Carl Levin

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I thought the unanimous consent request would be a colloquy.

Mr. LEVIN. I ask unanimous consent I be listed as a cosponsor of the McCain amendment relative to the treatment of detainees.

Mr. LEVIN. But in terms of the representation of what was in the package, it did not contain in packages 1 and 2 anything relative to the Energy and MILCON bills. The effort of this printed package is to make sure the proposed amendments to your amendment comply with your representation.

Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Chair. I cannot vote for cloture on this bill because it would make it impossible to consider highly important amendments for our troops and their families and amendments to enhance our Nation's security. One hundred twenty amendments are filled. The Parliamentarian can't tell us even how many are relevant but, because they are not technically germane, will not be permitted to come to a vote if cloture is invoked. The stakes for our security in the middle of war are too great not to take an extra few days to consider important relevant amendments. I vote to take those extra few days rather than to prematurely end debate. I will vote against cloture. Cloture Motion

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. LEVIN. I apologize for that statement.

Mr. LEVIN. Is my understanding correct that the amendment which was just sent to the desk to be printed are amendments to Senator Warner's amendment, not amendments to the bill itself?

Mr. LEVIN. If the Senator will yield for a question without losing his right to the floor, my understanding of the amendments which have just been printed is those are amendments to the Senator's amendment, not to the bill.

Mr. LEVIN. I wonder if I could inquire----

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for an inquiry without losing his right to the floor?

Mr. LEVIN. And that the purpose of this package is to remove any amendments relating to those two subjects from the managers' package.

Mr. LEVIN. In terms of the content of the package----

Mr. LEVIN. Without losing his right to the floor, I want to see if I can clarify what I understand to be in the package which was sent to the desk. My understanding is on the underlying amendment which the Senator filed and which I cosponsored that the sections of our Defense authorization bill relating to energy and to military construction have been removed.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I join the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee in filing the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, as an amendment to this bill. I also join the chairman in filing a managers' amendment incorporating many of the amendments that Members are offering to our bill. We and our staffs are working hard, and hope to clear more amendments as we move forward. This is not our preferred approach to this issue. We have always brought up and completed action on the Defense authorization bill as a freestanding bill in the past, and we would prefer to do so this year. Indeed, we have made and are continuing to make every effort to do so. I remain optimistic that we will be able to reach agreement to proceed to and complete action on the Defense authorization bill and that it will not be necessary to take up this amendment. This bill was unanimously reported out of the Armed Services Committee all the way back in May. It was brought to the Senate floor 2 months later, at the end of July. In the last week before the August recess, we attempted to enter a unanimous consent agreement which would have concluded debate on the bill in less that 2 days. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership rejected this proposal and pulled the bill off the floor before action could be completed, so that the Senate could instead consider the gun manufacturers' liability bill. Since that time, we have made every effort to bring the bill back up as a freestanding measure, but without success. We have repeatedly asked the Republican leadership for floor time. We have offered to enter into agreements regarding the relevance of amendments, and the number of amendments, so as to limit the amount of time that would be taken by debate. So far, none of these efforts have borne fruit. Mr. President, more than 4 months have now passed since this bill was reported out of the Armed Services Committee. The fiscal year covered by the bill began last week. The Senate truly needs to consider this bill, and if bringing it to the floor as an amendment is the only way to get that consideration, we have an obligation to try. At a time when members of our Armed Forces are performing heroically, both at home and overseas, to make our country safer and stronger, our military both needs and deserves all of the support that this Congress can provide. More than 70,000 active duty and National Guard troops have been sent to the gulf coast to assist in the recovery from Hurricane Katrina. These troops are playing a critical role in conducting search and rescue missions, evacuating displaced persons, providing security in impacted areas, delivering essential food, water and medicine, and rebuilding damaged infrastructure throughout the region. At the same time, roughly 138,000 U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are engaged in taking on an aggressive insurgency in Iraq, another 17,000 remain in harm's way in Afghanistan, and tens of thousands more are supporting the war effort through deployments thousands of miles from home. Our Armed Forces also continue to bear the brunt of the continuing effort to keep the peace in Kosovo and the Sinai, and contain the threat of North Korea--while remaining prepared to execute other missions in support of the national military strategy. Some of these troops deployed overseas are from the gulf coast area. Some will soon return home to find that Katrina has damaged or destroyed their homes. Some will have nothing left. Passage of the national Defense bill will improve their quality of life while they remain on active duty and when serving on hurricane recovery duty. It will send an important message to them and to their families that we, as a nation, understand their loss and appreciate their service. Failure to pass the Defense bill would send the opposite message. At a time when members of our Armed Forces are performing heroically, both at home and overseas, to make our country safer and stronger, it would be unconscionable to give the Defense authorization bill less than top legislative priority. Our military both needs and deserves all of the support that this Congress can provide. First and foremost, the Defense authorization bill would support our troops by improving compensation and quality of life for our service men and women and their families as they face the hardships imposed by continuing military operations within the United States and around the world. For instance, the bill would provide funding for a 3.1 percent across-the-board pay raise for military personnel; a $70 million increase in childcare and family assistance services for military families; and $50 million in supplemental educational aid to local school districts affected by the assignment or location of military families. The bill would also provide needed funding for the continuation of our military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. For example, the bill would authorize a $50 billion supplemental for continued operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, add hundreds of millions of dollars to the President's budget needed for force protection gear, up-armored vehicles, and a Joint Improvised Explosive Device Task Force, increase the Army's active-duty end strength by 20,000, and authorize the continuation of the Commanders' Emergency Response Program. If we fail to enact this bill in a timely manner, we will hurt our men and women in uniform. The military's authority to pay bonuses and special pays to our men and women in uniform would expire, exacerbating an already troublesome problem we are facing with recruitment and retention. The enhanced death gratuity of $100,000 and the increased life insurance benefits that we enacted for servicemembers earlier this year would lapse and substantially lower benefits would be reinstated. More than $6.0 billion in military construction and family housing projects to improve the conditions in which our servicemembers work and live would be unable to proceed. The Senate obviously has a lengthy agenda for the rest of the year. Some of the items on this agenda are undoubtedly important, but we should not pursue them at the expense of our men and women in uniform. If we truly value the contribution that our Armed Forces have made and continue to make every day at home and abroad, we should take up and pass a Defense authorization bill--preferably as a freestanding bill but, if not, as an amendment to the pending legislation.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, earlier this week the Violence Policy Center released its annual study of homicide data titled ``When Men Murder Women.'' This year's study analyzed homicide data from 2003, the most recent available, that involved one female victim and one male offender. The VPC found that in 2003, the majority of women who were murdered were killed with a firearm. In the overwhelming majority of these cases, 77 percent in fact, the male offender used a handgun. The VPC report also revealed that more than ten times as many females were murdered by a man they knew than were killed by a stranger. Of these, 62 percent were in an intimate relationship or married to their killer. According to the report, ``Most often, females were killed by males in the course of an argument.'' These statistics illustrate the tragic role firearms play in domestic violence disputes that escalate into murder. As my colleagues know, since 1968 it has been illegal for convicted felons, illegal aliens, individuals involuntarily committed to a mental health facility, individuals who have renounced their citizenship, drug addicts, those dishonorably discharged from the military, and fugitives to possess or purchase a firearm. In 1996, we extended the law to the prohibition on firearms to individuals who were under a domestic violence restraining order and those who had previously been convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor. Unfortunately, these efforts continue to be undermined by Congress' failure to close the ``gun show loophole.'' Under current law, when an individual buys a firearm from a licensed dealer, there are Federal requirements for a background check to insure that the purchaser is not prohibited by law from purchasing or possessing a firearm. However, this is not the case for all gun purchases. For example, when an individual wants to buy a firearm from another private citizen who is not a licensed gun dealer, there is no requirement that the seller ensure the purchaser is not in a prohibited category. This creates a loophole in the law, providing prohibited purchasers, including those who have previously been convicted of domestic violence crimes, with potential easy access to dangerous firearms. Such firearms could later be used to murder a wife or girlfriend in a moment of rage or jealousy. The VPC demonstrates that the Congress should do more to help protect women from gun violence. I urge my colleagues to join me in support of funding for domestic violence prevention programs as well as legislation to close the gun show loophole.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to Mildred Light Aldridge, an educator and administrator for many years and the wife of the late Reverend Dr. Avery Aldridge, who passed away at the age of 77 on September 22, 2005. She was an important member of the Flint community, and she will be sorely missed by many. Mildred Light Aldridge was born in 1928 in Earle, AR. She received her bachelor's of art degree in elementary education from the University of Michigan-Flint and her master's degree in guidance and counseling from Eastern Michigan University. She taught on the elementary school level and worked as a guidance counselor in several middle schools before serving as principal of the Doyle Ryder Community School until her retirement in 1986. After retirement, she remained active by founding and serving as the director of the Eagle's Nest Child Care and Development Center. She also served for the past 23 years as an instructor of the adult ladies fellowship class at Foss Avenue Baptist Church. Mildred Light Aldridge participated in various civic and community organizations, including the Flint Chapters of the NAACP and the Urban League, the Visually Impaired Center of Flint, and on the advisory board of the Mott Community College Foundation. She was also affiliated with the National Association of Elementary School Principals and the Flint Congress of School Administrators. In addition, Dr. Aldridge held honorary doctorate degrees from Arkansas Baptist College and Selma University. Dr. Aldridge is mourned by many in the Flint community and is survived by her two children, Derrick Aldridge and Karen Aldridge- Eason, and by her 10 grandchildren. This is, indeed, a great loss to all who knew her, and I know my colleagues will join me in paying tribute to the life of Mildred L. Aldridge.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, earlier this month, the emerald ash borer was positively detected in the Upper Peninsula of my home State of Michigan for the first time. Officials believe that this may be an isolated outbreak, and hope that it can be successfully contained. Unfortunately, this is an aggressive pest that we in Michigan have been fighting for years, however we have had only limited success in containing the infestation in the past. It is believed that the ash borer was brought to Michigan about 6 years ago through the channels of international trade. What started as a local infestation in a few counties in southeastern Michigan has grown to infest the entire Lower Peninsula. This find in a State park in Michigan's Upper Peninsula is significant because it shows that efforts and the resources provided until now have not been adequate to contain the pest. While even as we speak, research is being conducted by some of our State's best experts on ways to kill the bug while saving our ash trees, a lack of funding is hampering these efforts. Whatever funding is available must be balanced between research efforts and eradication and containment. For now, that means removing our ash trees. In Michigan alone, we are nearing 10 million trees removed. I cannot tell you how distressing it is for communities which have been forced to remove trees and have little or no funding to replace them. Ann Arbor, near the heart of the infestation and known for its beautiful downtown tree-lined streets, is increasing devoid of foliage, as is the case with too many of our cities and towns. The State of Michigan anticipated $30 million in Federal funding last year for activities related to eradicating emerald ash borer. Unfortunately, they only received a third of that. This has severely affected our ability to do what is necessary to eradicate this pest. Chipping of these downed trees has ground to a halt, and funding to enforce the State's wood quarantines has been strained. We cannot continue to hold back the spread of the ash borer on our own with such meager funding. This year, recognizing the serious threat that the ash borer poses to the Nation, the administration requested $32 million for eradication efforts. However, the Senate bill before us provides only $5.96 million for the efforts. This is simply far too inadequate. The House of Representatives approved $14 million for emerald ash borer-related activities in their Agriculture appropriations bill. While this is still far below what is required, I believe it is a positive first step to providing the desperately needed funding to slow the spread of the ash borer. We must recognize that this is a nationwide problem that is unfortunately not receiving the recognition or support that it should. A handful of States where EAB has been detected cannot be expected to contain the bug on their own forever. We have seen how quickly the ash borer has infested my State of Michigan, taking only 5 years to spread throughout the Lower Peninsula. Without adequate resources, we face a serious threat to our ash stock. The further spread of the emerald ash borer would be economically devastating to my State, and possibly to much of the rest of the Nation. I am hopeful that the Senate conferees to this bill will accept the House's level of $14 million for EAB eradication efforts.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I have been a strong supporter of the Community Oriented Policing Services, or COPS, program since its creation in 1994. Nationwide, the COPS program has awarded more than $11 billion in grants, resulting in the hiring of 118,000 additional police officers. In Michigan, 514 local and State law enforcement agencies have received more than $220 million in grants through the COPS program. These grants have improved the safety of communities by putting more than 3,300 law enforcement officers on Michigan streets. In the past month alone, the COPS program has awarded nearly $2 million in grants to Michigan communities. One COPS grant program, the Secure Our Schools Initiative, recently awarded more than $1 million in grants to nine Michigan communities to provide enhanced security for public schools. These grants help our schools pay for security assessments, security training for students and personnel and the installation of metal detectors, locks, lighting, and other important security measures. Another COPS grant program, the Tribal Resources Grant Program, awarded more than $800,000 in grants to eight Native- American communities in Michigan. These funds will strengthen the police departments in these communities by helping tribes hire and train police officers and modernize their equipment. COPS grants like these are critical to Michigan communities that are working to prevent and respond to violent crimes, especially those involving guns. Unfortunately, authorization for the COPS program was permitted to expire at the end of fiscal year 2000. Although the program has survived through the annual appropriations process, it has received significant funding cuts under this administration. In fact, the fiscal year 2005 Omnibus Appropriations Act included only $606 million for the COPS program, $142 million below the amount appropriated in 2004. During consideration of the fiscal year 2006 Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bill last week, I supported an amendment that would have provided $1 billion for the COPS program. Unfortunately, this amendment was defeated and the majority in the Senate voted to cut the COPS program further to $515 million for fiscal year 2006. I have cosponsored the COPS Reauthorization Act introduced by Senator Biden. This bill would continue the COPS program for another 6 years at a funding level of $1.15 billion per year. This funding would allow State and local governments to hire an additional 50,000 police officers over the next 6 years. In addition, the bill would modernize the COPS program by authorizing $350 million in Law Enforcement Technology Grants to assist police departments in acquiring new technologies for the analysis of crime data and the examination of DNA evidence, among other uses. The COPS Reauthorization Act would also build upon the accomplishments of the original COPS program by authorizing $200 million in Community Prosecutor Grants. These grants would be used to hire community prosecutors trained to work at the local and neighborhood level to prevent crime and improve relations with residents. The increased threat of terrorism as well as the continuing epidemic of gun violence underscores the need to devote more resources for our law enforcement agencies. The safety and security of our communities depends upon our local police departments, most often the first responders, being adequately staffed, trained, and equipped. I hope the Senate will do more to support the efforts of our local law enforcement officials by adequately funding programs such as COPS.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, today we mourn the passing of a great man whose name has become synonymous with the pursuit of justice, Simon Wiesenthal. Mr. Wiesenthal dedicated his life to finding and prosecuting Nazi war criminals, and he was extraordinarily successful at doing so. He was a passionate, courageous man waging an often lonely yet critical fight. Born 96 years ago in what is now the Ukraine, Mr. Wiesenthal barely survived the unimaginable horrors of the Holocaust, emerging from a concentration camp at the end of the war weighing less than 100 pounds. Though the Nazis had not succeeded in taking his life, he had lost 89 members of his family. Simon Wiesenthal took this incomprehensible grief and turned it into action, embarking on a lifelong quest to find Nazi war criminals and secure justice for their victims. He had already begun this work in the concentration camps, committing to memory details of his captors. After the war, he worked first for the U.S. Army's War Crimes Office and then opened the Jewish Historical Documentation Center in Linz, Austria in 1947, to continue that work on his own. The Center later moved to Vienna, where Mr. Wiesenthal worked every day in a small office building, surrounded by files, meticulously documenting and tracking the guilty. He worked in that office until last year, when his health would no longer permit it. In his most prominent success, information from Wiesenthal led Israeli agents to capture Adolf Eichmann, the architect of Hitler's extermination campaign, in Argentina in 1960. Wisenthal's other high- profile arrests include Anne Frank's captor, Karl Silberbauer, and the commandant of the Treblinka and Sobibor camps, Franz Stangl. The vast majority of his work, though, was pursuing lesser-known and unknown Nazis and demanding accountability for their roles. In all, he is credited with bringing more than 1,100 Nazi war criminals to justice. Those prosecutions not only brought punishment to the guilty but also affirmed to the world that justice, even when delayed, must always be done. As we honor and thank Mr. Wiesenthal for the results of his work, we owe him a special debt for the way he went about that work. Despite his personal tragedy and despite the staggering scale of the atrocities, Mr. Wiesenthal sought, as he said, ``justice, not revenge.'' He broke the cycle of hate and elevated us all. Indeed, one of his strongest hopes was that his work would help us to rise above our history. As he said: The history of man is the history of crimes, and history can repeat. So information is a defense. Through this we can build, we must build, a defense against repetition. The 11 million victims of the Holocaust had no finer, more dedicated, more capable advocate than Simon Wiesenthal. The living had no finer example of a hero. Our only solace in his passing is that the 11 million Simon Wiesenthal spoke for can finally say to him today: ``Thank you for remembering us.''

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I would like to call my colleagues' attention to a distinguished religious leader in Michigan, Reverend Dr. Vahan H. Tootikian. Dr. Tootikian will be honored at a special testimonial banquet on Sunday, September 25, 2005, in Troy, MI. The tribute will mark his retirement from active parish ministry and will recognize his 30 years as pastor of the Armenian Congregational Church of Greater Detroit and his 46 years of Christian ministry. Since accepting his call to the ministry in 1959, Dr. Tootikian has used his talents and unique skills to encourage and enlighten people around the world. He has earned the respect and admiration of the Armenian and the greater religious community in Michigan, throughout North America, and around the world for his pastoral leadership and his commitment and devotion to service. Born in Kessab, Syria in 1935, Dr. Tootikian received his primary education at the Armenian Evangelical schools in Syria and his secondary education in Beirut, Lebanon. He simultaneously earned a bachelor of art degree with honors and a bachelor of theology degree with honors from the American University of Beirut and the Near East School of Theology, respectively. He then served as pastor of Armenian Evangelical Churches in Syria and Egypt before coming to the United States in 1965 to pursue religious studies at Hartford Seminary, Harvard Divinity School, and Andover Newton Theological Seminary. While serving as minister of the Armenian Memorial Church in Watertown, MA, Dr. Tootikian earned a master of sacred theological degree in 1970, and a doctor of ministry degree cum laude in 1973. In 1975, Dr. Tootikian was welcomed into the pastorate of the Armenian Congregational Church of Greater Detroit. Under his spiritual guidance, the Church has flourished and undergone expansion, which has included a new Christian Education Building, the founding of an Armenian library, and the organizing of the Armenian Heritage Committee to preserve and perpetuate the Armenian Christian Heritage. Over the years, Dr. Tootikian has also provided leadership to numerous organizations, including the Armenian Evangelical Union of America, Armenian Missionary Association of America, and the Armenian Evangelical World Council--AEWC. During his tenure with AEWC, the 1700th Anniversary of Armenian Christendom was celebrated by all Armenian Evangelical Unions in Yerevan, Armenia, and the first Armenian Evangelical Pastors' Conference was held in May 2003 in Evian, France. As a scholar and lecturer, Dr. Tootikian has provided instruction at the University of Michigan and at the Lawrence Technological University. Dr. Tootikian has authored 27 books, with 6 of them currently in use as college textbooks. In addition, he has been a frequent contributor to many magazines and papers, and currently writes bilingual articles for 12 Armenian papers and periodicals. His efforts in support of various educational, philanthropic, religious and cultural organizations have been recognized through many awards and the establishment of endowment funds in his honor. I know my colleagues join me in congratulating Dr. Tootikian on his service to the community, and on his many achievements in the pastoral ministry. I am pleased to offer my best wishes to him on his retirement, and for many more years of good health, happiness, and contribution to the spiritual well being of many people around the world.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I have consistently supported commonsense legislation to help stop the flow of guns to the black market. Unfortunately, the failure of Congress to act on several commonsense bills has allowed criminals and terrorists continued potential easy access to guns. In addition to endangering our families and communities here in the United States, congressional inaction may also be helping to fuel international trafficking of powerful firearms. Earlier this year, the CBS news program ``60 Minutes'' aired a segment about the activities of an arms merchant who legally purchased high-powered weapons here in the U.S. and smuggled them to the Kosovo Liberation Army to be used in their fight for independence from Serbia. According to him, the weapon of choice for the KLA was the .50-caliber sniper rifle. Published reports indicate that .50-caliber sniper rifles are capable of accurately hitting a target more than 1,500 yards away with a bullet measuring a half inch in diameter. In addition, these thumb-size bullets come in armor-piercing, incendiary, and explosive varieties that can easily punch through aircraft fuselages, fuel tanks, and engines. Under current law, .50-caliber sniper rifles can be purchased by private individuals with only minimal Federal regulation. In fact, these dangerous weapons are treated the same as other long rifles including shotguns, hunting rifles, and smaller target rifles. ``60 Minutes'' pointed out that this one individual made use of his easy access to .50-caliber sniper rifles and other high-powered weapons to help outfit the KLA. He said: Anything you need to run a small guerrilla army, you can buy here in America. You have all the guns you need here to fight a war. He continued: All the rifles which U.S. soldiers use in every war, you can buy them in a gun store or a gun show. While he would not discuss the total number of .50-caliber rifles he shipped out of the country, the author of a book about the subject estimated the number to be several hundred. The author told ``60 Minutes'' that on one occasion, the arms merchant and his associates hid nearly one hundred .50-caliber sniper rifles in a shipment of humanitarian aid to Albanian refugees. For their report, ``60 Minutes'' also interviewed Joe Vince, a former senior official at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. He commented on our Nation's gun laws by saying: We are the candy store for guns in the world. And it's easy for people to acquire them here. During his interview, Mr. Vince called for computerized records of gun sales that would allow law enforcement officials to look for patterns of buying activity for high-powered firearms including .50- caliber sniper rifles. This approach may be helpful for identifying the gun trafficking operations that arm criminals in our country as well as those that support militants in other parts of the world, including terrorists. I have cosponsored the Fifty-Caliber Sniper Weapon Regulation Act introduced by Senator Feinstein. This bill would reclassify .50-caliber rifles under the National Firearms Act, treating them the same as other high powered or especially lethal firearms like machine guns and sawed off shotguns. Among other things, reclassification of .50-caliber sniper rifles under the NFA would subject them to new registration requirements. Future transfers or sales of .50-caliber sniper rifles would have to be conducted through a licensed dealer with an accompanying background check. In addition, the rifle being sold would have to be registered with Federal authorities. We have a responsibility to those we represent as well as to other nations to help stop dangerous firearms from falling into the hands of people who seek to use them for violence. I am hopeful that the Congress will recognize the danger of inaction and pass legislation to require registration of military style firearms like the .50-caliber sniper rifle.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I will spend a few minutes talking about Iraq this afternoon. I start with my conclusion and then go into the body of my remarks after I state what that conclusion is. The administration's position that we will stay as long as the Iraqis need us to is too open-ended and sends the wrong message to Iraqis that their failure to make the necessary political compromises will not affect how long we stay, and it makes it less likely that those compromises will be reached. Our military commanders have repeatedly stated there is no purely military solution in Iraq and that a political settlement is a necessary element for success. In view of that, I believe, unless the Iraqis achieve a political settlement by the end of this year, we must consider a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq, and we must make that point clearly to the Iraqis now while they are in the process of deciding whether to come together through consensus. The Iraqi National Assembly approved a draft Constitution on August 28, despite objections from the Sunni Arabs over provisions relating to federalism that most Sunnis believe will disadvantage the areas of Sunni concentration. Those provisions essentially would enable the Kurds in the North and the Shiites in the South to establish autonomous regions in which most of the country's oil reserves are located. Sunni Arab voters who chose to boycott the last election, and thus were underrepresented in the National Assembly and on the constitutional drafting committee, registered in large numbers for the referendum on the Constitution scheduled for October 15, with the apparent objective of rejecting the existing draft. If two-thirds of the voters in 3 or more of Iraq's 18 provinces vote no, the Constitution will be rejected, and the elections scheduled for December will elect a new National Assembly, which will start the constitutional drafting process anew. Additionally, there are reports that firebrand Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr will exhort his followers to reject the Constitution because he favors a unified Iraq, and he sees the existing draft leading to the dissolution of Iraq as a single State. Muqtada al-Sadr has a huge following in Baghdad, which lacks oil resources, and thus is disadvantaged in a manner similar to the predominantly Sunni Arab provinces. Meanwhile, the administration is urging the American people to ``stay the course.'' That is a bumper sticker slogan not a strategy. Secretary Rice, among others, has stated we will be in Iraq as long as we are needed, adding no incentive, therefore, to Iraqis to reach a political settlement. An open-ended commitment to keep our troops in Iraq, even in the absence of a political settlement by the Iraqis, flies in the face of our military commander's assessment that there can be no military success in the absence of an Iraqi political coming together. U.S. forces, particularly the U.S. Army, are stretched thin, despite the unprecedented use of a large segment of our National Guard in Iraq. Their lengthy and repeated deployments mean that much of a unit's time is devoted to recovery from a previous deployment and preparation for the next one, thus leaving little time for training to develop war- fighting capabilities or sustaining readiness for other contingencies. These actions, in turn, mean less time at home for soldiers with their families and lower morale, which threatens recruiting and retention. The level of participation of the Armed Forces of other countries has been disappointing, leaving the United States to bear most of the burden. The absence of forces from Muslim countries is deeply disappointing, since the outcome in Iraq has effects throughout the world and also impacts the future direction of Islam. While it would likely be unwise for Iraq's neighbors to supply any forces, the failure of the Arab states to express their condolences over the recent stampede, in which almost 1,000 Iraqis were killed, was noted angrily by Iraq's President and Prime Minister, as was the lack of Arab diplomatic representation in Baghdad. The administration should take advantage of the presence of so many national leaders at the United Nations later this week to press nations with substantial Muslim populations, other than those neighboring Iraq, to send forces to Iraq. The President should also make clear to the Iraqi leaders that we expect them to extend invitations to such nations. Speaking as a Senator, I delivered that message to President Talabani this afternoon in Senator Frist's office. It is a message that I delivered on a number of occasions and directly in the past to Iraqi's leaders in Iraq. U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad wrote in the Washington Post that one of the two standards to evaluate the Iraqi Constitution is ``its potential to be a national compact that brings Iraqis together and undermines the insurgency.'' He went on to say: If Iraqi voters ratify the draft overwhelmingly, it becomes a national compact. If they reject the draft, the next Assembly will negotiate anew. He continues: Under all scenarios, the United States will continue to encourage Iraqi leaders and communities to come together. But Ambassador Khalilzad failed to mention that there is another scenario; namely, that the Sunni Arabs vote overwhelmingly against the Constitution but fall short of achieving a two-thirds negative vote in three provinces. In such a case, the violence and insurrection is more likely to continue and even civil war could result. Moreover, the Ambassador's words fail to display urgency that Iraqis reach a political settlement and unwisely suggest the U.S. forces may stay in Iraq indefinitely until legal consensus is achieved. Despite the National Assembly's approval of the draft Constitution, the Iraqis continue to negotiate and make changes to the draft. For example, the Washington Post reported on September 6 that President Talabani said in his statement that he had agreed to changes that would ease concerns among Sunni Arabs that the wording of the draft loosened Iraqi ties to the Arab world. And Reuters reported on Sunday that the United Nations is unable to start printing Iraq's draft Constitution because the National Assembly had not yet certified the text and now has set Sunday, September 18, as the date by which any changes to the draft Constitution can still be met. This week provides a critically important opportunity for the administration to make clear to the Iraqis that U.S. forces cannot be in Iraq indefinitely. We must make it clear to the Iraqis that they have a limited time to achieve a political settlement and that if they do not do so, one way or another, by the end of this year, we will consider a timetable for withdrawal of our forces. Speaking as one Senator, again, I delivered that viewpoint to President Talabani in Senator Frist's office earlier this afternoon. We cannot write a constitution for Iraq, and we should not dictate the compromises they need to make to achieve a political settlement. But we do control whether our troops stay in Iraq and how long they stay. The framework for agreement appears to be at hand. Some Shiite leaders reportedly have come to realize the existing draft of the constitution, which grants a high degree of control over natural resources to autonomous regions, would apply to water resources as well as to oil resources. That could negatively impact on the amount and quality of water available to predominantly Shiite areas. The Shiites are mainly located in the south, downstream of both the Kurds in the north and the Sunni Arabs in the center, who are able to dominate the flow of Iraq's two great rivers, the Tigris and Euphrates. If the Shiites give up their ability to form an autonomous region or regions, or agree to greater control by the central government over the country's natural resources, the Sunni Arabs might then be able to support a revised draft constitution which would be a critical step in achieving a political settlement. The administration needs to move quickly. Both President Talabani and Prime Minister Jaafari--the leading Kurd and Shiite, respectively, in the transitional Iraqi Government--are in Washington this week and available for straight talk from the President and his Cabinet. The United States has done and is doing more than our part in Iraq. It is up to the Iraqis now to step up to the political compromises which need to be made if Iraq has a realistic chance to defeat the insurgents and to become a nation. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. LEVIN

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

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask I be allowed to proceed as though in morning business.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, it is essential that we turn promptly to consideration of the Defense authorization bill. Our troops are fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and providing law and order and saving lives in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The Defense authorization bill contains numerous provisions to improve their compensation and enhance the quality of their lives and their families' lives. Passing the Defense authorization bill sends an unmistakable message that we care about them and that as a nation we appreciate their sacrifices. More than 64,000 Active-Duty and National Guard troops have been sent to the Gulf Coast where they are assisting in the recovery from Hurricane Katrina. These troops are playing a critical role in conducting search and rescue missions; evacuating displaced persons; providing security in impacted areas; delivering essential food, water, and medicine; and rebuilding damaged infrastructure throughout the region. I saw firsthand last Sunday in Battle Creek, in my home State of Michigan, just how effective and professional the Michigan National Guard is in preparing for the needs of hundreds of evacuees of Katrina. And, of course, about 138,000 American soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are engaged in taking on aggressive insurgency in Iraq, and 17,000 remain in harm's way in Afghanistan. Tens of thousands more are supporting the war effort through deployment thousands of miles from home. Our Armed Forces also continue to bear the brunt of the continuing effort to stabilize and rebuild Afghanistan, keep the peace in Bosnia, Kosovo, and other hot spots, while remaining prepared to execute other missions in support of the national military strategy. Some of these troops deployed overseas are from the Gulf Coast area. Some of them will soon return home to find that Katrina has damaged or destroyed their homes. Some will have nothing left. Taking up and passing the national Defense bill will improve their quality of life while they remain on active duty and when serving in hurricane recovery duty. Passage of the Defense bill will send an important message to them that we as a nation understand their loss and appreciate their service. At a time when members of our Armed Forces are performing heroically both at home and overseas to make our country safer and stronger, it would be unconscionable to give the Defense authorization bill anything less than top legislative priority. Our military both needs and deserves the support that Congress can provide in the Defense authorization bill. First and foremost, the Defense authorization bill would support our troops by improving compensation and quality of life for our service men and women and their families as they face hardships imposed by continuing military operations within the United States and around the world. For example, the bill would provide funding for a 3.1-percent across-the-board pay raise for military personnel. The bill contains a $70 million increase in childcare and family assistance services for military families and $50 million in supplemental educational aid to school districts affected by the assignment or location of military families. The bill would provide increases in housing allowances and payment of over 20 types of bonuses and special pay for our service men and women. The bill will increase the death gratuity paid to survivors of our military personnel who die while on duty. It would increase their life insurance to $400,000. And that total death benefit of $500,000 is a small price for a nation to pay to a family of a soldier or sailor, an airmen or marine who has made the ultimate sacrifice of giving his or her life in service to our Nation. If the Defense authorization bill is not enacted, the military's authority to pay bonuses and special pay to our men and women in uniform will expire, exacerbating an already troublesome problem that we face in recruitment and retention. If this bill is not enacted, the enhanced death gratuity of $100,000 and the increased life insurance benefit that we enacted for servicemembers earlier this year will lapse and substantially lower benefits will be reinstated. If this bill is not enacted, more than $6 billion in military construction and family housing projects to improve the conditions in which our servicemembers work and live will be unable to proceed. The Senate obviously has a lengthy list of legislation that it wants to consider and needs to consider over the next few months, but surely if we truly value the contribution that our Armed Forces have made and continue to make every day, each and every minute at home and abroad, taking up and passing the Defense authorization bill before the end of this month will reflect that sentiment. It is essential we do so. We have many things to take up, but I can't think of anything more important, other than our response directly to Katrina to help the victims and their families, than taking up and passing the Defense authorization bill. I thank the Chair and I yield the floor. I note the absence of a quorum.