J. Thurmond

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I rise today to oppose the amendments offered by Senator Wellstone and any other amendment which lowers defense spending below the level set in the budget agreement. We have a budget agreement with the administration that we should not disregard-- an agreement that was widely supported by this body and the administration--and frankly, Mr. President, this agreement itself may not provide enough funding for defense. Mr. President, our military forces are beginning to show the stress of constrained budget and too many deployments. Funding for modernization and quality of life initiatives is continually diverted to fund current operations with promises to fix the modernization problem in the future. This is no longer acceptable. It should not be acceptable to any of the Members of this body. The Department of Defense is continuing their downsizing. This year's defense budget request represents lowest percent of our GDP in the last 57 years. Force levels have shrunk from 2.1 million service members at the end of the cold war to 1.4 million today. Annual spending in the Department of Defense has decreased in the last 10 years from $375 to $250 billion in inflation adjusted dollars. Even at the level of funding proposed in the budget agreement, the Quadrennial Defense Review is recommending force structure reductions up to 130,000 military personnel as well as reductions in key modernization programs. Mr. President, I believe that a mismatch is developing between strategy and actual force capability. GAO and CBO have both given estimates to the underfunding of the modernization accounts. The budget agreement does not fully fund defense. It does represent what funds are available. Funding defense at the levels proposed by these amendments will have serious impacts on the readiness and quality of life of our service personnel. Command Sergeants Major Alley, U.S. Forces Command, has summed it pretty well when he stated. Our soldiers do not ask for much. What they do ask for is stability in deployments, adequate housing, quality-of-life programs, and adequate compensation. Mr. President, if this body allows these amendments or other amendments to lower defense spending below what was agreed to--I repeat, was agreed to--in the budget agreement, we will be responsible for the impacts on the readiness of our forces, we will increase the tempo of our operating forces, and we will not be able to provide the quality of life programs, our service members deserve. I suggest the absence of a quorum and I ask unanimous consent that the time be equally divided between both sides.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, we have agreed to accept it.

Mr. THURMOND. I yield such time as I may require.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I want to commend Senator Santorum, the able chairman of the subcommittee that handled this matter, for all the good work he did on that subcommittee. I also wish to commend the able Senator from Virginia for his explanatory remarks on this subject. I think this matter is so clear that no other conclusion could be reached than the position taken by the able chairman of the subcommittee, Senator Santorum, and the able Senator from Virginia, and others who have taken that position. Mr. President, I yield the floor. Mrs. BOXER addressed the Chair.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I move to table the Boxer amendment. Unanimous-Consent Agreement

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. THURMOND. I move to reconsider the vote.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I move to table the Boxer amendment, and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may require. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the amendment offered by my good friends, Senator Boxer and Senator Grassley. Mr. President, I acknowledge that some executive salaries are exorbitant, but section 804 of our defense bill is a sound middle ground on the very controversial issue of payment of executive compensation under cost-type contracts with Federal agencies, including the Department of Defense. The section in our bill recognizes that the industries supplying goods and services to the Federal Government do not do so in isolation from the rest of the economy. They must compete with similar companies in the private sector for the limited pool of the most qualified technical and management people. Salaries for such people are not determined by a Government agency; they are set in the marketplace. Section 804 would provide a framework for ensuring that we can bring the best private sector talent to bear to support our national defense. At the same time, section 804 would not permit the Federal Government to reimburse exorbitant salaries or other forms of compensation. The maximum allowable limit for executive compensation covered under this provision would not exceed $340,000, according to the Defense Contract Audit Agency, based on surveys conducted in 1995. In fact, the administration opposes section 804 because it provides too great a limitation on compensation, in their view. The administration wants to pay more, but we limit this to $340,000 in our defense bill. Mr. President, section 804 is a sound means to settle executive compensation issues once and for all. It protects the interests of the taxpayer, both in the limits it places on reimbursement under cost-type contracts and by recognizing the relationship between compensation practices in the industries supporting defense and those in the commercial sector. I urge the rejection of Boxer-Grassley amendment. We feel that our defense provision here covers it adequately and is in the best interest of the Government.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I move to table the amendment of the Senator from Minnesota.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there now be 1 hour for debate on the Wellstone amendment No. 668 equally divided in the usual form, and following that debate time, the amendment be laid aside and the Senate resume consideration of the Gramm amendment No. 794, with 30 minutes for debate equally divided in the usual form. I further ask unanimous consent that following that debate, the amendment be temporarily set aside and Senator Boxer then be recognized to offer an amendment regarding executive compensation, with a time limitation of 1 hour and 20 minutes equally divided in the usual form. I further ask unanimous consent that following that debate, Senator Bingaman be recognized to offer an amendment regarding space-based laser. I further ask unanimous consent that there be 2 minutes equally divided in the usual form prior to each vote ordered in the stacked sequence and that at 6 p.m. today, the Senate proceed to vote on, or in relation to, the Wellstone amendment No. 668, to be followed by a vote on, or in relation to, the Gramm amendment No. 794, to be followed by a vote on, or in relation to, the Levin amendment No. 778, as amended, if amended, to be followed by a vote on, or in relation to, the Boxer amendment regarding compensation. Finally, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that no second-degree amendments be in order to any of the above-mentioned amendments.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, the amendment offered by my friend, Senator Levin, would devastate the function of the Federal Prison Industries, Inc., known as FPI. FPI is the Bureau of Prisons' most important inmate program. It keeps inmates productively occupied and reduces inmate idleness and the violence and disruptive behavior associated with it. Thus it is essential to the security of Federal correctional institutions, the communities in which they are located, and the safety of Federal correctional staff and inmates. FPI has no other outlet for its products than Federal agencies. The constraints within which FPI operates, cause it to be less efficient than it private sector counterparts. Private sector companies strive to obtain the most modern, efficient equipment to minimize the labor component of their manufacturing costs. FPI, on the other hand must keep its manufacturing process as labor intensive as possible in order to employ the maximum number of inmates. Since FPI operates its factories in secure correctional environments, it faces additional constraints that limit its efficiency. For example, every tool must be checked out at the beginning of the day, checked in before lunch, checked out again in the afternoon, and checked in at the end of the day. The costs associated with civilian supervision and numerous measures necessary to maintain the security of the prison add substantially to the cost of production. It should be noted that the average Federal inmate has an eighth grade education, is 37 years old, is serving a 10-year sentence for a drug-related offense, and has never held a steady job. According to a recent study by an independent firm, the overall productivity rate of an inmate with a background like this is approximately one-fourth that of a civilian worker. FPI must have some method of offsetting these inefficiencies if it is expected to acquire a reasonable share of Government contracts and remain self-sufficient. The offsetting advantage that Congress has provided is the mandatory sourcing requirements in section 4124 of title 18, United States Code. This section requires that Federal agencies purchase products made by FPI as long as those products meet customer needs for quality, price, and timeliness of delivery. If the product is not currently manufactured by FPI, or if the FPI is not competitive in quality, price or timeliness, Federal Prison Industries will grant a waiver to allow the Federal agency to purchase the product from private sector suppliers. The Federal Prison Industries preference in title 18 is essential if this program is to prevent inmate idleness on a large scale. Increasing Inmate idleness will risk unrest affecting the safety of prison security personnel and the surrounding communities. I urge my colleagues to reject the Levin amendment. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. I move to lay it on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to hold an executive business meeting during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 10, 1997, at 9:30 a.m., in room 226 of the Senate Dirksen Office Building.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Labor and Human Resources Subcommittee on Employment and Training be authorized to meet for a hearing on vocational rehabilitation during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 10, 1997, at 9:30 p.m.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Financial Services and Technology of the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 10, 1997, to conduct an oversight hearing on financial institutions and the year 2000 problem.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be granted permission to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 10, for purposes of conducting a Subcommittee on National Parks, Historic Preservation, and Recreation hearing which is scheduled to begin at 2 p.m. The purpose of this oversight hearing is to review the preliminary findings of the General Accounting Office concerning a study on the health, condition, and viability of the range and wildlife populations in Yellowstone National Park.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent on behalf of the Governmental Affairs Committee Special Investigation to meet on Thursday, July 10, at 10 a.m., for a hearing on campaign financing issues.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 10, 1997, at 2 p.m., in room 562 of the Dirksen Senate Building to conduct an oversight hearing on the administration's proposal to restructure Indian gaming fee assessments.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be granted permission to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 10, for purposes of conducting a joint oversight hearing with the House Committee on Resources which is scheduled to begin at 9:30 a.m. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony on the final draft of the Tongass Land Management Plan as the first step in the congressional review process provided by the 1996 amendments to the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Labor and Human Resources Subcommittee on Public Health and Safety be authorized to meet for a hearing on occupational safety and health administration during the session of the Senate on Thursday, July 10, 1997, at 2 p.m.

Mr. THURMOND

Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I thank the able Senator from Kansas. The name of the courthouse for Bob Dole is purely a Kansas matter, but I just want to say that no finer person in the United States deserves a courthouse or any other building named for him than Bob Dole. He is a great American. He has rendered this country great service. He was an outstanding leader here in the Senate for many years. We are all proud of him and we will be delighted to have a courthouse named for him.