John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. I enjoyed that story. I have a great and abiding love for my eldest daughter. I think at that point, I depart from the background of Aaron Burr and his other features, but I would not suggest in any way that you were drawing an analogy. I found the story fascinating.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to reject the pending Lieberman amendment to the homeland security bill. This amendment will prevent the President from gaining the authorities he needs to effectively deal with the very real and growing threat to our homeland. We should act, and act quickly. to give the President this authority. The current amendment would keep the President from addressing a key issue in providing protection to our homeland, that is, the issue of liability risk which must be resolved if the private sector is to actively provide innovative homeland defense technologies and solutions. Some form of indemnification or limitation of lability has been a part of U.S., war efforts since World War II, as evidence by congressional passage of the War Power Act of 1941 2 weeks after Pearl Harbor, and, since 1958, the use of the National Defense Contracts Act, or Public Law 85-804, to indemnify contracts issued by the Department of Defense and other national security agencies. To address the current terrorist threat, I have worked on the liability issue with the High Technology Task Force under the leadership of Senators Allen and Bennett to fashion various solutions to enable America to access the best private sector products and technologies to defend our homeland. This is particularly important to those innovative small businesses who do not have the capital to shoulder significant liability risk. The Lieberman amendment would nullify the compromise recently worked out with the House to limit this liability risk through limited tort reform. The Lieberman amendment would not provide any alternative to address the underlying problem. If this amendment passes what would be the incentives for This amendment is contractors to provide innovative solutions to our homeland security? For example, contractors will not sell chemical/biological detectors already available to DOD to other Federal agencies and State and local authorities because of the liability risk. Some of our Nation's top defense contractors will not sell these products because they are afraid to risk the future of their company on a lawsuit. There is an urgent need for authority to address this situation. While my earlier proposal on indemnification, which is another approach to addressing liability risk, is not included in the current bill, I believe that the compromise language will go a long way to addressing the problem. If it appears that additional authorities are necessary to complement the language in this bill, I pledge to work in the coming Congress to provide any necessary authority that the Present needs to ensure that innovative homeland defense technologies and solutions are available to the Federal State and local governments, as well as to the private sector. I would also like to remark on the importance of Section 882 in the homeland security legislation to create an Office for National Capital Region Coordination within the new Department. This office will enable the Washington metropolitan region to prevent and respond to future terrorist attacks by coordinating the efforts of the Federal Government with state, local and regional authorities. The September 11 attacks underscored the unique challenges the National Capital Region faces. As the seat of our Nation's Government, the location of many symbolic structures, the venue for many public events attended by large numbers of people, a key tourism destination point and home to thousands of Federal workers and lawmakers, it has been and may continue to be a prime location for potential future terrorist attacks. The Washington metropolitan region needs a central Federal point of coordination for the many entities in the region which must deal with the Federal Government on issues of security. These authorities include the Federal Government, Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, the Military District of Washington, the judicial branch, the business community and the U.S. Congress. In no other area of the country must important decisionmaking and coordination occur between an independent city, two States, seventeen distinct local and regional authorities, including more than a dozen local police and Federal protective forces, and numerous Federal agencies. A central Federal point of contact compliments the work of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, COG, which established a comprehensive all-sector task force to improve communication and coordination when an incident of regional impact occurs. Currently, several Federal agencies have been involved in the task force, including the Office of Homeland Security, FEMA, the Office of Personnel Management, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Military District of Washington, the Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Public Health Service, and the Centers for Disease Control. Without a central Federal point of contact, it has been difficult, if not impossible, for effective coordination to occur among the region and these many entities. For example, the Continuity of Operations Plans for several federal agencies are instructing employees to use Metrorail and Metrobus service in the event of an emergency. There is not a central Federal contact, however, for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, WMATA, to work with to ensure that the Federal Government's needs are met and Federal employees are fully protected. This new office within the Department of Homeland Security will resolve this problem by providing a much needed central Federal point of coordination. It will give all entities in the region a one-stop shop for dealing with the Federal Government on security issues, including plans and preparedness activities, including COG, WMATA, the Greater Washington Board of Trade and the Potomac Electric Power Company, PEPCO, whose statements have appeared in previous versions of the Congressional Record. On behalf on the region's 5 million residents, I commend the House and Senate for recognizing the unique needs of our nation's capital in preventing and responding to terrorism by supporting creation of the Office for National Capital Region Coordination. Passage of legislation to create a new Department of Homeland Security is crucial to our Nation's ability to respond to and prevent possible future terrorist attacks.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to reject the pending Lieberman amendment to the homeland security bill. This amendment will prevent the President from gaining the authorities he needs to effectively deal with the very real and growing threat to our homeland. We should act, and act quickly. to give the President this authority. The current amendment would keep the President from addressing a key issue in providing protection to our homeland, that is, the issue of liability risk which must be resolved if the private sector is to actively provide innovative homeland defense technologies and solutions. Some form of indemnification or limitation of lability has been a part of U.S., war efforts since World War II, as evidence by congressional passage of the War Power Act of 1941 2 weeks after Pearl Harbor, and, since 1958, the use of the National Defense Contracts Act, or Public Law 85-804, to indemnify contracts issued by the Department of Defense and other national security agencies. To address the current terrorist threat, I have worked on the liability issue with the High Technology Task Force under the leadership of Senators Allen and Bennett to fashion various solutions to enable America to access the best private sector products and technologies to defend our homeland. This is particularly important to those innovative small businesses who do not have the capital to shoulder significant liability risk. The Lieberman amendment would nullify the compromise recently worked out with the House to limit this liability risk through limited tort reform. The Lieberman amendment would not provide any alternative to address the underlying problem. If this amendment passes what would be the incentives for This amendment is contractors to provide innovative solutions to our homeland security? For example, contractors will not sell chemical/biological detectors already available to DOD to other Federal agencies and State and local authorities because of the liability risk. Some of our Nation's top defense contractors will not sell these products because they are afraid to risk the future of their company on a lawsuit. There is an urgent need for authority to address this situation. While my earlier proposal on indemnification, which is another approach to addressing liability risk, is not included in the current bill, I believe that the compromise language will go a long way to addressing the problem. If it appears that additional authorities are necessary to complement the language in this bill, I pledge to work in the coming Congress to provide any necessary authority that the Present needs to ensure that innovative homeland defense technologies and solutions are available to the Federal State and local governments, as well as to the private sector. I would also like to remark on the importance of Section 882 in the homeland security legislation to create an Office for National Capital Region Coordination within the new Department. This office will enable the Washington metropolitan region to prevent and respond to future terrorist attacks by coordinating the efforts of the Federal Government with state, local and regional authorities. The September 11 attacks underscored the unique challenges the National Capital Region faces. As the seat of our Nation's Government, the location of many symbolic structures, the venue for many public events attended by large numbers of people, a key tourism destination point and home to thousands of Federal workers and lawmakers, it has been and may continue to be a prime location for potential future terrorist attacks. The Washington metropolitan region needs a central Federal point of coordination for the many entities in the region which must deal with the Federal Government on issues of security. These authorities include the Federal Government, Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority, the Military District of Washington, the judicial branch, the business community and the U.S. Congress. In no other area of the country must important decisionmaking and coordination occur between an independent city, two States, seventeen distinct local and regional authorities, including more than a dozen local police and Federal protective forces, and numerous Federal agencies. A central Federal point of contact compliments the work of the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, COG, which established a comprehensive all-sector task force to improve communication and coordination when an incident of regional impact occurs. Currently, several Federal agencies have been involved in the task force, including the Office of Homeland Security, FEMA, the Office of Personnel Management, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Military District of Washington, the Department of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Public Health Service, and the Centers for Disease Control. Without a central Federal point of contact, it has been difficult, if not impossible, for effective coordination to occur among the region and these many entities. For example, the Continuity of Operations Plans for several federal agencies are instructing employees to use Metrorail and Metrobus service in the event of an emergency. There is not a central Federal contact, however, for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, WMATA, to work with to ensure that the Federal Government's needs are met and Federal employees are fully protected. This new office within the Department of Homeland Security will resolve this problem by providing a much needed central Federal point of coordination. It will give all entities in the region a one-stop shop for dealing with the Federal Government on security issues, including plans and preparedness activities, including COG, WMATA, the Greater Washington Board of Trade and the Potomac Electric Power Company, PEPCO, whose statements have appeared in previous versions of the Congressional Record. On behalf on the region's 5 million residents, I commend the House and Senate for recognizing the unique needs of our nation's capital in preventing and responding to terrorism by supporting creation of the Office for National Capital Region Coordination. Passage of legislation to create a new Department of Homeland Security is crucial to our Nation's ability to respond to and prevent possible future terrorist attacks.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. OK. I thank the Chair.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, reserving the right to object--and I shall not--could we be more explicit as to whether or not we believe there should be a recorded vote because that is a time element. At this point, I think I would speak. We want to convenience the leadership in the expediting of the matters before the Senate. I do not know if there has been a request for a recorded vote because you are looking at 30 minutes for that probably. I just make that clarification.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. We should include Senator Max Cleland. Very definitely, he worked very hard.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, Senator Reid and I and Senator Levin in our colloquy are discussing the importance of this bill including a provision on concurrent receipts. Following the election, recognizing that I would become chairman at the appropriate point in time when the chairmanships are established formally, that I make an effort to try and reconcile the differences and get a provision in this bill because, give or take a few, I would think almost all 435 Members of the House of Representatives, in the course of their campaigns, had a colloquy with their veterans on this subject. I know from experience on the Senate side, those of us 30 plus who were up for reelection this time and others seeking election had to address this issue and respond to our veterans. Therefore, I felt it was a matter of principle for the Congress of the United States not just to rely on campaign rhetoric, but to include in this very historic bill a provision directed at compensation for those veterans we deemed formed that category deserving of added funds. I was privileged to work on drafts. I have showed them to our distinguished chairman. While he had views that were somewhat different on this issue in the course of the deliberations, without his final acknowledgment to agree with me that this was as much as we could achieve, we would not be here today. It was a joint effort, I say to the chairman, and he encouraged his colleagues to sign the conference report as I encouraged our colleagues. I went to the White House with Congressman Duncan Hunter who was standing in for Chairman Stump in the final days of the conference negotiations. We were joined by Secretary Principi and the Deputy OMB Director, Mrs. Dorn. We met with the President's chief of staff, and in due course worked out what I felt was the best compromise we could achieve. I wish to say I felt the White House was very cooperative--Mitch Daniels, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, the chief of staff, and others. Mr. Principi was exceedingly helpful. I had several days before I joined him at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial to read the names of those who bear witness to freedom and their sacrifices on that wall. It was interesting, as we were sitting there on that cold twilight afternoon, I had a little piece of paper, and we were sketching out the framework of what the two of us felt could be achieved. So I thank Mr. Principi for his efforts. Duncan Hunter was just a tremendously strong working partner throughout this entire deliberation. I thank those individuals, and certainly Mr. Card, who is the President's chief of staff, for at some point in the meeting saying: That's it, we're going to do it. It is interesting, earlier that day Mr. Principi and I had attended an early meeting at the White House with the President when he addressed a number of veterans. I remember in the front row were a number of Congressional Medal of Honor veterans. We had some veterans from the United Kingdom, and the Chief of Staff of the Army, and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and others were present. It was a very moving statement by our President acknowledging this Nation's eternal gratitude to generations of veterans who made possible our life today in these United States, our quality of life, our freedom. It seemed to be an appropriate time to bring up with the President this issue once again, and he said: We are going to take a good look at it, and that they did. So I am most grateful. Actually, it was not that day, for that day I left that meeting at the White House and went up to Maine to participate in the christening of a destroyer to honor John Chafee, a United States Senator whom the Presiding Officer and I held in the greatest esteem and affection. It was the day following the White House meeting. I refer to this as a beachhead, and I do so respectfully because throughout this deliberation, in total fairness, we are faced with an extraordinary demand on the Department of Defense now, and particularly the men and women who are currently in uniform, as well as the Guard and Reserve. We are in the course of transitioning in the roles and missions, the equipment, and the training of our military departments to meet the threat of terrorism today. Therefore, the utilization of dollars from the United States taxpayers that go to the Department of Defense has to be prioritized against that threat today. The dollars involved in this we estimate to be perhaps as much as $10 billion over 10 years. That is a considerable factor to take into consideration in the competition for these dollars. I, speaking for myself, am ever mindful of the rising public debt necessitated in large part by this war on terrorism. So in fairness to the President and his advisers who looked at this issue and have looked at it for some period of time, there are other factors that had to be considered. In the final analysis, I believe, with the help of the chairman and others, we crafted the best possible compromise we could get. I thank the distinguished chairman once again.

Mr. WARNER. It was a team effort, Madam President. I thank my distinguished chairman.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, if I might again say how much the two of us--Chairman Levin and I--appreciate the strong support of Senator Reid throughout particularly this year, building on what he did last year, to see that this issue was kept at the very forefront of our legislative objectives with the annual authorization bill. I say to my good friend that when the group of us gathered with the President's Chief of Staff at the White House, we were there with Mr. Principi, the chief of the Veterans Administration, the rough calculation was that there are about 33,000 who will be embraced with the formulation we have included in this bill. I think, as you say, and as I have said, it is a beachhead.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my colleague. Mr. President, we, as a Nation, were astonished, once again, in the past few days to see the face of Osama bin Laden and hear the remarks he (allegedly) made. I am not here to in any way lend credence to the validity of this, but nevertheless, those in the position to determine will eventually determine the validity of that piece of tape. But it did bring home to America the threats that this Nation faces and the fact that we, under the leadership of a brilliant President, are engaged in all-out war, together with our allies and others, in a war on terrorism. This bill is an essential building block in that war. Questions were raised in the course of our deliberations on this bill: Can we as a Nation afford, can the military take on the obligation to engage the enemy of terrorism in the worldwide effort and, at the same time, if it is necessary--and I repeat, if it is necessary--to use force against Saddam Hussein and his regime--not the people of Iraq, but Saddam Hussein and his regime? And I say this bill provides that measure of support such that our President, in his role as Commander in Chief, can conduct the full range of options militarily necessary to protect this Nation, be it from terrorism or the possible use of force in Iraq. That brings me to another point. As we all watch the developments in Iraq and, indeed, today, very interesting developments, I stop to think we would not as a free world be in the position of having this new resolution from the United Nations had it not been first and foremost for the courageous leadership of our President who, over a period of a year or more, has been constantly reminding the world, not just our citizens, of the threats from Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction, and the need to address those threats. Wisely, he sought to go to the United Nations where he put forth that historic speech. Had it not been for the vision, the foresight, and the commitment of this President, we would not be seeing today the unfolding of what I hope will be a successful resolution of the destruction of the weapons of mass destruction now possessed by Saddam Hussein without the use of force. The second factor in achieving the action by the United Nations was the fact that the men and women in the U.S. military are trained, are ready, and would respond to the Commander in Chief's order, if that were necessary, to resolve this critical worldwide issue by the use of force. They are ready. Saddam Hussein knows that. So I salute the men and women of our Armed Forces who are as much responsible for what we hope will be the successful resolution of this issue pursuant to the most recent resolution of the U.N. It is just as important a factor as the deliberations of the U.N. itself and indeed the valiant efforts of our President, and I wish to acknowledge that. Congress also played an important role by passing a strong resolution in support of the President; a resolution authorizing the use of force against Iraq. The militaries of the U.S. and our allies stand by, ready to use force if necessary, pursuant to that authorization by the Congress. I think this bill should remove any doubt of our commitment to fight terrorism, to use force if it becomes necessary in Iraq, and to defend the interests of Americans and our allies throughout the world. An undertaking of the magnitude of this bill is ultimately a bipartisan effort. Our committee has a long tradition of bipartisanship. Senator Levin and I have served under Chairman Stennis, Senator Goldwater, Senator Tower, Senator Nunn, and now the two of us are privileged to have that responsibility, I as ranking member, and Chairman Strom Thurmond, who is now present on the floor, all of whom tried to have the highest possible bipartisanship in this committee. Our chairman and I have continued that tradition. When it comes to the welfare of the men and women of the armed services, when it comes to the importance of the security of this Nation and the recognition by our allies that we stand to support them, we should have, and do have, that degree of bipartisanship. Consequently, there are many people deserving of recognition and thanks who have kept that tradition. I especially want to thank my chairman for his leadership. I want to thank all of our subcommittee chairmen and ranking members for their tireless efforts in ensuring that our troops have the tools they need for peace to accomplish such missions as they may have to undertake. At this point, I would like to pay special tribute to three Republican Members of our Committee who will not be returning next year. Senator Strom Thurmond has proudly served as a Member of the Senate Armed Services Committee since January 14, 1959, during the Eisenhower Administration. During nine successive Administrations, Senator Thurmond has provided a steady hand, sage advice and strong support for our men and women in uniform. He also had a distinguished military career, leading members of the ``Greatest Generation'' ashore on the beaches in Normandy and rising to the rank of Major General in the Army Reserve. He is a true American hero, and he will be missed in the years ahead. Senator Bob Smith has been a Member of the Committee since 1991, serving most recently as the Chairman of the Strategic Subcommittee from 1997-1999. A distinguished Navy veteran who served in Vietnam, Senator Smith has been a champion of veterans issues, joining Senators Reid and Hutchinson in the efforts on concurrent receipt. And finally, Senator Tim Hutchinson has made significant contributions during his four years of service on the Committee. As the Chairman and then Ranking Member of the Personnel Subcommittee, Senator Hutchinson has been committed to improving the quality of life of our military personnel. He joined me in crafting legislation--TRICARE for Life--to ensure that we meet our commitment to our military retirees to provide them with health care for life. In addition, he has been instrumental in ensuring significant pay raises for the military for four consecutive years and major improvements in educational benefits. They have all been valuable Members of the Committee and they will all be missed. No committee succeeds without a dedicated professional staff. I especially want to recognize the unwavering leadership of Judy Ansley of the minority staff, who will soon be moving over to become chief of staff of the majority, and of David Lyles who likewise will shift his desk a slight distance and continue the partnership that these two magnificent professionals have, as well as the wonderful service they render to the Senate, and indeed our country. I also want to thank Peter Levine, counsel to both sides. He is good, and we call on him. Fortunately, we do not have to pay his salary out of our allocation, but we get the full measure of his brilliance. Each of them have a marvelous professional staff. I would like to recognize each of them individually. On the Republican staff: Chuck Alsup, David Cherington, Marie Dickinson, Ed Edens, Brian Green, Bill Greenwalt, Gary Hall, Carolyn Hanna, Mary Alice Hayward, Bruce Hock, George Lauffer, Patty Lewis, Tom MacKenzie, Ann Mittermeyer, Joe Sixeas, Leslie Stone, Scott Stucky and Dick Walsh. On the Majority and non-designated staff: Dara Alpert, Ken Barbee, Mike Berger, June Borawski, Leah Brewer, Chris Cowart, Dan Cox, Madelyn Creedon, Mitch Crosswait, Rick DeBobes, Brie Eisen, Evelyn Farkas, Richard Fieldhouse, Daniel Goldsmith, Creighton Greene, Jeremy Hekhuis, Gary Howard, Drew Kent, Jennifer Key, Maren Leed, Gary Leeling, Mike McCord, Tom Moore, Cindy Pearson, Arun Seraphin, Christina Still, Mary Louise Wagner, Nick West, and Bridget Whalen. So I pay my respects, for they deserve credit and recognition. The conference report before the Senate represents an important step forward in ensuring the readiness of our Armed Forces, protecting our homeland, and ensuring success in the ongoing global war against terrorism. During this critical time in our history, with our Nation at war and preparing, together with the United Nations, to meet the threats posed by Iraq--I should say posed by Saddam Hussein, not posed by the people of Iraq--it is essential that we provide our President and the Armed Forces with the vital resources they need to defend our Nation to fight the scourge of terrorism both at home and abroad, and to prepare for future threats. I use the word ``home'' purposely because in my lifetime, I have seen incredible transition, the focal point being 9/11. I look upon the armed services of the United States as one of the greatest assets the American people have, and we should constantly look for ways in which they can, within the legal framework of our laws, be a full partner with those who are entrusted with our homeland defense. I am not just speaking of the Guard, the Reserve and others, but I am talking about the security forces, the police, be they Federal, State or local, the people who provide medical assistance, the people who provide all types of assistance in the event of a problem at home. We have to continue to strengthen and move in that direction, again within the framework of the laws. As President George Washington stated in his first inaugural address to Congress on January 8, 1790, and I quote: To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving the peace. That is what this bill is about, to be prepared. We can all take pride in this legislation. It represents the bipartisan work of all committee members in both Chambers to support our men and women in uniform, and their families. I want to commend Chairman Stump, ranking member Ike Skelton, and Duncan Hunter. They were marvelous working partners in the House for the chairman and I to conclude this conference. This bill is named in honor of Chairman Stump, a World War II veteran who lied about his age and joined the Navy when he was 15 years old and saw combat before his 18th birthday. I guess that is one of the reasons that generation, of which I am a very small and modest part having come into the tail end, is referred to as the greatest generation. Chairman Stump exemplifies that name: The greatest generation. The fact that this legislation is named in his honor is a fitting tribute to that true patriot. I believe the Presiding Officer served in the House of Representatives at one time with Chairman Stump. I also want to thank Duncan Hunter and Ike Skelton for their unwavering efforts. Our President sent the first signal to strengthen defense by asking Congress to increase spending, a very considerable increase in this legislation. This conference report sends a further signal to our citizens and to nations around the world that the United States is committed to a strong national defense. More importantly, this conference report sends a clear signal to our men and women in uniform, from the newest private to the most senior flag or general officer, that we are clearly behind them and we support their efforts around the world, and we are behind their families. We must always pause to remember that the men and women in the Armed Forces rely first and foremost on the support they receive from their loved ones. I want to thank the Department of Defense. I have had very cordial and strong working relations with Secretary Rumsfeld--we go way back together in the Nixon administration--as well as the Deputy Secretary of Defense and others. I think he has put together a good team. Yes, we do battle with them. We did battle with them on concurrent receipts, but in the end they swung in and gave us the technical advice to write this particular section on concurrent receipts in a way that creates a very special class of deserving career veterans, career military veterans. To reiterate, I am proud to join Chairman Levin in recommending this conference report to the Senate. This has been a long and difficult conference; but, we have achieved our goal of providing for our men and women in uniform. An undertaking of this magnitude is ultimately a bipartisan team effort. Our Committee has a long tradition of bipartisanship. Consequently, there are many people deserving of recognition and thanks. I especially want to thank my friend and colleague of 24 years in this Chamber and on the committee, Chairman Carl Levin, for the leadership he has shown in bringing this conference to a successful conclusion. I also want to thank all of our subcommittee chairs and ranking members for their tireless efforts in ensuring our troops have the tools they need to accomplish their missions. No committee without a dedicated, professional staff. I especially want to recognize the unwavering leadership efforts of David Lyles, Judy Ansley, and Peter Levine in bringing this process to a successful conclusion. They have led a great staff, all of whom deserve great credit and recognition. The conference report before the Senate represents an important step forward in ensuring the readiness of our armed forces, protecting our homeland, and ensuring success in the on-going global war against terrorism. During this critical time in our history, with our nation at war and preparing--together with the United Nations--to meet the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, it is essential that we provide our President and our armed forces the vital resources they need to defend our Nation, fight the scourge of terrorism at home and abroad, and prepare for future threats. As President George Washington stated in his first annual address to Congress on January 8, 1790: To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving the peace. We can all take pride in this legislation. It represents the bipartisan work of all committee members--in both Chambers--working together to support our men and women in uniform, and their families. I especially want to thank Chairman Bob Stump for his efforts this year and congratulate him for his outstanding work on behalf of our men and women in uniform for the 26 years he has served on the House Armed Services Committee. The fact that this legislation is named in his honor is a fitting tribute to a true patriot. I also want to thank Congressmen Duncan Hunter and Ike Skelton for their unwavering efforts to ensure we have a strong defense authorization act for our nation. Our President sent the first signal by asking Congress to increase defense spending. This conference report sends a further signal to our citizens, and to nations and around the world, that the United States is committed to a strong national defense. More importantly, this conference report sends a clear signal to our men and women in uniform, from the newest private to the most senior flag officers, that we are clearly behind them and we support their efforts around the world. The conference report before us contains the largest defense increase in over 20 years--an increase of $45.0 billion over the fiscal year 2002 appropriated level. The good news story associated with this much needed increase is that it has the full, bipartisan support of the Congress. While there are always minor disagreements over how some of the money in this bill should be allotted, there was no dissent about the need for this significant increase in the top line for defense. This is a remarkable display of unity behind our President, so important and fitting with our Nation at war. In line with the request of the President, the conference report significantly increases the major defense accounts over the Fiscal Year 2002 appropriated levels: It increases spending on military personnel by over 14 percent including a 4.1 percent pay raise for our servicemen and women. The bill increases the procurement account by over 20 percent. This will enable our military departments to procure the equipment they need to replace aging and heavily used assets, as well as to buy the things they need to protect our facilities, infrastructure and people in these increasingly uncertain and dangerous times. Additionally, the bill increases spending on research and development by almost 17 percent, ensuring that critical investment is being made to develop the capabilities we need in the future to deter and defeat emerging threats to our national security. The bill also sets aside a $10.0 billion reserve fund, as requested by the President, to pay for ongoing and future military operations in the global war on terrorism. The threats to our nation and the ongoing war on terrorism demand this increased investment in national security, both now and in the future. The bill contains many key provisions which will improve the quality of life of our men and women in uniform, our military retirees, and their families. In addition to the 4.1 percent pay raise I mentioned earlier, additional funding is included for facilities and services that will greatly improve the quality of life for our service personnel and their families, both at home and abroad. This legislation also contains key provisions that will better organize the Department of Defense to support the critical homeland defense mission, including: creation of an Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence; authorization to add an Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense; and, a requirement that the Secretary of Defense establish at least one Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Team within every state and territory. One of the most difficult issues facing the conference was how to ensure that our military retirees, who have incurred disabilities, receive a measure of military compensation. Concurrent receipt of retired pay and disability pay is as complex an issue as I have dealt with in my 24 years on this committee. Here is how I view this issue: success in certain military operations requires extensive planning, establishment of a ``beachhead,'' and then long term effort to determine the equities and priorities for the future. We have crafted such a ``beachhead'' in this conference report--I call it ``Purple Heart-Plus-Others.'' The provision in this conference report provides substantial recognition and compensation for those who were injured in combat, that is, all those with disabilities resulting from injuries for which they received the Purple Heart. In addition, those retirees most severely disabled in combat related operations, in preparation for combat, and in performing hazardous service, that is, those with disabilities rated at 60 percent or greater, would receive additional compensation. We will rely on the Secretary of Defense to exercise his discretion to further define the nature of this service. In both cases, those career retirees who have a certain degree of disability would receive the same amount of compensation--under a new, special compensation program--as if we had removed the prohibition on concurrent receipt. We all know that this is a complex issue and an emotional issue. Inaction is not an option. We must establish our ``beachhead'' today. I commit to holding early hearings next year to fully establish a body of fact on this issue. I see great merit in establishing a Presidential commission that can objectively examine the many issues related to the adequacy of compensation provided to our disabled veterans. I await the views of the veterans to be expressed at hearings. It is important to note that this conference report supports and fully funds virtually all of the priorities established by the Department of Defense for the development and procurement of major weapons systems, including the Joint Strike Fighter, the F-22, the Army's Future Combat System, and unmanned aerial vehicle programs. I remain committed to supporting investment in technologies that will enable us to field significant numbers of unmanned aerial and ground combat vehicles, as soon as feasible. In addition, I am pleased that the conference was able to add $229 million to the CVN(X) aircraft carrier to restore the original development and fielding schedule for this essential program. The carrier has proved its worth again and again in the global war on terrorism--a war which has relied extensively on carrier-based assets. This bill supports acceleration of this important program. The world as we knew it changed forever on September 11. We lost not only many lives and much property that day, but we also lost our uniquely American feeling of invulnerability. But, from our darkest hour, our nation has quickly emerged stronger and more united than ever. Our President has rallied our country and many nations around the world to fight the evil of terrorism, and to confront those who threaten peace and freedom around the world. As we conclude the 107th Congress, our nation is at war. U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, together with their coalition partners, are engaged on the front lines in the global war against terrorism, with a mission to root out terrorism at its source in the hopes of preventing future attacks. We are now faced with the possibility of war with Iraq, if the current U.S. led U.N. efforts fail. Our armed forces have responded to the call of duty in the finest traditions of our nation, and they are prepared to protect our security in future conflicts. It is critical that the Congress keep faith with our troops by providing the resources and capabilities our President-- our Commander-in-Chief--has requested. Homeland security is now, without a doubt, our top priority. We have a solemn obligation to protect our nation and our citizens from all known and anticipated threats--whatever their source or means of delivery. Our President, George W. Bush, has promised our nation that homeland security is his most urgent priority. The fiscal year 2003 budget the President submitted reflected this priority. The conference report before us funds the urgent security needs of our nation by doubling the funding for combating terrorism at home and abroad, in supporting the President's request for missile defense, and investing in new technologies to detect weapons of mass destruction and to deter their development. I urge my colleagues to support this conference report that upholds the President's fundamental national security priorities and makes the right investments in future capabilities. It is imperative that we send our President, our fellow citizens and the world a message of resolve from the Congress--a National Defense Authorization Conference Report that provides the resources and authorities our Nation's leaders and our armed forces require to protect our Nation and our vital interests around the world.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I, once again, thank the chairman for his service. We have been together now for 24 years on the Senate Armed Services Committee. And, given the results of the recent elections, we will be here for another 6. When I yielded the chairmanship 2 years ago, thereabouts, Senator Levin just moved one place over. Now I will just move back to that one place. We have conducted the affairs of this committee in a very spirited way, but I think it reflects as high a degree of bipartisanship as can be achieved in this magnificent institution, the Senate. I commend the chairman, and I commend him for this bill. He has worked long and hard on it, with me at his side, together with our respective Members. It is a good bill, a very good bill. (Mr. JEFFORDS assumed the Chair.)

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. I wouldn't suggest that he has been quiet, but I certainly want to recognize him and give him such time----

Mr. WARNER. My understanding is that the Senator from Delaware has 10 minutes. He is not here. I will ask unanimous consent I take 7 of his 10 minutes.

Mr. WARNER. I thank my friend from Texas for his cooperation. I now yield the remaining time, with the exception of 1 minute for the Senator from Virginia, to the Senator from Connecticut.

Mr. WARNER. Why doesn't the Senator take an additional 2 minutes so we can complete the debate on this amendment?

Mr. WARNER. I regret to say to my good friend from Texas----

Mr. WARNER. Yes. I had to speak to the Republican leader. I had 7 minutes. I wish to allocate several of those minutes to our colleague from Connecticut. Mr. President, how much time remains?

Mr. WARNER. At this time, the Senator from Arizona wishes to allocate his time to Senator Kyl.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to retain 2 of those minutes for myself and give 4 minutes to our colleague from Texas.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I say to our distinguished colleague from Texas, I listened intently to his remarks. Two things occurred to me. First, how much we value the Senator's contribution these many years we have served together. We shall miss him. Also, the Senator cut right to the heart of the argument, leaving no doubt where he stands. Mr. President, I am happy to yield the floor. I think I have 3 minutes left under my control.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we are making excellent progress on this bill. Did the leader wish to speak?

Mr. WARNER. I am sorry. I did not hear the leader. Mr. President, we have some matters moving along very well. I thank my colleague from Illinois for his remarks. I shall proceed to use my 3 minutes, and the 3 minutes from the Senator from Delaware, which as I understand it is still there, without objection.

Mr. WARNER. I have listened carefully to our colleague. His amendment is very simple on its face. But behind the simplicity lies a great deal of history. This Nation of ours has been protected by the two oceans, and by wonderful neighbors to the north and to the south. We have had a sense of security. But with the advent of high technology, and with the advent of worldwide syndicates of terrorists, America will never be the same again. That is a tough thing for me to tell my children and my grandchildren because I have labored in my life--as everyone in this Chamber has--to provide not only for my family, friends and neighbors such that they can enjoy the life we have enjoyed these many years. However, high technology, while it benefits mankind in so many ways, has brought about dramatic change. If you wish to have the standard of imminent threat placed in the bill that Senator Lieberman, Senator McCain, Senator Bayh and I have crafted, I say to you most respectfully, with the advent of this extraordinary evolution of technology, the time involved in warning that is implicit in imminent threat left us with the end of the 20th century. The 21st century high technology has erased that. Imminent danger struck us on September 11th. We didn't know it was coming. The doctrine of imminent danger, as I say, has changed in this 21st century. It no longer gives us the warning that we must have. I urge my colleagues to let this resolution remain unchanged by this amendment as they have with the other amendments that have been brought before us. I expect Senator Reid in the Chamber momentarily. I know he has a concluding matter by way of a unanimous consent request. Before I, ask for regular order, I want to make certain that----

Mr. WARNER. Yes.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, have the yeas and nays been ordered?