Carl Levin

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask to be yielded 2 minutes.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I have been talking with Senator McCain, and it is our understanding the agreement now is the Graham amendment, which would be next in order under the previous UC, would be laid aside temporarily--we think we are making some progress on working out that amendment--and then we would now have Senator Webb recognized to introduce his amendment.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, the law we passed last Congress stripped the Federal courts of jurisdiction to grant habeas corpus despite a constitutional prohibition which says that habeas corpus may not be suspended except in cases of rebellion or invasion, neither of which is the state of affairs today. I want to make in this 2 minutes one essential point. The Specter- Leahy-Dodd amendment does not grant any individual the affirmative right to go to court. It does not grant a right of habeas corpus. It simply removes a legislative barrier to such action, restoring the law as it was before we enacted this provision in the last Congress, leaving it up to the courts--where it belongs and it always has been-- as to whether habeas corpus should be granted. When we debated this provision in the last Congress, we received a letter from three retired Judge Advocates General who urged us not to strip the courts of habeas corpus jurisdiction. That letter, signed by Admirals Hutson and Guter, and General Brahms, said the following: We urge you to oppose any further erosion of the proper authority of our courts and to reject any provision that would strip the courts of habeas jurisdiction. As Alexander Hamilton and James Madison emphasized in the Federalist Papers, the writ of habeas corpus embodies principles fundamental to our nation. It is the essence of the rule of law, ensuring that neither king nor executive may deprive a person of liberty without some independent review to ensure that the detention has a reasonable basis in law and fact. That right must be preserved. Fair hearings do not jeopardize our security. They are what our country stands for. Well, we received similar letters from nine distinguished retired Federal judges and from hundreds of law professors from around the United States, and from many others. I urge our colleagues to support the Specter-Leahy-Dodd amendment.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that the pending amendments be set aside and that Senator Webb be recognized to offer his amendment.

Mr. LEVIN. I think that is the intention, as part of a unanimous- consent agreement. It is my understanding that is the intent, however, that will be part of a larger UC.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, over 4 years of war have stressed our Armed Forces to the breaking point. Our Army and Marine Corps are stretched dangerously thin. They are performing magnificently, as they always do. Chronic personnel and equipment shortages plague our nondeployed forces resulting in dangerously low readiness. As a nation, we simply do not have the ground forces necessary, nor are the few uncommitted forces trained and ready, to protect our interests against other threats around the world. As Army Chief of Staff GEN George Casey put it: The demand for our forces exceeds the sustainable supply. Nearly 1.6 million servicemembers have been deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan. Of the Army's 43 active brigades available for rotation, 10 brigades have been deployed three or more times. All others have been deployed once or twice, with the exception of one new brigade just forming. Of course, the single brigade stationed in Korea does not deploy as part of the Iraq or Afghanistan rotation. All of our National Guard combat brigades have at least one rotation to Iraq, Afghanistan, or Kosovo. Two National Guard combat brigades have two rotations. Guard brigades from Indiana, Arkansas, Ohio, Oklahoma, Minnesota, and New York have been notified that they should be prepared to deploy at the end of this year. Through the first part of this year, units pushed to Iraq as part of the surge strategy barely had enough time to make up their personnel and equipment shortages or complete their training. Inadequate time to prepare for war puts a unit at risk when sent into harm's way. We have the responsibility to make sure that our forces have adequate time available to prepare and then use that time to best advantage. We have accepted too much risk for too long. Senator Webb's amendment goes to the heart of this obligation, ensuring that our forces have the time they need to recover and prepare. Multiple rotations and insufficient dwell time inherently raise readiness risks. Units must have the time necessary to fully man, equip, and train prior to their next deployment. Readiness reports we receive here in Congress consistently show that most of our nondeployed units are not ready to deploy, and those getting ready to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan do not have personnel and equipment necessary for comprehensive training until very late in their preparation. In order to provide some relief for the personnel shortages in next-to-deploy units, the Army is cutting training at its important officer and NCO schools. The Army has gone so far as to institute a 6-day training week at many of these schools to accelerate getting troops back to their units. For soldiers, especially young leaders and instructors just back from deployment, working a 6-day week starts to make dwell time feel a lot like deployment. Insufficient dwell time contributes to retention challenges, especially among young officers. There is ample evidence that multiple long deployments are impacting our troops' mental health and family stability. Servicemembers and their families, particularly among our young officers and NCOs, are voting with their feet, leaving the military rather than endure the uncertainty and turmoil in their families' lives. There is no greater threat to the quality and viability of our all-volunteer force than the loss of these combat-experienced young leaders. The Webb amendment exempts our special operations forces. Their deployment cycles are always irregular, their readiness sustained at much higher levels, and their ability to respond to emergencies is critically important. The exemption in this amendment preserves that flexibility. Servicemembers and their families are weary of the deployment cycle and uncertainty about timing and length of deployments. They are eager for greater predictability about when and for how long troops will be at home or deployed. The Webb amendment will require the DOD to make earlier strategic and operational decisions which will result in greater predictability and stability for troops and their families. The Webb amendment will incentivize the Department of Defense to greater certainty in the implementation of unit and individual rotation policies. Controlling deployment cycles is the only way to rapidly stop the dramatic loss of readiness in our nondeployed and next-to-deploy units. Controlling deployment cycles is the only way to provide the fastest possible relief to our troops and their families. Controlling deployment cycles is a critical step in preserving our all-volunteer military system. The Webb amendment deserves the support of this Senate. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, with that modification, I ask that the unanimous consent request be agreed to.

Mr. LEVIN. Parliamentary inquiry: Like the previous vote, this amendment requires 60 votes?

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, we have had an informal discussion. I am sad that there is not an opportunity on this bill to bring up the hate crimes bill. I do hope there is a way, following this session, to bring up the hate crimes bill. It has broad support and deserves to be heard and, I hope, passed. I discussed with Senator McCain the possibility that the Senator from Delaware would now be recognized. We agreed that he would at this time.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, first, I concur with something Senator McCain said which is that the floor is open now for people to come down and speak, either on the bill, on the pending habeas corpus amendment, or on any other matter on which they wish to speak. There will be no more votes today, I am authorized to say. Also, there will be a cloture vote tomorrow at approximately 10:30 a.m. on the Specter-Leahy-Dodd amendment. Then we hope to take action relative to the Graham amendment. There are some discussions going on relative to that amendment. Then, hopefully, we would promptly move to take up the Webb amendment. It is the intention of this manager that the Webb amendment then be called up immediately after the disposition of, first, the Specter-Leahy-Dodd cloture vote and then the Graham amendment, and it is my intention that Senator Webb then have his amendment called up. I believe Senator Webb will be ready to proceed at that time.

Mr. LEVIN. I will be happy to yield.

Mr. LEVIN. The Senator is correct. I did fail to mention that the leaders are meeting to see if there can't be a unanimous consent agreement worked out relative to the Iraq amendments. Senator Reid described that proposed unanimous consent agreement, but that is going on. The Senator from Arizona is correct, we are going to seek to reduce the number of amendments that require rollcalls. We are going to seek time agreements. We have a huge number of amendments which have been filed, in the two hundreds. We made some progress because we disposed of 50 amendments the other day. We very much thank Senator McCain, by the way, and his staff, and Senator Warner, for the efforts they are putting into this legislation. Senator McCain is a very easy person with whom to work. We are used to having people on the committee who are both chairman and ranking member, regardless who is in control of the committee, work on a bipartisan basis. Senator McCain is surely in that tradition. We are grateful for that effort.

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

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I see Senator Specter on the floor. I ask unanimous consent that after Senator Specter is recognized, if Senator Graham is on the floor, he be recognized for debate only on the bill, and then that Senator Chambliss be recognized, if he is on the floor, for debate only, and that then the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Chair and my friend from Pennsylvania.

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

Mr. LEVIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, while we hope the Senator from Arizona is right and we can complete the bill this week, we also are aware of the fact that on Friday, we do have to leave here somewhat early because of the Jewish holidays. That will be only part of the day. I hope we can make tremendous progress this week. It may be a bit optimistic in terms of finishing it this week. That is going to depend on the cooperation of our colleagues. We have hundreds of amendments. We need colleagues who can clear many of them, and we need time agreements on the rest. It depends on our colleagues. We are going to do everything we can to continue a great tradition here. May I say, this is the 46th year in a row that the authorization bill has come to the floor, and we are not going to break the record of having an authorization for every one of those previous 45 years. We always had it because of the provisions of the bill which are so important--the pay and benefits and the support of not only our troops but also their families. When the Senator from Arizona made reference to the Wounded Warriors legislation, I know our Presiding Officer, Senator McCaskill, because of her active role and participation in that legislation, understands precisely what we are saying. That legislation is so important that it is not only in the bill but it is in a separate bill which was passed that is now awaiting, hopefully, a resolution between the Senate and the House. But in any event, the Senator is correct, the presence of that legislation in this bill may be the greatest assurance we have that legislation is going to become law. There are a lot of reasons, hundreds of reasons, why we need this authorization bill passed. That is surely one of the most important ones, one that has had the support of so many of our Members. So many of our Members and our Veterans' Affairs Committee have been so active with that legislation as well. I join in the comments of my good friend from Arizona and hope our colleagues will come to the floor now. We can take up matters. We can get unanimous consent. We can even set aside pending matters. There are things we can do this afternoon. I do hope our colleagues will come to the floor and give their speeches on habeas corpus or other subjects. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I have no objection.

Mr. LEVIN

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

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I send a series of amendments to the desk which have been cleared by myself and Senator Warner. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate consider those amendments en bloc, the amendments be agreed to en bloc, and the motions to reconsider be laid on the table. Finally, I ask unanimous consent to have any statements relating to any of these individual amendments printed in the Record.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I understand there are 50 amendments.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I now ask unanimous consent that all pending amendments be withdrawn, with the exception of the Levin substitute amendment; that Senator Leahy or his designee be recognized to offer a first-degree amendment on the subject of habeas corpus; that after the Leahy amendment is offered, Senator Graham or his designee be recognized to offer a first-degree amendment to strike section 1023; that the offering of these amendments does not preclude further amendments on the subject matter of these amendments.