Carl Levin

Mr. LEVIN

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.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. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding the adoption of Durbin amendment No. 3199, it be modified with the changes at the desk.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, tomorrow night will be bittersweet in Jackson, MI; it is the night the Community Action Agency will bid a formal farewell to its leader and CEO, Marsha Kreucher. For nearly a quarter century, the Community Action Agency has been guided by a leader with vision and compassion. Her work has been squarely focused on making the lives of those in need better. She has gone about this work with humility and tenacity, ensuring that her work and the work of the agency she leads does its part to improve the lives of the countless people served by the Community Action Agency. The roots of poverty are complex and deep. Marsha's work, which takes a holistic and innovative approach to promoting self-sufficiency among at-risk and low-income residents, has sought to identify the issues associated with poverty and develop programs to alleviate them. Her efforts have reaped many rewards for the residents of Jackson, Lenawee, and Hillsdale counties and have improved their economic, social, and health conditions as a consequence. In the late 1980s, when she began working at the Community Action Agency, the agency administered about two dozen programs and had a budget of roughly $4 million. Nearly a quarter century later, the agency serves more than 27,000 residents annually through more than 80 programs with a budget that averages around $20 million. This is impressive growth and a testament to the quality of service the agency provides and the talent of those leading the way. It doesn't take very long to observe the profound impact the Community Action Agency has had on this region in the last two decades. The Center for Healthy Beginnings was established and currently provides full health care services to more than 27,000 residents annually. The Partnership Park Downtown Neighborhood Project was formed to help revitalize and redevelop a 23-block area in Jackson, MI, through $15 million in investments. More than 1,000 children a year receive early childhood education opportunities through agency activities. And thousands of families receive free assistance filing their income tax returns each year. These are but a few examples of the good work of this impressive agency and a glimpse of the range of services they provide with Marsha Kreucher as a driving force. Marsha is not just an accomplished leader; she is also a willing mentor and tireless community servant. She sits on a number of nonprofit boards and works to bring various stakeholders together to seek out fresh ways to combat the issues related to poverty. She is always willing to lend an ear or to provide insight to others. Her vision and her ideas have helped spark innovation and creativity, planting the seeds for a brighter future. Marsha recently said to a local paper about her life after retirement, ``It's almost hard to comprehend the difference my life will have without it.'' I say to her today that it is hard to imagine how different the Jackson community would be without her vision, leadership, and hard work over the last two decades. She has worked tirelessly and fiercely to make a positive impact on the lives of those in need, and she has done so with grace and determination. I congratulate her on a job well done and wish her the best as she begins her next, exciting journey.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services I report favorably the following nomination lists which were printed in the Record 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. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Dr. Jim Malachowski, an Air Force fellow assigned to the office of Senator Conrad, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the debate on S. 3254.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the HELP Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 600 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to; the amendment to the preamble which is at the desk be agreed to; the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; and that any statements related to the measure be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Commerce Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. 3542 and the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask that the Klobuchar amendment which is at the desk be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed; the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate; and that any statements relating to the measure be printed in the Record.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 604, submitted earlier today.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements relating to the matter be placed into the Record.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 603 which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and that any related statements be printed in the Record as if read.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:15 a.m. on Friday, November 30, 2012; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; and that following any leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of S. 3254, the DOD Authorization Act.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the provisions of S. Res. 604 as a further mark of respect to the memory of former Senator Warren B. Rudman of New Hampshire.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following blocks of time be set aside for the purpose of statements from retiring Senators: 11:30 a.m. to 12:30 a.m., Tuesday, December 4; 10 a.m. to 11 a.m., Thursday, December 6; and 12 noon to 1 p.m., Wednesday, December 12.

Mr. LEVIN

Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I want to describe to the Senate what we just did. It is a little different from what we sometimes do around here, which is we have long threats of filibusters on motions to proceed; then, we, finally, often or sometimes reach unanimous consent agreements to proceed. What we did here--and it was very deliberate-- was to proceed by motion, not by unanimous consent, to this bill so that if persons were going to filibuster the motion to proceed, they were then going to have to come to the floor and debate it--not just simply threaten to filibuster the motion to proceed, but they would have to come and actually debate it. Because I believe that is the correct way for us to operate. Motions to proceed, I believe, have been abused. The threats to filibuster those motions have been allowed to be successful. One way we can overcome what has been a bad habit of allowing threats to filibuster motions to proceed to succeed is to basically tell those folks, our colleagues, that if they want to filibuster a motion to proceed--in this case, the Defense authorization bill--they are going to have to come over and filibuster. This is something which is significant. It may sound like a nuance to many. I think it probably would to most outside this body and our staffs as to what I am saying. But it is important to those of us who are trying hard to get this body to be more functional that we use the existing rules--and I am all in favor of rules changes, by the way--but that we use in the meantime the existing rules to get this body more functional than it is right now. And one of those existing rules is the one we just used, which is to proceed by a motion to proceed, and then to indicate, as our leader just did, there appears to be no one who wishes to be recognized to debate it, and then for the Chair to put the question, the Presiding Officer to then put the question to the body: All those in favor of the motion say ``aye,'' all those opposed say ``nay.'' The ayes have it, and now we are on the bill. So, Madam President, I have a long opening statement. I will, however, with the assistance here of my friend, Senator McCain, also make the following statement. There is no cloture motion which is filed or pending. We hope we can adopt this bill without a cloture motion. We are hopeful that people who have amendments will bring them over. We will try to dispose of them, either by saying we could agree to them or we cannot agree and putting them in line for debate; but proceeding in a way that if folks, colleagues, have amendments, they bring over those amendments and let us try to work those amendments through this process without having to go through cloture and without having to set aside pending amendments in order to make other amendments pending. If we can proceed without a cloture motion, we are not going to have to use that process of setting aside pending amendments, making other amendments pending, because if we can avoid a cloture motion, we are not going to have a postcloture period where that pendency of amendments becomes relevant. If we are not going to need to go to a cloture, then it is not relevant that an amendment is made pending because the bill is open to amendment. That is what we are hoping to do. We are willing to stay here late hours. Senator McCain and I have spent a lot of time talking about this--we spent a lot of time getting this bill to the floor, by the way; and it came out of our committee unanimously--but we spent a lot of time talking about how do we get this bill done in 3 days because that is what we told the majority leader we think we can do. By the way, that is all the time we are going to have. The majority leader has made it clear we do not have more than 3 days. We want colleagues, Senators, who have amendments to bring those amendments to us. We will try, if we cannot resolve them, to put them in packages. If they need to be debated and voted on, that is fine. That is what we are here for. We are going to then try to line up those amendments so that we will go back and forth to the extent we can between Democrats and Republicans offering amendments and voting on those amendments. So, therefore, I intend to object, in the absence of a cloture motion being filed, to laying aside amendments because, again, in the absence of a cloture motion pending, there is no need to do that and it confuses and complicates the life of the managers of this bill. So I want to make that clear to our colleagues. I wonder if Senator McCain might have a comment on that.

Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I thank my good friend from Arizona for those comments. Madam President, on behalf of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I am pleased to bring S. 3254, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2013, to the Senate floor. The Armed Services Committee approved the bill by a unanimous, 26-0 vote, making this the 51st consecutive year that our committee has reported a defense authorization act. Every previous bill has been enacted into law. This year's bill would authorize $631.4 billion for national defense programs--the same amount as the President's budget request and $31 billion less than the amount appropriated for fiscal year 2012. U.S. forces are drawing down in Afghanistan and are no longer deployed in Iraq. However, real threats to our national security remain and our forces are deployed throughout the globe. I am pleased that this bill provides our men and women in uniform the funding and support that they need as they engage in continued combat in Afghanistan, work to track down al-Qaida and associated forces in the Arabian Peninsula and North Africa, and perform other military missions around the world. First and foremost, this bill continues the increases in compensation and quality of life that our service men and women and their families deserve as they face the hardships imposed by continuing military operations around the world. For example, the bill authorizes a 1.7 percent across-the-board pay raise for all military personnel, extends over 30 types of bonuses and special pays aimed at encouraging enlistment, reenlistment, and continued service by active-duty and reserve military personnel, and authorizes increases to several of these bonuses; does not accept Department of Defense proposals that would have increased the cost of medical care for service members and their families by establishing enrollment fees for TRICARE Standard and TRICARE for Life, and increasing TRICARE deductibles and the annual catastrophic cap; authorizes $30 million in supplemental impact aid and related education programs for the children of service members, and adjusts the impact aid formula to alleviate delays in impact aid funds; requires the Secretary of Defense to provide recommendations for statutory or regulatory changes to further increase career and service opportunities for women in the armed forces; and strengthens protections on consumer credit for members of the armed forces. The bill includes funding needed to provide our troops the equipment and support that they need in Afghanistan, while preparing the way for a transition of responsibility to Afghan forces. For example, the bill funds the President's request for $88 billion for overseas contingency operations; fully funds the President's request for $5.7 billion to train and equip the Afghan National Army and Afghan Police--growing the capabilities of these security forces so those forces can continue the transition to taking the security lead throughout Afghanistan by 2014; reauthorizes the use of DOD funds to support a program to reintegrate insurgent fighters into Afghan society at the requested level of $35.0 million; reauthorizes the Commanders' Emergency Response Program in Afghanistan with a reduction in the Administration's request, given reductions to U.S. force levels in Afghanistan; reauthorizes the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund at a reduced level and restricts the availability of the authorized funds until the Secretary of Defense submits information on how new projects will be sustained following completion; and requires an independent assessment of the size and structure requirements of the Afghanistan National Security Forces necessary to ensure that Afghan forces are capable of providing security for their own country after 2014. The bill also contains a number of provisions that will help improve the management of the Department of Defense and other federal agencies. For example, the bill enhances protections for contractor employees who blow the whistle on waste, fraud, and abuse on DOD contracts; restricts the use of ``pass-through'' contracts by requiring that at least 50 percent of the work on any service contract be performed by the prime contractor or by a subcontractor identified in the contract; lowers the cap on contractor salaries and compensation that is allowable for DOD reimbursement from $750,000 to $230,700; prohibits the use of cost-type contracts for the production of major weapon systems, with limited exceptions; and adds $59 million to enable the DOD IG to provide more effective oversight and help identify waste, fraud, and abuse in DOD programs, especially in the area of procurement. There are a number of controversial issues that are not addressed in this bill. First, the sole detainee-related provision in this bill is a one-year extension of existing language addressing certifications for transfers of GITMO detainees and the construction of facilities inside the United States to house GITMO detainees. I understand that some of my colleagues would like to revisit issues we addressed last year regarding the authority to detain individuals apprehended in the course of our ongoing fight with al-Qaida, the Taliban, and associated forces, and they have that right, but those issues are not addressed in the bill reported by the Senate Armed Services Committee. Second, the bill does not authorize new rounds of base closures, as requested by the administration. In fact, the bill includes a one-year moratorium on implementing any realignment that would result in a military installation falling under the threshold for closure without going through the BRAC process. The Department of Defense has achieved savings through previous BRAC rounds, but there are other options-- including further reductions to our overseas basing structure--that should be considered to achieve savings before Congress authorizes a new round of base closures inside the United States. Third, in accordance with the policy that the Armed Services Committee has adopted over the last two years, the bill does not contain any earmarks, as defined in rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. I continue to believe that we it is wrong for us to give up the power of the purse given to Congress in the Constitution. I don't believe that the executive branch has a monopoly on good ideas; in fact, I think that we are often more receptive to creative, new ideas that can lead to advances in the national defense than the defense bureaucracy is. Nonetheless, there are no earmarks in this bill. Finally, I would like to discuss four issues in the bill that are of particular importance to the Department of Defense and the Nation. First, the budget proposal included a plan by the Air Force to retire or realign various aviation units, resulting in a 4.8 percent reduction to the Air National Guard, compared to a reduction of only 1.2 percent to the active duty Air Force. The Air Force provided no convincing justification for the imbalance in these cuts. Some of the proposed cuts in National Guard force structure were accompanied by proposed increases in active duty force structure for the same aircraft. The rationale provided for other cuts was inconsistent with statements that the Air Force made as recently as two years ago about the capability of its aircraft. In fact, the Air Force was unable even to provide the committee with consistent numbers documenting the impact of the proposed cuts on affected locations. The bill before us rejects the Air Force plan and fully restores $1.4 billion in fiscal year 2013 funding for the force structure that the Air Force proposed to cut--without increasing the overall top-line of the defense budget. While we understand that the Air Force has to make tough choices in its budget, major changes in Air Force structure are too important to be made without the support of objective analysis. For this reason, the committee bill would delay the actions proposed by the Air Force and instead establish a national commission to provide an objective analysis of how the structure of the Air Force should be modified to best fulfill current and anticipated mission requirements in a manner consistent with available resources. It is our expectation that this analysis will provide a far more sound and defensible basis for future force structure decisions. Second, the bill establishes a Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission to review elements of military compensation and retirement benefits with the objective of modernizing these systems, ensuring the long-term viability and sustainability of All- Volunteer force, and enabling a high quality of life for military families. In proposing such a commission, the Department of Defense took note of significant changes in the demographics of the national workforce and private sector retirement plans, concerns about the extent to which military compensation is deferred and the vesting of benefits is delayed, and the continuing fiscal pressures on the nation. As recommended by the Department, the provision in our bill provides for expedited legislative consideration of the commission's recommendations--including an up-or-down vote on those recommendations without amendment. Our legislation would ensure that proposed changes do not break faith with the current force by expressly requiring that the commission's recommendations grandfather all members serving in the armed forces as of the date of enactment of the provision. Third, the bill includes a provision requiring the Department of Defense to develop and implement a plan to reduce the size of its workforce of civilian employees and contractor employees by an amount commensurate with the 5 percent reduction in military end-strength planned through fiscal year 2017. This provision recognizes the reality that a reduction in military end-strength and force structure should be accompanied by a comparable reduction in supporting elements. In recent years, we have come to understand the critical role played by the acquisition workforce--and the risk that we could lose billions of dollars in failed acquisition programs by trying save millions of dollars in ill-advised cuts to that workforce. But it is not just the acquisition workforce that plays a critical role in ensuring that our military is prepared to meet current and future challenges. DOD's civilian workforce also includes 45,000 nurses, pharmacists, and other medical professionals; 86,000 personnel in cybersecurity, information assurance and related fields; 15,000 personnel in science and technology; and 6,000 personnel in intelligence functions. Our civilian employee workforce plays a critical role in ensuring that our troops get the supplies that they need, that they receive the pay that they earn, that their bases are safe and well-maintained, and that their children receive the education that they deserve. Without this workforce, we would not be able to build, test, and maintain the weapon systems we need to face today's challenges, and we would not be able to conduct the research and development we need to keep our technological edge into the future. In the current budget environment, however, no area of the Department of Defense can be off limits as we look for savings. I am well aware that the Department has already developed plans to reduce its civilian employee workforce by two to three percent over a 5-year period, and is achieving additional savings through an ongoing pay freeze for its civilian employees. However, these efficiencies initiatives were developed before the current budget crunch and fall short of the 5 percent reduction planned for military end strength. The cuts imposed on the Department's contractor employee workforce have been significantly less deep. The provision in our bill should ensure that savings achieved in the Department's civilian personnel workforce and contractor employee workforce are brought in line with the savings achieved through the newer, deeper cuts to military end strength. It is our expectation that the Department will utilize a deliberative, needs- based planning process to achieve this objective. Finally, the bill includes a number of provisions on energy conservation, energy research, and alternative fuels. The Department of Defense is the single largest consumer of energy in the United States, spending close to $20 billion a year on purchases of fuel and electricity. I am pleased that the bill authorizes $150 million for the Energy Conservation Investment Program and $200 million for the research of innovative technologies, including technologies that will enhance energy security and independence, through the Rapid Innovation Program. In the long run, these 12 investments should result in substantial savings in fuel costs, reduce logistics requirements for military operations, and enhance our energy security. The bill also contains two provisions--each adopted on a razor-thin 13-12 vote--restricting the Department's continued investment in alternative fuels. The first provision prohibits the use of fiscal year 2013 funds for the production or purchase of an alternative fuel if the cost exceeds the cost of traditional fossil fuels available for the same use. The second provision prohibits the Department from entering into a contract to plan, design, or construct a biofuels refinery or any other facility or infrastructure used to refine biofuels, unless specifically authorized by law. These provisions may result in short-term savings, but they will impose significant long-term costs by undermining the Department's efforts to diversify its fuel supplies and enhance its energy independence and security. It is my expectation that we will revisit these provisions as we debate this bill on the Senate floor. As of today, we have roughly 1.4 million U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines serving on active duty--with tens of thousands engaged in combat in Afghanistan and stationed in other regional hotspots around the globe. While there are issues on which Members may disagree, we all know that we must provide our troops the support they need. Senate action on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 will improve the quality of life of our men and women in uniform and their families. It will give them the tools that they need to remain the most effective fighting force in the world. Most important of all, it will send an important message that we, as a Nation, stand behind them and appreciate their service. I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this vital legislation. Amendment No. 2985 Senator Udall's amendment is now pending, and I am wondering whether there is a time agreement yet on this amendment and, if not, whether we can work on a time agreement.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent Senator Boxer also be allocated 5 minutes to speak on the pending amendment.

Mr. LEVIN. Can I ask the Senator from Montana if he wishes to speak on the Udall amendment?

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I know of no further debate on Senator McCain's amendment No. 3051. We are not quite ready.

Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Boxer be allocated 5 minutes of debate time on the Udall amendment.

Mr. LEVIN. We are waiting for just one further word on the McCain amendment. We hope to be able to voice-vote that in the next few minutes.