Ted Stevens

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. We come back, then, to the pending amendment. As I understand, it is the regular order. And that is the amendment that was not tabled.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I am informed there is reluctance to accept that amendment until the Bosnia amendment is considered. I ask unanimous consent to set it aside temporarily, also, until that is resolved.

Mr. STEVENS. There is one amendment on which the debate has been finished. May I inquire of the Senator from Texas, is debate finished on the one amendment?

Mr. STEVENS. For the information of the Senate, Senator Kyl asked that his amendment be set aside temporarily because the Armed Services Committee is meeting to consider a similar amendment. We would like to have that set aside until Senator Kyl asks that it be brought up. I ask unanimous consent that Senator Kyl's amendment be set aside.

Mr. STEVENS. Was there one more amendment we had to dispose of before we come back to the regular order?

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

Mr. STEVENS. I ask for the adoption of Senator Abraham's amendment.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the next amendment would be amendment No. 2964, offered by Senator Abraham. There was no request for time that I know of for this. We are prepared to and do ask that--are the yeas and nays ordered on that amendment? I do not think they have been ordered. Have they?

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Communications of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet on Thursday, July 30, 1998, at 9:30 a.m. on international satellite reform.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Clean Air, Wetlands, Private Property, and Nuclear Safety be granted permission to conduct an oversight hearing on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Thursday, July 30, 1998, at 9:00 a.m., Hearing Room (SD-406).

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Labor and Human Resources be authorized to meet in executive session during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 30, 1998 at 2:15 p.m.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 30, 1998 at 1:00 p.m. in room 226 of the Senate Dirksen Office Building to hold a hearing on: ``Judicial Nominations.''

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Although I made a motion to table, I think it is in order until 2 o'clock that they may be able to speak. Amendment No. 3409

Mr. STEVENS. The Hutchinson amendment that I made a motion to table, the one pertaining to China.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I send to the desk a technical correction to amendment No. 3391 previously adopted. I ask unanimous consent that the amendment be modified. It is strictly a technical error in the amendment that was previously adopted.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. I ask we proceed with the unanimous consent agreement.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask this amendment be set aside for later consideration so we may have consultation with other committees and Members involved in this subject. We did not have this on our list and have not distributed it until just now. I ask unanimous consent it be put aside until other Members have a chance to review it.

Mr. STEVENS. Fine. Privilege of the Floor

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I just delivered a copy of the Senator's amendment to the minority and other committees affected. He is at liberty to make such comments he wishes to make, but we will not be able to have final consideration of the matter until we have heard back from Senator Inouye and his people on his side of the aisle. The Governmental Affairs Committee is also considering this issue.

Mr. STEVENS

Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that the Senator have 10 minutes for a statement as in morning business.

Mr. STEVENS. It is my understanding that the Senator from Washington wishes to speak on a subject that is not related to the bill. I am pleased to afford my good southern friend that opportunity. I ask him, how much time does he wish?

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, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the Senate begins consideration today of the 1999 Defense appropriations bill, to fund the military activities of the Department of Defense for the upcoming fiscal year. This bill provides $250.5 billion in new budget authority for 1999, an increase of $2.8 billion over the amount appropriated in 1998. The committee reported this bill on June 4th. Unforeseen circumstances delayed the consideration of the bill, but I believe it is vital that we pass the Defense funding bill prior to the recess. The military must know how much money it will have to meet critical operational and modernization requirements at the beginning of the fiscal year, October 1. Fiscal year 1999 represents the first budget cycle under the 5 year bipartisan budget agreement--the amount requested by the President corresponds to the cap agreed to for Defense. That results in a fundamentally different dynamic for balancing this bill compared to fiscal years 1996, 1997 and 1998. For the previous three fiscal years, Congress and the White House were at odds over the total level of funding for Defense. The budget submitted by the Pentagon failed to fully accommodate the readiness and modernization priorities of the Joint Chiefs. For 1999, the committee received a budget proposal consistent with the bi-partisan budget agreement--not enough for Defense, but at the level agreed to last summer at the summit. The content of that budget reflected the priorities and strategy of the Quadrennial Defense Review, submitted by Secretary Cohen and Gen. Joe Ralston last spring. The FY 1999 budget kept faith with the concepts and priorities advocated in the QDR. I want to begin by commending Secretary Cohen and Deputy Secretary John Hamre for their efforts to present a budget that did not require a major overhaul by Congress. We do not agree on every item, and fact of life events resulted in adjustments on many programs, but essentially, this budget request meets the minimum needs of the Armed Forces. The recommendations from the committee focus on three goals: ensure an adequate quality of life for the men and women of the Armed Forces; sustain readiness; and modernize to assure future battlefield dominance by our Armed Forces, if needed. To achieve needed quality of life for our troops, and their families, this bill fully funds the 3.1 percent authorized military pay raise. During consideration of the DOD authorization bill in June, I joined the managers of that bill in co-sponsoring an amendment to increase the pay raise to 3.6 percent for 1999. The first amendment that Senator Inouye and I will jointly offer to this bill will provide the additional appropriation for the 3.6 percent raise. Additionally, the Treasury-General Government bill that we will pass later today provides a comparable pay raise for civilian Pentagon workers. Those amounts are funded from within the general operation and maintenance appropriations. The pay raise solves only a part of the compensation crisis facing the Department of Defense. My discussions with the service chiefs, the service secretaries, field commanders and the men and women of the Armed Forces, serving in my State of Alaska and around the world, lead me to conclude that an equally pressing challenge is retirement pay. The changes adopted by Congress in 1986 reflected the cold war priority of attracting men and women to serve a full 30 year career in the Armed Forces. Our victory in the cold war led to a wrenching realignment of the force, and radical new personnel priorities. There is great pressure today for individuals to spend only 20 years in active service. The revised retirement plan puts them at an unfair, and unacceptable disadvantage, as compared to serving a full 30 years. It is my intention to work with the leaders here in Congress, and with the Secretary of Defense, to put us on a track to fix the retirement system--in my mind, there is no higher defense funding priority, for it has led to a series of decisions by men and women in the services, not to continue because of their feeling about the unfairness of the retirement policies. The considerable operational demands on our Armed Forces dictate that we also ensure the welfare and quality of life for those on active duty now. Based on the committee's recent trip to Bosnia and Southwest Asia, a new $50 million MWR and retention initiative is included in this bill. These funds will provide added resources and flexibility to address the though living conditions and family separation challenges of deployments to Bosnia and Southwest Asia. More than $100 million is added for quality of life enhancements in the service O&M accounts, to upgrade barracks, dormitories, and other personnel support facilities. Our second focus, maintaining readiness, has been stressed by overseas deployments during the past three years. For 1998, this committee succeeded in providing needed contingency funds as an emergency, without disrupting other Defense programs. For 1999, the recommendation adds funds for flying hours, depot maintenance, training, and base operations. We recommend savings resulting from changed economic factors, such as fuel costs, foreign currency, and inflation--but restore all those amounts to the O&M appropriations. There is no option to trade near term readiness for future modernization. As long as our Armed Forces face the range of missions overseas underway today, we must sustain the O&M accounts at least at the levels provided in this bill, and the House bill. No sector of Defense has suffered more the past few years than acquisition. We must invest more to protect the technological superiority that our smaller military force counts on. These recommendations fully fund the combat priorities advocated by the Joint Chiefs: F-22, the Crusader, F-18, new attack submarine, the JASSM missile, V-22, and national missile defense. In many instances, the recommendations add funds for technology development programs, to look even further down the road, past the systems we will deploy over the next ten years--out for the next thirty years. Achieving these three priorities was especially challenging given our fixed budget caps. Every dollar shifted among programs came from a reduction to an item in the budget request--there were no additional dollars to spend this year for Defense. Senator Inouye and I sought to allocate the resources available to the subcommittee as equitably as possible, and consistent with the military needs identified by the Chiefs. In most cases, we could not provide large increases in existing procurement programs, or to restore programs already terminated. No member of this committee, or the Senate, secured every priority which he or she advocated to the committee. On the other hand, we reviewed all of them, and have done our best. I believe the recommendations are fair and achieve a balance between the budget and the priorities of Congress. It is my intention to do everything we can to work with all of our colleagues to meet the needs they have brought to the Committee. Finally, there is one notable change from the bill reported last year by this Committee--in the area of medical research. In the bill we reported last year, we provided $176 million for medical research. Coming out of conference, that total grew to $344 million, almost twice the level of the Senate. In the context of adding $6 billion to the budget, that total was manageable. Let me explain that again. Last year, we had an additional $6 billion by the time we came out of the conference, and it was possible to increase that amount. This year, we have no top line margin to allocate. Whatever is added to this bill will come out of either readiness, or future acquisition, or the quality of life concepts that I have discussed. For 1999, Senator Inouye and I recommended a new appropriations of $250 million in the defense health program for medical research grants. This increase over last year's appropriation provides adequate resources to sustain growth in the breast cancer and prostate cancer programs, while enabling the Department of review other research programs and opportunities. The report lists all the programs seeking funding this year. The bill establishes a floor for breast cancer and prostate cancer research at the minimum; at least they must be provided at the level that we finally agreed to in conference in 1998. The bill also seeks to address the funding priorities of the National Guard. In testimony before the subcommittee, the Army Guard identified as shortfall for 1999 $634 million for their operational requirements-- not for future involvement for just their operational requirements. The bill reported by the committee provides an additional $20 million for the Guard counterdrug operation, $225 million for the Army Guard O&M account, and $95 million for Army Guard personnel account. A total of $475 million will be added to the National Guard and Reserve equipment. That is a cut, however, of 25 percent from the level appropriated in 1998. Finally, the bill reported by the committee did not include the $1.9 billion requested by the President as emergency spending for Bosnia. The Senate considered several amendments during debate on the defense authorization bill concerning our future force levels and operations in Bosnia. Later this morning, I know Senator Hutchison, Senator Byrd, and others will raise at least one amendment related to our presence in Bosnia. At the time we considered this bill in the Appropriations Committee, it was premature for this committee to consider funding for that mission for 1999. Based on our visit to Bosnia in May, and to NATO headquarters after that, it is clear that a long-term presence in Bosnia is envisioned by NATO and the administration. That long-term role cannot in the future be funded on an annual emergency basis. The Congress must be part of the decision on the size of the force, the duration of the mission, and the cost of the operations. Mr. President, we bring this bill to the Senate with the hope of commencing the August recess tomorrow. Securing passage of this bill at a reasonable hour will require the cooperation, consideration, and assistance of every Senator. It is my hope that we will obtain early today an agreement to have all amendments filed at the desk so we can most efficiently dispose of those amendments--accepting some, debating some, and encouraging Members not to raise others. This bill has been available to all Members since June 5. The bill closely approximates the level authorized in the defense bill we passed last June. That authorization bill is in conference with the House, and we have continued to work closely with Senator Thurmond, Senator Levin, and others on that committee to support the priorities passed by the Senate in that bill. Mr. President, the presentation of this bill to the Senate would not be possible without the leadership and partnership that I have enjoyed with my friend from Hawaii, Senator Inouye. This is the tenth year that the two of us have come to the Senate jointly to present and recommend the defense appropriations bills. Six of those years Senator Inouye served as chairman, and I have enjoyed that privilege for the past four. It is a pleasure and a privilege to work with the Senator from Hawaii on defense matters and other matters. I enjoy our personal friendship. And the opportunity to bring this bill to the Senate on a full bipartisan basis is one that I think comes from the tie between us that we enjoy. Mr. President, I yield to Senator Inouye for his statement. Mr. INOUYE addressed the Chair.

Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I have given the clerk a list of staff members. I ask unanimous consent that these staff members associated with our presentation of the bill be allowed the privilege of the floor during consideration of the defense bill.