Carl Levin

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I join my friend from Virginia in recognizing the commitment of the Senators from New York to finding a solution to this critical problem. I share their understanding regarding the scope and intent of the Bond-Harkin amendment, and will do our best to address their concerns when conferencing the House and Senate bills.

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

Mr. LEVIN. The vote will then occur on the waiver?

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, how much time is remaining?

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, in the fiscal year 1995 Defense Authorization Act, we did precisely the same thing Senator Kennedy is asking. I am going to quote section 2(B)A. This is relative to Bosnia at that time. The report must include an estimate-- ``an estimate''-- of the total number of forces required to carry out such an operation, including forces required for rotation base. There is good precedent for precisely what Senator Kennedy is doing in terms of requiring an estimate. The troops deserve it. The Nation deserves that estimate.

Mr. LEVIN. I believe Senator Reed controls the time on his side.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I wonder if the Senator from Rhode Island will yield 2 minutes to me.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, first, I wish to ask the Senator from Rhode Island a question. The Patriot PAC-3 experience he described where I believe there were four failures, did that not, in fact, lead to changes in that system?

Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Presiding Officer.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, the question again is whether this Defense Department is going to obey the law or do they believe they are above the law. The law is very specific. It reads: The Secretary of Defense shall provide that a major defense acquisition program may not proceed beyond low-rate initial production until initial operational test and evaluation of the program is completed. That is the law. This Defense Department too often has decided it is above the law; it is beyond the law; it is not going to abide by the law. We have written a law for a purpose. Operational test and evaluation is required by law, not by the Secretary of Defense, but by the independent office that was created to do this testing. That is the definition of initial operational test and evaluation. No exception has been made for that. We deployed some UAVs, but we did not exempt them from independent test and evaluation. We deployed airplanes, but we have not exempted them from this requirement. This would be the first system that would be allowed to proceed beyond low- rate initial production without that evaluation.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask for 1 additional minute.

Mr. LEVIN. One final point in this minute. According to the agency's own papers, disclosures, the production rate capacity of these interceptors is one per month. That is the capacity. They are there. This is full-rate production. They are not at low-rate initial production anymore. The capacity is one per month. That is what they are doing now. That is their plan. Their plan is for one per month. The law says they cannot go beyond low-rate initial production without this independent evaluation. That is what this amendment is about. It provides the money but says abide by the law, obey this law, there is a purpose for it--to make sure our weapons systems work. I commend the Senator from Rhode Island for this amendment. It is quite different from any amendment that has been voted on before.

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

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

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3377

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. LEVIN. We need to pass this amendment first.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I thank and congratulate the Senator from Wisconsin for this amendment. He has been an absolute bulldog when it comes to protecting taxpayers' dollars, just as he has been a fighter for veterans, as in his previous discussion. I want to tell him I know we will be fighting with all of our energy in conference to retain this provision. It is vitally important there be this kind of an inspector general review and an inspector general who has the kind of independent power the Senator from Wisconsin has always fought for. We intend to do exactly that, to carry out, to wage his battle in conference to retain this provision.

Mr. LEVIN. Yes. I, too, agree that Congress would have to vote before a test could be conducted.

Mr. LEVIN. That is a fair request.

Mr. LEVIN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. amendment no. 3280

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. I can commit to the Senator from Delaware that I will do all that I can to ensure that this area is included in the Department's review and given full consideration.

Mr. LEVIN. My colleague from Delaware is correct. The Department of Defense has a rigorous process for determining whether a new mission should be assumed as a military mission and that expansion of the information operations capability of the Air National Guard has not been considered by this process. Additionally, the Department of Defense is conducting a complete review of the Guard's roles and missions right now.

Mr. LEVIN. Again, I commit to my colleague that we will work with him and the Department of Defense to get that thorough and timely consideration.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Reserving the right to object, I surely will not, it is our intent I believe at the end of this first period to have our structure put back in place--that we would immediately return to the bill and resolve it.