John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to vitiate the action on the Ensign second-degree amendment No. 3467 and withdraw it. That is a technical requirement.

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

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

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senate now turns to the second-degree amendment and an up-or-down vote. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. WARNER. The distinguished Senator from Utah will address the Senate. We are ready to go to votes.

Mr. WARNER. I thank my colleague. We have served together these 26 years now in this body.

Mr. WARNER. OK. Thank you.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we want to accommodate the Senator. Whatever happened, happened. We are glad to, in an equitable way, offer him this time. I will try to take the floor in the area of 9:40, if that is convenient.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I agree with the Senator from Hawaii that improving the membrane technology for fuel cells was the program for which the Committee recommended an addition to the Defense authorization this year.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I would be happy to discuss this issue with the Senator from Hawaii.

Mr. WARNER. Yes, I am. I certainly understand the Senator's concerns, and I can tell him that I am hopeful that as we move forward and reconcile this very important bill with that of the House in conference, we will take a very careful look at these measures and work out acceptable language that will not burden the DOD or hamper the President in his role as administrator of the federal bureaucracy in these critical times.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I certainly agree with my friend from Wyoming that we should continue to evaluate the way the federal government operates. Competitive sourcing is an important tool available to the government to ensure that high quality governmental services are acquired at the lowest cost to the taxpayer. I believe the Senator wanted to share some of his concerns with an amendment offered by the Senator from Massachusetts and the Senator from Georgia.

Mr. WARNER. I believe we looked to remedy this with the FAIR Act in 1998. Am I not correct in stating that this law basically says that federal agencies should inventory government services that are commercial in nature, and then review whether these activities should continue to be performed in the public sector?

Mr. WARNER. I thank the Senator from Georgia for his leadership on this issue, and I look forward to working with him on this important issue.

Mr. WARNER. The Senator from Georgia is quite correct in his observation and assessment and our committee has urged the Department to move forward with its economic analysis of engine alternatives for this critical fleet of aircraft. The Senator from Georgia should be proud of the 116th wing of the Georgia Air National Guard, as the work that this integrated wing performs on a daily basis is responsible for saving many soldiers' lives. As he stated, the E-8C JointSTARS fleet provides critical airborne battle management command and control.

Mr. WARNER. Yes. That would clearly be one factor among several that should be considered, consistent with the goal of providing the same type and quality of American radio and television news, information, and entertainment that would be available to military personnel and their families if they were in the continental United States. Other factors should also be considered in achieving the AFRTS goals of fairness and balance in presenting all sides of important public questions, and the amendment was intended to underscore the importance of those goals.

Mr. WARNER. Absolutely. The amendment cites word for word relevant portions of the current Department of Defense Directive concerning AFRTS, including a statement of the mission to be accomplished and the key principles that should be followed in order to provide a free flow of political programming from U.S. commercial and public networks. The amendment specifically states that the mission statement is appropriate. Recognizing that there are several hundred satellite stations or ``outlets'' around the globe at which programming decisions are made on a daily basis, the amendment goes on to recommend that the Secretary of Defense ensure that these important principles, which can be summarized as fairness and balance in presenting shows on various topics, including political commentary, are being accomplished.

Mr. WARNER. Thank you for offering me the opportunity to clarify this point. In my view, the intent of this amendment was not to call into question the performance of the AFRTS. Indeed, as my staff and I examined the proposed amendment originally submitted by Senator Harkin, we saw that it called for the establishment of a Presidential Advisory Board to examine the manner in which AFRTS carries out its mission and to submit recommendations on how the AFRTS should carry out programming. As we looked at the manner in which the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs and AFRTS perform its mission, however, it became clear that the case had not been made that changes were necessary or that such an Advisory Board was needed.

Mr. WARNER. In discussions with my good friend and colleague, Senator Inhofe, I have been made aware of the fact that questions have arisen about the intent of amendment 3316 regarding the American Forces Radio and Television Service, or AFRTS, submitted by Senator Harkin. That amendment to the pending legislation was accepted on June 14, 2004.

Mr. WARNER. Yes, I think that if there were funding for such a development project it offers the prospect of significant security benefits.

Mr. WARNER. I understand that accuracy has been a problem with some systems developed to date so new approaches would be welcomed.

Mr. WARNER. Yes, that is certainly my understanding.

Mr. WARNER. I commend the distinguished Senator from North Carolina for her steadfast advocacy for our men and women in uniform, and their families, and I would be pleased to work with her on this important issue.

Mr. WARNER. I would agree wholeheartedly with the Senator from North Carolina's statement. At at time when we are relying more and more on our National Guard and Reserve forces to defend our national security, we must continue to provide direct and substantive support to these personnel and their families.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senator from North Carolina is correct. At the time that the Armed Services Committee was preparing its mark, there was not sufficient data available concerning the specific elements of the proposed program, and its interrelationship with other existing and emerging programs within the Department, to fully assess the merits of the National Demonstration Program for Citizen-Soldier Support. The absence of this proposed program in the bill should not be interpreted as a negative assessment.