my pleasure today to recognize Lieutenant General Bergeson's long and decorated career. On behalf of a grateful nation, I commend Lieutenant General Bergeson for his dedicated service to the United States of America. I also wish to recognize the sacrifices and contributions made by his wife, Pam, and his children, Erik and Kristin. I extend my best wishes to Lieutenant General Bergeson and his family and wish them the best in retirement and the years to come.