John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Governmental Affairs' Subcommittee on Financial Management, the Budget, and International Security be authorized to meet on Tuesday, November 16, 2004, at 10:30 a.m., for a hearing entitled, ``Oversight Hearing on Insurance Brokerage Practices, Including Potential Conflicts of Interest and the Adequacy of the Current Regulatory Framework.''

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I was very pleased with the total cooperation on both sides of the aisle. We passed yesterday the annual authorization act in honor, by the way, of Ronald Reagan. We named it in his honor. However, it was a stack about three times the size of this when it reached the Senate. I saw my distinguished colleague from Louisiana, who, incidentally, served on the Armed Services Committee with great distinction. She does have a keen knowledge of the needs of the military people. I respect that greatly. In that bill we have made some progress this year on a very delicate package of benefit increases for the Guard and Reserve and made inroads to the TRICARE situation and made an impression on that in this bill. It is a balance we constantly have to watch between the active service--that individual, he or she, 365 days a year on call, their families likewise--and then the contribution of the Guard and Reserve, which has absolutely been extraordinary, as the distinguished colleague from Louisiana points out. I can speak from some personal experience. Never before has the United States relied so heavily on the Guard and Reserve since, the Senator pointed out, World War II. I see my distinguished colleague here from Alaska. He had a very heroic career in World War II, and I had a far less distinguished career. I was 17. We did what we had to do. I saw it swelled to 16 million men and women in the Armed Forces. The chart also showed how we are down to a level of 1941. The reason for that is the spectrum of threats against this country--the standing armies and navies of other nations don't anywhere near approach what we have, and the weapons are so different. One ship today can do the work of four ships we had during World War II. So there is a reason for that leveling off. The point I wish to make in conclusion is every time a pay in benefit is brought up for any one of the Active or the Reserve, it goes through enormous formulations in the Department of Defense by people who spend their total careers trying to maintain a fair and equitable balance between the Guard and Reserve and to meet their needs and to have that standing Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force that is required for 365 days of the year, and then proudly to have the Guard and Reserve, which can respond in time of need. So with all due respect to my colleague from Louisiana, I would hope this type of legislation again would be analyzed in the normal course of the authorization and appropriations bills. I say to the Senator, you were so active as a member of our committee. That way, we can have access to that tremendous infrastructure within the Department of Defense and elsewhere that has the knowledge as to how best to structure the benefit package for the Active as well as the Reserve Forces.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I submit a report of the committee of conference on the bill (H.R. 4200) and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, on behalf of the distinguished ranking member, Mr. Levin, and myself, I now ask unanimous consent that the conference report be adopted and the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, all with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, this conference report represents the hard work of many, many individuals. I first thank my distinguished ranking member, Mr. Levin of Michigan, together with our subcommittee chairmen and all members of the committee. This was truly a bipartisan effort from start to finish. We achieved an extraordinary piece of legislation. I am proud to say, at the request of the chairman, myself, the bill is named the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005. We do that in honor of our late President's extraordinary contributions to the men and women of the Armed Forces in his capacity as President and in his role as Commander in Chief at that time. This conference report provides $420.6 billion for defense, an increase of $19.3 billion above the amount authorized by Congress last year. The report also authorizes an additional $25 billion for war- related costs in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am proud to bring the conference report for the Ronald W. Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 before the Senate for final passage. I thank my ranking member and partner for these 26 years, the senior Senator from Michigan, Carl Levin, for his consistently constructive help and leadership in bringing this important legislation to the floor. I would also like to thank our subcommittee chairman and ranking members, and all committee members for their hard work on this conference report. I am pleased that this legislation report has the unanimous support of the members of the committee. I also want to thank Chairman Duncan Hunter and Congressman Skelton for their leadership and teamwork in producing this conference agreement. No committee succeeds without a dedicated, professional staff, and I believe our committee has one of the finest on Capitol Hill. I particularly want to recognize the efforts of the Committee Staff Director, Judy Ansley and the Democratic Staff Director, Rick DeBobes in bringing this process to a successful conclusion. They have led a great staff, all of whom deserve great credit and recognition. This dedicated professional staff worked very long hours and helped the members reach the agreements that are contained in the conference report before us. I ask that the names of all members of the committee staff be printed in the record following my remarks.

Mr. WARNER. The Senator from Arizona is correct. Section 133 specifically revokes the authority previously granted under Section 8159 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2002, to the Air Force to lease aircraft for use as tankers. The conferees expressed their intent very strongly on this issue in eliminating all references to leasing aircraft throughout Section 135.

Mr. WARNER. Section 133 bars the Air Force from executing a contract for the multiyear purchase of aircraft specified under Section 8159, that is, general purpose Boeing 767 aircraft that would be modified as an aerial refueling aircraft. Section 8159 would have precluded full and open competition.

Mr. WARNER. The Senator from Arizona is correct. I thank him for that clarification.

Mr. WARNER. Yes, we have. The Congressional Budget Office would score this provision as a traditional procurement program which would expressly require the Air Force to pay for each tanker in the year it is purchased.

Mr. WARNER. I thank the Senator from Arizona for his steadfast leadership and vigilance on this critical issue. There could be no doubt as to the gentleman's sincerity in always protecting the interests of taxpayers and the warfighter. Mr. Kennedy. Mr. President, it is reprehensible that the GOP House leadership demanded the removal of the hate crimes provision from the Defense Authorization Act. The provision had solid support in both the Senate and the House. Under the leadership of Senator Warner and Senator Gordon Smith, the Senate approved it as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill in July by the nearly 2-to-1 bipartisan majority of 65 to 33. Eighteen Republicans joined all the Democrats in approving this measure. Last week, by a vote of 213 to 186, the House instructed its conferees to support this provision in the conference report on the bill. The hate crimes provision is an essential response to a serious problem which continues to plague the nation. Since the September 11 attacks, we've had a shameful increase in the number of hate crimes committed in our country against Arabs and Muslims--murders, beatings, arson, attacks on mosques, shootings, and other assaults. In 2001, anti-Muslim incidents were the second highest-reported hate crimes based on religion--second only to anti-Jewish hate crimes. Nevertheless, under current law, the Justice Department has to fight these vicious crimes with one hand tied behind its back. Outdated pre- 9/11 restrictions limit Federal jurisdiction in hate crimes based on religion. Hate crimes based on sexual orientation are not even covered by the law. How can House Republican leaders say they're fighting a war on terrorism, when they're not prepared to fight it here at home? Clearly, President Bush is worried about his right-wing base in the coming election, and the implication is obvious that the White House sent word to its Republican allies in the House--block the hate crimes provision, even if blocking it denies the clear will of the majority. The carefully selected White House candidate for the Senate in Florida used the hate crimes issue to smear his opponent in the Republican primary in August. Former Congressman Bill McCollum, a respected law-and-order Republican, was smeared as ``anti-family'' and ``the new darling of the homosexual extremists'' and lost the primary-- because he supported the hate crimes legislation. There is nothing ``anti-family'' or divisive about the hate crimes bill. It protects all victims of hate-motivated violence: citizens of all races, all religions, all sexual orientations. No one is left out. Sadly, the despicable smear against Congressman McCollum in Florida is only one example of the vicious campaign tactics used by Republicans this year. In West Virginia and Arkansas, the Republican National Committee has sent out flyers suggesting that ``liberals'' want to ban the Bible. My colleague Senator Robert Byrd aptly described it as a ``desperation tactic'' and ``an insult to the intelligence of voters'' in his State. In Oklahoma, the National Republican Senate Campaign is running a race-baiting advertisement on television attacking Democratic Senate candidate Brad Carson's record on immigration by showing images of Hispanic farm workers and African Americans receiving welfare dollars. We've seen such campaign appeals to racism and bigotry before in this country. Most of us hoped we would never see them again. When President Bush condones outrageous tactics like these, how can he claim with a straight face that he's lived up to his campaign promise to be a uniter, not a divider? The administration is wrong to have ordered its allies in the House to block our bipartisan hate crimes provision. However, this is not the end of our battle. We will be back again and again, and we will continue to bring this legislation up every opportunity we can until it is signed into law. It's heartening to know that we may soon have a President who will sign it--a President who is honestly committed to uniting, not dividing, the country.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I join in that. Senator Harkin was actually a Naval aviator. We have discussed that distinguished part of his career many times. I thank the distinguished senior Senator from Nevada. He very quietly works on issues. I can remember a year ago we stood in this well when we weren't able to achieve that goal, the distinguished Senator from Nevada himself--I think Senator McCain was very active and Senator Levin. We said: All right. This year we can't get it, but next year we will. Through the Senator's absolute resolute determination that was accomplished. He did it for a category of veterans who are well deserved of this recognition by the Congress and the American people for their services. I thank the Senator.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I believe this has been cleared on both sides. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 514, which is at the desk.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the concurrent resolution be printed in the Record.

Mr. WARNER. I thank the distinguished Presiding Officer. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I see my colleague from Michigan.

Mr. WARNER. May I make a suggestion to the distinguished leader? Quietly, in the rooms off the Chamber, I think a resolution of this matter is about to be achieved. So, therefore, the purpose of my amendment would be to frame for colleagues the issue as I see it, which I think can be explained very simply and calmly. Then perhaps a few comments, and this amendment, I understand, will be laid aside, and we can proceed to the Chambliss amendment.

Mr. WARNER. No objection.

Mr. WARNER. I was here early this morning with Senator Bayh, so that is the purpose of my presence, solely for that amendment.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, for the Committee on Armed Services I report favorably the following nomination list which was printed in the Record on the date indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that this nomination lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I am joined by my colleague, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee, the Senator from Michigan. This is an amendment which we have jointly worked out together. Amendment No. 3875, As Modified

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, from a parliamentary standpoint, I now send a modification to amendment No. 3875 to the desk.

Mr. WARNER. I thank the Presiding Officer. I shall be very brief on this matter. The distinguished manager and comanager have worked with my staff and Senator Levin and myself, and we have come to an agreement on this issue. Again, it is an amendment by myself, Mr. Levin, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Allard, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Cornyn, and Mr. Chambliss. I start by referring to the 9/11 report. This is a very important report which has been a roadmap for so many of the provisions and it is a roadmap I have used for this provision. I read from page 412: The Defense Department's military intelligence programs-- the joint military intelligence program (JMIP) and the tactical intelligence and related activities programs (TIARA)--would remain part of that department's responsibility. That is the purpose of this amendment. It is to clarify. I think it was the intent of the managers all along. They made statements comparable to what is in the 9/11 report from which I just quoted and, therefore, this amendment would leave in place those programs being performed by what we call the combat agencies, largely under a contractual relationship, and they would remain in place, but with the understanding that upon completion of a review, to be conducted by the national intelligence director and the Secretary of Defense, if they reach, as is specified under the bill, a joint opinion as to the desirability to move them into the national intelligence program, in all likelihood that can be achieved. I thank the managers. I yield the floor to my distinguished colleague from Michigan. I thank my distinguished colleague, Senator Levin, for his work on this very important amendment, an aspect of which is tailored to meet a concern that the Senator from Michigan has. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague and ranking member. Given that the two of us are about to start a hearing in 10 minutes, I guess it is best we go to the adoption of the amendment, but I yield for any comments the distinguished chairman may like to make.

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