Ted Stevens

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. I would like to tell the Senate about the way the last administration treated this Senate.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I think the Senator from West Virginia is well aware of what the last administration did. They just spent money. They didn't even tell us where they were taking it from. Twice in 1999, we had to have supplementals. They didn't even tell us in the supplementals what funds they used. They deployed forces, and they took money from the accounts we had already appropriated for other purposes. Every time President Clinton deployed forces, that is what he did. This time, this President came and asked for a supplemental. He has money he is spending, but he cannot tell us precisely day by day what they are spending. They asked for money in advance. They got money in advance. He did not disturb the individual accounts of the various services. He did not cause the chaos in terms of defense that the last administration did. I will defend my friend, this Secretary of Defense. If the Senator wants to defend the last Secretary of Defense, I will let him do it. But I know what happened. In 1998, 1999, and 2000--we had 2 supplementals in 1999. That represented money that was used under the food and farm act concept of ancient law of the United States. The President took money from other accounts and just spent it. He didn't ask us for it. He didn't tell us what he was using it for. He never would account for it. Even when he asked for a supplemental, he didn't tell us what unit he took it from. We had to look for the unit and put the money back where it belonged. This administration is doing it right. When they ask for money in advance, they are spending money and accounting for it as they account for their bills normally in their normal reports. But they did not take money from the individual units. They took money from the Air Force and Army and spent it somewhere else without telling anybody. You want to get me excited about something, I will get excited about the way the last administration handled the Department of Defense. They decreased funding and used the money in a manner totally unheard of in the history of the United States. It would have ruined the military had it not been for the concept of the consolidated force structure. The military saved itself by using Reserve and Guard units in the proper way. But their funding came from moneys that were for entirely different purposes. I believe they took money from the procurement account from time to time. Normally, they took the operation and maintenance money. That is the steaming money. That is money for flying hours. That is money for drilling. That is money for equipment. That is money for munitions. They just depleted money, and deployed forces to Bosnia and Kosovo without asking at all. There was no advance request. There was no notice given. If the Senator wants to get excited about the way funding is being used now, they are using the funds which they asked Congress for. I was the one who presented the bill. Congress approved it. The President signed the law. And the Secretary of Defense has the right to use that money according to laws that we pass. And he is following those laws, to the best of my knowledge.

Mr. STEVENS. Will the Senator yield right there?

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, this has been an interesting debate, but in the course of the debate we found that we have agreement that we have to do something about the basic subject of rotation and deployment as it applies to the Guard and Reserve as well as the active portions of our total force. I think, in the interest of all concerned, it would be best to put aside both Senator Byrd's amendment and the one that Senator Inouye and I have offered and see if we cannot get further information from the Department and try to work with the Department in terms of this new policy that is projected. So on that basis and the debate that has taken place so far, I move to table Senator Byrd's amendment, which would take with it my second- degree amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have three amendments which have been cleared. Senator Inouye has similar ones for his side. Right after that, we will have a consent agreement that we will present, and if we are successful in getting that consent agreement, we would not have any further votes tonight but we will have to wait until we present that agreement. I send to the desk three amendments en bloc, one from Senator Voinovich to make available from amounts available for research, development, test, and evaluation, defensewide, $3 million for the long-range biometric target identification system; an amendment on behalf of myself and Senator Inouye for Senator Roberts which earmarks $2,500,000 for the study of geospatial visualization technologies; and a third amendment by Senator Allen to make available from amounts available for research, development, test, and evaluation, Navy, $4 million for the high speed antiradiation demonstration airframe/ propulsion section. I send those to the desk and ask that they be considered en bloc.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendments be dispensed with.

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

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the Senator from Missouri has a statement I would like to respond to, and I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to yield to him for his portion of the statement.

Mr. STEVENS. I agree. The war in Iraq demonstrated the important of having the highly-mobile maintenance capability that the digitization of DoD manuals enabled our forces to employ. For many years, the Senator and I have shared a concern about the high unemployment rates in Native communities. This program serves as one effective means of addressing those high unemployment rates while also providing the Defense Department with new sources of supply for digitization services.

Mr. STEVENS. In an effort to ensure full compliance with Congress's intent to fully fund the non-line of sight cannon program, the Senate Appropriations Committee has designated the program as a congressional special interest and appropriated funding in a separate program element devoted to the advanced development of artillery systems.

Mr. STEVENS. I would yield to the Senator from Indiana for a question.

Mr. STEVENS. I was aware of the reliance on MREs, yes.

Mr. STEVENS. We are going to take a close look at this problem and see what is or isn't being done to address it and take corrective action if necessary. cost-sharing of defense medical research

Mr. STEVENS. Yes, the Senator from Vermont is correct. The committee is seeking to determine alternative ways to fund increases in these kinds of projects, but not undermine the effectiveness of ongoing programs. The committee has received numerous requests to start up new medical research programs. In many cases these requests cannot be met when trying to meet other valid military requirements with limited resources. The language is certainly not specifically designed to undermine the integrity of the existing DOD BCRP, and the committee recognizes it as innovative, extremely accountable and transparent in its approach to medical research.

Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Senator for his interest in this issue. I recognize the importance of laser peening technology, and I promise the Senator that I will be certain to give his request careful consideration as we proceed with action on the Department of Defense Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2004.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security be authorized to meet to conduct a joint hearing on ``Visa Issuance, Information Sharing and Enforcement in a Post-9/11 Environment: Are We Ready Yet?'' on Tuesday, July 15, 2003, at 2:30 p.m. in SD226. Panel I: Mr. Jess T. Ford, Director, International Affairs Division, General Accounting Office, Burke, Virginia. Panel II: Ms. Janice L. Jacobs, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Visa Service, Department of State, Carbondale, Illinois; Mr. Michael T. Dougherty, Director of Operations, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, McLean, Virginia; Mr. Jayson P. Ahern, Assistant Commissioner, Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, Ashburn, Virginia. THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask that the Chair now lay before the Senate a message from the House on H.R. 1474. The Presiding Officer laid before the Senate the following message from the House of Representatives: Resolved, That the House disagree to the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 1474) entitled ``An Act to facilitate check truncation by authorizing substitute checks, to foster innovative in the check collection system without mandating receipt of checks in electronic form, and to improve the overall efficiency of the Nation's payments system, and for other purposes'', and ask a conference with the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon. Ordered, That the following Members be the managers of the conference on the part of the House: For consideration of the House bill and the Senate amendment, and modifications committed to conference: Mr. Oxley, Mr. Bachus, Mr. LaTourette, Ms. Hart, Mr. Tiberi, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, Mr. Sanders, and Mr. Ford.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate insist on its amendment to the House bill, agree to a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes, and the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees at a ratio of 3 to 2.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 193, S. 764.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. For the information of all Senators, at the leader's request, following morning business, the Senate will take up H.R. 2330, the Burma sanctions bill, under a 1-hour time agreement. Upon the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 2658, the Department of Defense appropriations bill. Under the previous order, there will be up to 30 minutes equally divided in relation to the Dorgan amendment and 40 minutes equally divided in relation to the Bingaman amendment. Following the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate will proceed to three stacked rollcall votes related to the Dorgan amendment, the Bingaman amendment, and the Burma bill. Therefore, if all debate time is used, the first vote in tomorrow's session will occur at approximately 12:10 p.m., and that vote will be the first in a series of three stacked votes. Following that series of votes, the Senate will resume consideration of H.R. 2658, the Department of Defense appropriations bill. It is the majority leader's intention to complete action on that bill tomorrow. I share deeply that desire. Therefore, any Members who have amendments are encouraged to contact either me, as the manager of the bill, or Senator Inouye so that they can schedule the appropriate time for the amendment's consideration. I also inform the Members that votes should be expected throughout the day. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, we know of only two amendments so far that may come toward this bill. We would encourage Members to come forward and tell us if they are going to offer amendments. It would be our hope that we could proceed with this bill in a fashion that we could come to a final conclusion tomorrow afternoon and vote on this bill tomorrow afternoon and take up one of the other bills so we can move these bills along. This bill came out of our committee unanimously. We have taken care of most of the amendments in our committee. We will cooperate with you in every way to give you advance notice on the votes. If we can find out the number of amendments that are coming, we might even be able to make arrangements that we would vote early tomorrow morning on the amendments on this bill and just have one vote on the executive calendar.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, it is my privilege and honor once again to present to the Senate the Defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 2004. This bill reflects a bipartisan approach that Senator Inouye and I have tried to maintain during the time we have served together on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. It is always a great pleasure for me to work with him and with his staff member Charlie Houy. We believe we have a bill that will meet the approval of the Senate with very few amendments. This bill was reported out of the full Appropriations Committee on July 9 by a unanimous vote; 29 Senators voted in favor of it and no Senator objected to it. We have sought to recommend a balanced bill to the Senate. We believe it addresses the key requirements for readiness, quality of life, and the reconstitution of our military force. While we are debating this bill on the floor today, there are hundreds of thousands of men and women in uniform forward deployed and serving our country abroad. They are performing superbly and we are proud of what they are accomplishing. The Department of Defense now faces three critical and often competing challenges: First, conducting simultaneous combat and near-combat operations in numerous theaters at the same time--Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, and Kosovo, to name a few. We have forces spread throughout the world, deployed in more areas and in more strange circumstances than at any time in the history of this country; Secondly, keeping the readiness of this force at high levels, ready to respond when called upon to carry out the global war on terrorism, is another great challenge; Lastly, transforming the Department to meet future challenges. We must ensure that our military forces are ready to meet whatever lies ahead as we move through the 21st century. Transformation is necessary to ensure that U.S. forces continue to operate from a position of overwhelming military advantage. Transformed forces are also essential for deterring conflict, dissuading adversaries, and assuring others of our commitment to a peaceful world. This bill Senator Inouye and I present today reflects a prudent balance among all three of these challenges. It recommends $368.6 billion in discretionary budget authority programs for the Department of Defense. This is $3.2 billion below the President's request but within our 302(b) allocations for the Defense subcommittee. As the Senate will recall, we completed action on a $62.6 billion Iraq supplemental appropriations bill for the Department of Defense in mid-April. This bill rescinds $3.157 billion of those supplemental funds that are not currently required by the Department. This measure is fully consistent with both the objectives of the administration and the Senate-passed 2004 National Defense authorization bill. It honors the commitments we have to our Armed Forces. It helps ensure that they will continue to have good leadership, first-rate training, modernized equipment, and quality infrastructure. It also fully funds key readiness programs critical to the global war on terrorism. These recommendations will make continued progress in supporting our military personnel, their families, and modernizing the force. As always, those are our first priorities. In highlighting several of the key initiatives, I note the following: This bill funds an average military pay raise of 4.15 percent and provides $210 million to fund increases in family separation allowances and imminent danger pay. It does not recommend consolidation of Guard and Reserve personnel appropriations with their respective active component appropriations. For the Army, it is additional funding for their transformation initiative--the Stryker brigade combat teams. For the Navy, additional submarine refuelings, advance procurement of LPD-23, and fully funding the last increment of the LHD-8. For the Air Force, it is fully funding the C-17 aircraft and funding acquisition of 22 F-22 Raptor aircraft. In light of the contributions of the Guard and Reserve forces and deployments to the Balkans, Afghanistan, and Iraq, this bill adds $700 million of nondesignated equipment funding--specifically for the Reserve components. The proposal before the Senate funds the President's request for missile defense. Finally, let me once again thank my cochairman, Senator Inouye, for his support and friendship and invaluable counsel on this bill. I urge the Chair to recognize him for any statement he wishes to make.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk for Senator Inhofe to make available from amounts available for research, development, test and evaluation, Air Force, $4 million for cost- effective composite materials for manned and unmanned flight structures. I also send to the desk an amendment for Senator Dodd to increase the amount of Army RDT&E funds available for the broad area unmanned responsive resupply operations aircraft program. I also send an amendment to the desk by Senator Snowe to set aside Navy operation maintenance funds for the Navy Pilot Human Resources Call Center in Cutler, ME. I also send an amendment to the desk for Senator Breaux to make available from amounts available for research, development, test and evaluation, Navy, $4 million for Navy integrated manufacturing development. I ask unanimous consent that they be considered en bloc.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendments be agreed to en bloc.

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