Ted Stevens

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk on behalf of the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma, Mr. Nickles, and ask that it be considered.

Mr. STEVENS. I would tell the Senator from New Hampshire that it is also my understanding that the Navy now has the flexibility to reprioritize those FY2003 funds.

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 Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

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

Mr. STEVENS. I move to table the McCain amendment and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. STEVENS. If the Senator from Arizona has completed, I am prepared to offer a motion to table this amendment with the understanding that the time for the vote would be established by the leadership sometime tomorrow.

Mr. STEVENS. I join on this. I have to say that I don't use this word too often, but I was appalled at that story about the violence. We all have tremendous respect for these young people representing our Nation abroad who get in harm's way and really are put under severe stress. I hope it is not only associated with the concept of the victims of abuse, but we ought to find some way to have greater counseling available to our people when they come home. Those of us who have come home in the past know it is a traumatic experience for anybody, but for those who have been deeply involved in combat, it is really difficult. We should be very moved by that story. I think this will be the first step in meeting that syndrome that has developed and trying to find some way to prevent it in the future. So I commend the Senator for his amendment, and I, too, support it.

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President. I repeat that. We are blessed with probably the hardest working staff in the Congress. I am grateful to my great friend and chief assistant, Steve Cortese, for his work. But I would say this to the Senator from Nevada. For those of us who served in uniform, I think the greatest privilege there is is being able to manage this bill because it affects the people who have followed us, being willing to take up arms to defend our country. I know of no better group to work with and no group that really needs our help more than they do. I thank the Senator for his kindness. We would pay you for the job. It is like flying. I used to tell people they are paying me to fly and I would have paid them to let me fly. But I would pay for this job. It is an amazing, amazing feeling to know we can accomplish some of the things we did tonight.

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

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the position of the Senator from Arizona is understandable from the point of view of not being really cognizant of the aging aspect of our aircraft. We found, for instance, on the tankers, the tankers that were flying nightly in and out of Afghanistan averaged more than 42 years of age. If you had told this Senator in 1944 to fly a plane that was made 42 years earlier, 1902, it would have been laughable. Today, to have our people flying airplanes that were made in Harry Truman's day, is laughable. Just this past trip that we took to Europe, we flew on a plane that was 28 years old. It was one of these planes for this type of purpose, of carrying personnel, not cargo. We looked at this problem and we found that should we start an acquisition program for these new aircraft, which was requested by the people from the Department of Defense who pointed out in many of these statistics to us that the capital cost would be so great that it would force out of the budget items that are absolutely essential to our war against terrorism and to the modernization of our military forces in other places. We still have an absolutely difficult time replacing our ships-- replacing them at a rate that is far less than is necessary to maintain the number of ships in the line that we have. But we are stuck in that kind of economics where we can't lease the kind of military vessels we need for the Navy. But in this instance we are dealing with the world of aviation, and we can lease. We can lease planes, and we can also lease engines very competitively. There is a competitive market out there for both. There is a competitive market in the private sector for the planes we are talking about. We are not entering into a market where there is monopolistic practice at all. But for us to try to do what the OMB and the Congressional Budget Office might have wanted originally would have required a massive new procurement program in order to get the planes, and we would be getting them one or two a year for 20 years. We are going to lease a fleet of these to meet the needs of the Department of Defense and retire these planes which are so old that the cost to merely maintain them far exceeds their value now. Beyond that, their reliability is so low that I have been told in many places the concept of redlining--telling the pilots they cannot fly the plane because the plane won't pass even minimum standards--is so prevalent now in the Air Force that it is, in part, a matter of morale. I believe we should do everything we can to shift the acquisition of aircraft that we cannot lease into procurement accounts and try to get those planes to meet our military needs. Those that we can lease in a competitive world, we should do so. When we do so, we lease them at an asset that can be returned to the commercial market at the end of the lease. That is one of the things we have not been able to get real credit for yet in terms of the people who are reviewing this matter for the Senator from Arizona. We will pursue that further. But in this instance Congress and the White House agreed with us in the last year--and previously--about the concept of leasing, that there are going to be other items that have to be leased. When we were looking at some of the consequences of the terrible events of 9/11, we found that the NATO AWAX planes were bought to the United States and flown over our major cities for a substantial period of time. There were 19,000 to 20,000 hours put on those planes during a period where otherwise they probably would not be getting anywhere more than 100 hours a month. The engines on those planes have been effectively worn out. We are going to have to go into that process. I would invite the Armed Services Committee to do some studying of its own. If it has a better way to get us the equipment we need now without breaking the budget, I am sure the Senator from Hawaii and I would be pleased to join. The money for the leasing of these planes comes from the O&M account of the Department of Defense. It competes with all other things that O&M moneys are paid for. The Department is not going to be reaching out and leasing planes that are not needed. On the other hand, it is going to have to retire the planes that are so old now that their utility is so limited they should not be in the inventory of the U.S. Air Force. I hope the Senate will support the position. I am prepared to make a motion to table. I understand that it will be handled under a previous agreement. I shall make the motion to table before the evening is over. But it is my understanding that the amendment is pending. We will just leave it that way, and I will ask unanimous consent that it be put aside for the consideration of other matters that will come before the Senate this evening.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I object. I do not think we have a copy of that amendment yet.

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I join the Senator from Hawaii and welcome the opportunity to vote to accept this amendment. I think it is a very modest step. The Senator from West Virginia has been restrained in terms of the abuses that we have heard about. This will start the process of putting us on a straight track. I support the amendment and urge its adoption.

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I urge its adoption.

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote and to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask to amend the request of the Senator from Hawaii and ask unanimous consent that the amendment I shall send to the desk for the Senator from Iowa, Mr. Grassley, be adopted. It deals with the awarding of a Medal of Honor flag to recipients of the Medal of Honor.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, it is my understanding the bill is still open to amendment. The Senator still has his right to offer it at any time.

Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that the action on amendment 4412 be vitiated and the amendment withdrawn.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider that action.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent Senator McCain's legislative fellow, Navy LCDR Paul Gronemeyer, be granted floor privileges during consideration of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following staff members of the Appropriations Committee be granted floor privileges during consideration of H.R. 5010, the DOD appropriations bill: Steven Cortese, Sid Ashworth, Kraig Siracuse, Alycia Farrell, and Nicole Royale.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent that Randy Rotte, a fellow in Senator Hutchison's office, be permitted on the floor of the Senate during debate on the Defense appropriations bill.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. We offered a list of amendments to staff. We informed the staff and we will be happy to show them the amendments when we see the amendments that Senator McCain intends to offer.

Mr. STEVENS. Madam President, I am informed that 20 minutes ago those amendments went to Senator McCain's office and we have not seen his amendments. We ask that we see his amendments, too. We cannot put a managers' package together until we see them all.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I endorse the statement made by the Distinguished Chairman of our Subcommittee, Senator Inouye, and fully support the Bill now pending before the Senate. In a time of war and conflict, including unprecedented threats here at home, the Senate engages in no more important task than funding our national defense. The Bill reported by the Committee, under Senator Inouye's leadership and guidance, fully meets the needs of our men and women who serve in the Armed Forces, today and for the future. The Bill exceeds the level provided in the House version of the Bill by nearly $700 million. The Bill is consistent with the President's total request for the defense budget function 050, with the exception of the $10 billion reserve, which I will speak to shortly. The Chairman has accurately and comprehensively addressed the contents of the Bill, I will take just a few moments to highlight several priorities. While providing unprecedented levels of funding for current training and operations, this Bill serves to decisively move our military towards a future of more mobile, more lethal, and more efficient systems and capabilities. In all four services, and in the Missile Defense Program, this Bill shifts from the sustainment of legacy systems, designed to fight the Cold War, to the technologies of the 21st Century. For the Army, the increase in this Bill for the future combat system, and the Non-Line-of-Sight Cannon to succeed the Crusader, keeps faith with General Shinseki's vision of the Army's future. For the Navy, full funding for the DD-X Program, and start up funds for the Littoral Combat Ship, prepare the Navy to maintain our dominance at sea. For the Air Force, funding for the F-22, the JSF, C-17, and JASSAM all contribute to a refurbishment of the Air Force unmatched since the introduction of the jet fighter in the 1950's. For the Marine Corps, the Bill fully supports the V-22, and puts the LPD-17 Class Amphibious Assault Ship Program back on track, along with JSF. Of special importance to me, and my State, is the funding provided in the Bill for missile defense. Intelligence analyses over the past decade consistently demonstrate the increased threat, and our continued vulnerability to long-rang missile attack, potentially with weapons of mass destruction. President Bush, in a new relationship with Russia, has established a framework whereby our Nation will go forward with a limited missile defense capability, without putting at risk our relations with Russia. Many claimed that deployment of U.S. national missile defense systems would precipitate a new arms race. That speculation has proven to be without basis or merit. Last week, several Members met with our Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, Gen. Joe Ralston, who spoke positively about the new ties between NATO and Russia. Greater security for our Nation fosters greater security and stability for our allies and emerging partners. This Bill accommodates the priorities presented by the President and the Secretary of Defense to the Congress. The Bill lives within the fiscal limits set by our Committee in the absence of a budget resolution. The Bill addresses the key priorities raised in the Senate's consideration of the Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2003. I urge all Members to work with the Chairman today to accomplish the expeditious consideration and passage of this Bill. Consistent with the allocation adopted by the Appropriations Committee, by unanimous vote, I will oppose any amendment that would increase the spending level in this Bill. We have been working with Members since the Bill was filed to address additional concerns, and will proceed to a number of cleared amendments shortly. I will close by expressing by appreciation to the Chairman for his partnership, colleagiltiy and courtesy at every state in the preparation of this Bill. I support the Bill with reservation or qualification, and urge all my Colleagues to join advancing this Bill to Conference today.

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