John Warner

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. I ask unanimous consent there be a period for morning business with Senators to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, there are rare moments in the life of the Senate that one shall never forget. I thank the Senator not just because he has indicated support for my amendment but for the Senator's very extraordinary observations about the times, the difficulty, and the need to have bipartisanship and to leave our politics at the water's edge. As I said earlier, I take responsibility for adopting this course rather than the earlier draft I had prepared. I say to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, it is an expression of how close we really are on the fundamental things. The sole point of difference is how each Senator shall read the last paragraph. It is as simple as that. I read it as lending to the world an interpretation of what we have done and what we will do in the future as embracing some definitive timetable, and the President will have to every 90 days address those key words and in doing so could well complicate and jeopardize the next 120 days, which this Senator thinks is so critical. I yield the floor.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, our magnificent service men and women, along with allies and partners, are supporting the Iraqis as they develop their own concepts of democracy. Jointly we are improving infrastructure, improving the internal security, and together confronting the extremists. By any fair objective political measure, the people of Iraq are making progress. In 1 year, the Iraqis elected a transitional government, ratified a constitution, and are preparing to elect a permanent parliamentary government on December 15th. During many hearings and briefings, the senior military commanders, particularly General Abizaid has stressed that the extremist militant jihadists are focusing on dominating a geographic area that extends from Spain to Indonesia. The tragic events in Jordan underscore the accuracy of that military analysis. The al-Qaida group in Iraq claimed responsibility for the tragic attacks in Jordan against innocent Arab civilians. While portions of Iraq remain focal points for terrorist attacks, the threat extends far beyond. This enemy seeks neither compromise nor coexistence with the United States or others who do not share their world vision. The United States, along with partners and allies, must continue their strong resolve and effectively address this threat. The civilized world has no choice. Of equal importance to the military mission in Iraq is the development of political structures and reconstruction of the infrastructure. I, like many of you, have made a number of trips to Iraq: I have seen progress. Now I would like to specifically address the pending amendments related to our policy to achieve our military, political, and reconstruction goals in Iraq. While there are similarities, the amendments differ on several major points. Both amendments recognize the magnificent work being done by our Armed Forces; the unwavering support of their families at home; the importance of political developments to take place in Iraq next year; the necessity to put Iraqi Security Forces in the lead in securing Iraq; and the requirement to keep the American people well informed of all aspects of the military, political, and reconstruction efforts in Iraq. Both amendments call for the President to submit a quarterly report on our progress in Iraq. While Congress already receives a number of reports and Members and committees in both bodies receive briefings from civilian and military leaders, this report from the President would become the most comprehensive report on the situation in Iraq. These are the three important differences between the two amendments. No. 1 the reporting timeline--section c. The Warner-Frist amendment calls for the first report 90 days after the enactment of the Act. Ninety days allows the President sufficient time to assemble this very wide-ranging report. A report of this scope will require close consultation with all departments and agencies of the Federal Government; American diplomats in Iraq and in the region; United States allied and partnered nations; and our military leaders here and in the theater of operations. The Levin amendment would allow for just 30 days of coordination and consultation before submitting the initial report. I believe that is insufficient time to produce a report as comprehensive as this. No. 2 is section c. The Levin-Reid amendment calls for a completely unclassified report. The Warner-Frist amendment directs that the report be unclassified to the extent possible. This is an important distinction. Some information on international negotiations and agreements, and plans for Iraq's domestic security will be an integral part of the development of Iraqi security forces, this may be too sensitive to be presented in an unclassified forum. The Warner-Frist amendment allows the President to produce a classified annex if the President and his advisors believe it is necessary. No. 3 is a campaign plan with estimated dates for phased withdrawal-- section c(7). The Levin-Reid amendment asks for a campaign plan with estimated dates for the phased withdrawal of U.S. forces to be published in the unclassified report. I believe that any program for the withdrawal of American combat forces must be conditions-based, and linked to specific, responsible benchmarks not just dates on a calendar, per se. While I agree that we must continue to make it clear to the Iraqis that a program for withdrawal is a common goal, any announcement of immediate withdrawal or even speculation of withdrawal before a secure and democratic Iraq is in place is simply not prudent. I am concerned that the release of a timeline such as that in the last paragraph of the Levin-Reid amendment now that announces our withdrawal plans, even with estimated dates, could promote speculation and send an erroneous message to our troops, the Iraqi people, our coalition partners, and the terrorists. I urge you to vote for Warner-Frist amendment and that we follow Levin and Reid, rather than an entire new amendment to show how much we do agree on and that this is an effort to seek partisanship. We are down to two differences: the word ``indefinite,'' which to me precludes the chance--could be construed as we would not leave a very small unit there to facilitate the logistic transfer, the need to bring up to a level of acceptability the armaments the Iraqis have; and the continuation of some security work as well as training. But I will not belabor the point. I was very specific in the careful choice of words substituted for ``indefinite.'' The last paragraph--every Senator has to decide for himself or herself the clear meaning of the English language and whether that cannot be construed by many to invoke the thought of a timetable. I say to my good friend, we have had a very good debate tonight. How fortunate we are that our distinguished colleague, a long-time member of the committee, the Senator from Connecticut, joined us. I think we have done a good service to our colleagues who, in a very brief period tomorrow, will be required to focus on this and cast their votes accordingly.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I think the matter now is that the Senate should go off the bill and I will proceed to do morning business.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today the Senate stand in adjournment until 9:45 a.m., on Tuesday, November 15. I further ask that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved, and the Senate proceed to a period of morning business for up to 30 minutes, with the first 15 minutes under the control of the Democratic leader or his designee and the final 15 minutes under the control of the majority leader or his designee; further, that the Senate then resume consideration of S. 1042, the Defense authorization bill; I further ask that there then be 30 minutes of time equally divided between the Senator from Michigan and myself, between the bill managers, followed by a series of stacked votes as under the previous order; I further ask that there be 2 minutes equally divided prior to each vote; I further ask that following the vote on passage of the Defense bill, the Senate stand in recess until 2:15 p.m. to accommodate the weekly policy lunches.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I want to say again how important is the debate our distinguished colleague from Alabama has provided the Senate this morning on these key subjects. It is reassuring. The Senator made, as did I, reference to this report, which I think is an accurate compilation of what has been achieved and what remains to be achieved and the struggle they are having with regrettably this cultural thing called graft, which is all pervasive throughout much of the Middle East, but nevertheless somehow we are overcoming that.

Mr. WARNER. I thank the Senator. Madam President, it is my understanding that the time under the control of the Senator from Virginia has now expired.

Mr. WARNER. And there remains what period of time?

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, the Senate has already defeated this amendment twice--first on September 14, 2005, on the Commerce, State, Justice, Appropriations bill by a vote of 53-44 and then on October 19, 2005 on the Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development Appropriations bill by a vote of 54-44. This amendment is unnecessary and duplicative of the current contracting oversight mechanisms created to meet the challenges that then Senator Truman identified. The Truman Committee was needed at the outbreak of World War II. There were no GAO or IG investigations, no Defense Contract Audit Agency or Defense Contract Management Agency. There were no conflict of interest laws to reign in the dollar-a-day men and no Truth in Negotiations Act, Whistle blower Protections, or Competition in Contracting Act. The Armed Services Committee is currently performing its oversight tasks and I see no need for a Special Senate Committee to look at contracting practices in Iraq and Afghanistan. The potential for fraud, waste and abuse is not limited to just Iraq and Afghanistan. The Air Force has just been through the worst contracting scandal in the last 20 years and the Armed Services Committee was at the forefront of uncovering this scandal by using normal committee legislative oversight tools. We conducted hearings, tasked the GAO and the Inspector General to review specific issues, and requested and reviewed thousands of documents. The Armed Services Committee has conducted numerous hearings and briefings on acquisition oversight and reform, including oversight of contracting in Iraq, and initiated numerous investigations by the GAO and the Inspector General on DOD acquisition practices and programs. Senator Ensign plans to conduct several more Iraq contracting hearings in the near future in the Readiness Subcommittee and Senator McCain is conducting a series of hearings on the overall procurement process. The Office of the Special Inspector General of Iraq Reconstruction was established to look at Iraqi contracting. This new IG has routinely briefed this Committee and others on its findings. Section 823 of this bill establishes a contract fraud task force at DOD to identify potential areas where DOD is susceptible to fraud, waste and abuse. This group will inform Congress on how to modify our contracting laws wherever we need to get tougher on contract fraud. This is how best to conduct our oversight--through the established committee process and established oversight mechanisms. I am sure that the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee who shares responsibility for the oversight and jurisdiction of contracts in Iraq, as well as the Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee who has jurisdiction of Federal contracting would agree. I appreciate the concerns of the sponsors of this legislation. However, I do not support the establishment of a new special committee which would duplicate the work of this committee and others and only look at a narrow amount of Federal expenditure.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I speak on the bill for just a minute or two.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I say to my good friend and colleague, if there is an award to be made for determination, he has it on this particular issue. It is interesting that the Senator from North Dakota invoked a good deal of history as to the Truman committee. I think colleagues should know, however, that the Senate has already addressed this amendment on two previous occasions: first on September 14, 2005, on the Commerce-State-Justice appropriations bill. The vote was 53 to 44, defeated, and then again on October 19, 2005, on the DOD appropriations bill. Again, the Senate rejected it 54 to 44. Those matters should be before Senators.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, there is a further order for two votes to occur beginning at the hour of 11:30. I think it would be helpful to all Members if the Chair would restate the timing and status of those votes.

Mr. WARNER. I thank the Chair. Under the time I control, I yield such time as my colleague from Alabama may desire to speak. He will speak as in morning business, to reserve the time on the bill, on such aspects of the amendments that he so desires.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. WARNER. Has the Senator put into the Record the name of the assistant he has worked with in developing this and explained about his background as having been there and participated? Because this is an extremely important segment of our debate that the Senator is filling in this morning. You are receiving a lot of this information from your very able assistant who is an on-the-scene individual responsible for some of this.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Parliamentary inquiry, Madam President: We are in morning business?

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the period of morning business be extended another 5 or 6 minutes.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, I am delighted to do that. We will have a 6-minute extension on each side in morning business.

Mr. WARNER. Madam President, if the Senator will entertain a question, we will allocate my time on the question, as I propound it, and to the extent he responds will be on his time.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, November 10, 2005, for a committee hearing to examine the rebuilding of VA assets on the Gulf Coast. The hearing will take place in room 138 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building at 2 p.m.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Aviation be authorized to meet on Thursday, November 10, 2005, at 9:30 a.m., on the Wright Amendment.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Yes, Mr. President. This is a subject I have discussed with the administration and most specifically with the Secretary of Defense. I assure my colleague that it will not establish a pattern because to me the advice and consent process is a very precise obligation of the Senate. This type of action is taken in this case because it is my understanding that the President will make a recess appointment within 120 days, and I assure the Senator this matter will not go beyond the 120 days. I thank the Senator for bringing it up, and I thank him for his cooperation and the cooperation of other Senators on this matter.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I spoke with Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld very early this morning on this issue.

Mr. WARNER

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, the Senator from Massachusetts provided us a copy of his amendment just a minute before he began his remarks to the Senate. Senator Roberts, on this side, is now in consultation with the ranking member, Senator Rockefeller, and I anticipate that one or both will shortly come to the floor on this issue. At this time I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.