[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 64 (Thursday, April 6, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5522-S5525]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS AND RESCISSIONS ACT--CONFERENCE 
                                 REPORT

  Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, I submit a report of the committee of 
conference on H.R. 889 and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be stated.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the 
     two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 
     889) making emergency supplemental appropriations and 
     rescissions to preserve and enhance the military readiness of 
     the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending 
     September 30, 1995, and for other purposes, having met, after 
     full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do 
     recommend to their respective Houses this report, signed by a 
     majority of the conferees.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the Senate will proceed to 
the consideration of the conference report.
  (The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the 
Record of April 6, 1995.)
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I want to strongly urge the Senate to 
adopt today the conference report on H.R. 889, the emergency Defense 
supplemental appropriations bill.
  On Wednesday, the conferees completed work on this bill, which will 
ensure that the readiness, quality of life and pay for our Armed Forces 
will not be impacted by the costs of overseas peacekeeping and 
humanitarian missions.
  As chairman of the Defense Subcommittee, there is no question in my 
mind that we must act on this bill prior to the recess.
  In summary, this bill provides $3.04 billion in new funding for the 
Department of Defense, and $28.3 million for the Coast Guard, to pay 
for these contingency operations, and other emergency requirements.
  For DOD, in addition to the contingency operations amounts, $258 
million is included to meet the increases in overseas personnel costs 
due to the decline in value of the dollar.
  These amounts go directly to the men and women, and their families, 
stationed overseas, to defray the increased expenses they face because 
of this devaluation.
  All new Defense spending in the bill is offset by rescission to DOD, 
defense related and foreign aid appropriations.
  From available DOD funds, $2.26 billion is rescinded. Also, $200 
million from function 050 nuclear facility funds, $100 million from 
military construction funds, and $120 million from foreign aid 
appropriations.
  The conferees worked to ensure that no significant military program 
was damaged by these cuts. Most reductions come from savings in 
programs underway, or from reduced efforts in lower priority programs.
  Some of these funds will need to be replaced in 1996, but will not 
reduce military readiness or capability this year.
  The amount rescinded from DOD represents an increase of $300 million 
over the levels adopted by the Senate.
  These reductions were necessary to ensure that these new 
appropriations did not increase the deficit, thus hampering our ability 
to provide needed funds for 1996.
  All the military services have identified the severe cuts in training 
and readiness that will result if this bill is not enacted early this 
month.
  Navy fleet steaming days will be reduced. Flight training will be 
reduced. Ships will not undergo needed overhauls at shipyards, 
resulting in substantial layoffs.
  Air Force flight training will be slashed by 25 percent. Aircraft 
will be parked on the ramp, because they will not receive necessary 
depot maintenance.
  In short, we face a return to the hollow force that many of us 
remember from the 1970's. We cannot permit this.
  In the 1970's, that hollow force was the result of the Congress not 
appropriating the funds needed for military readiness. This crisis if 
the result of the President diverting the funds provided by Congress 
for the military.
  Let me make clear, the 1995 Defense appropriations bill provided the 
funds needed to maintain military readiness and training for 1995.
  During the last quarter of 1994, and the first quarter of 1995, the 
President used these funds to undertake the overseas missions in 
Kuwait, Korea, Bosnia, Iraq, Somalia, Cuba, and Haiti.
  In no case did the President come to the Congress, to seek approval, 
and funding, for these missions.
  The result was a $2.5 billion diversion of readiness and personnel 
appropriations.
  I want the Senate to know that the appropriations committees of the 
House and Senate were unanimous in their commitment that this 
circumstance should not happen again.
  Included in the statement of the managers on the conference report is 
an explicit statement of our objections to the course followed by the 
administration. This bipartisan, bicameral statement reflects our 
views. I ask unanimous consent that this statement be inserted in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                Contingency and Nontraditional Missions

       The conferees express their deep concern over the process 
     by which U.S. military forces are being deployed on major, 
     large scale contingency operations. The conferees note that 
     the Administration neither sought nor received advance 
     approval of or funding for military operations from the 
     Congress in support of peacekeeping and humanitarian 
     missions. The missions involving Somalia, Rwanda, Haiti, and 
     refugee relief in the Caribbean all mark significant 
     departures from previous emergency deployments of American 
     forces dealing with valid threats to the national security. 
     The conferees strongly believe that military deployments in 
     support of peacekeeping or humanitarian objectives both merit 
     and require advance approval by the Congress.
       This issue is of special concern to the conferees because 
     of the effect these operations have had on the defense 
     budgeting and planning process. There is no question but that 
     the recent spate of ``contingency'' deployments, none of 
     which was approved in advance by Congress nor budgeted for, 
     have wreaked havoc upon the ability of the Department of 
     Defense to maintain military readiness. These operations have 
     led to substantial and repeated diversions of funds intended 
     for training, equipment and property maintenance. From the 
     Secretary of Defense to commanders in the field, there is 
     universal acknowledgment that this practice has led to 
     degradations in readiness.
       A related issue involves the rapid increase in Defense 
     Department participation in activities which under both law 
     and tradition are the responsibility of other Federal 
     departments. The principal example of this trend is the use 
     of DoD funds, personnel, and facilities to deal with the 
     issue of Cuban and Haitian refugees. The cost of these 
     operations has been almost entirely borne by the Department 
     of Defense, even though other Federal entities have long had 
     primary responsibility for dealing with refugee and 
     immigration issues and have, in the past, reimbursed the 
     Department of Defense for such support in accordance with the 
     Economy Act. At present, DoD is being forced to bear $1 
     million per day in costs for these operations, out of funds 
     intended to be used for [[Page S5523]] military operations, 
     training, and readiness. The conferees believe DoD should not 
     be forced to bear the cost of operations which are not its 
     responsibility, especially when it results in a substantial 
     diversion of funds provided by the Congress expressly for 
     military activities.
       These problems underline the need for the Executive Branch 
     to seek congressional approval for unanticipated 
     nontraditional military operations in advance. The conferees 
     intend to address these issues in connection with the fiscal 
     year 1996 appropriations process, in order to avoid the 
     recurrence of situations such as those which created the need 
     for the appropriations contained in this measure. The 
     conferees strongly urge the Administration to provide 
     detailed and timely proposals to assist in resolving these 
     issues.

  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, there was no reluctance on the part of 
the conferees to meet the needs of our Armed Forces. This was 
accomplished in a fashion that is fully offset in new budget authority, 
and virtually offset in new outlays for 1995 from rescissions.
  The Senate-passed version of this bill fully offset all new outlays. 
This conference agreement results in only $4.3 million in additional 
outlays for fiscal year 1995, though it provides over $3 billion in new 
spending.
  I want to thank our chairman, Senator Hatfield, and Senator Byrd for 
their leadership and commitment to move this bill forward prior to the 
recess.
  In our first conference with the new House team, I want to report the 
exceptional efforts of the Defense Subcommittee chairman, Bill Young, 
and the full committee chairman, Bob Livingston, to work with us to 
move this bill forward.
  They drove a hard bargain of many of the differences between the two 
bills, but we were united on our commitment to meet the needs of the 
military services.
  As I stated when this bill was presented to the Senate last month, 
the work of the Defense Subcommittee reflects the longstanding 
partnership between myself and Senator Inouye on defense matters.
  His efforts were invaluable in seeking compromises with the House on 
matters of interest to the Senate, and I am indebted to him once again 
for his hard work and wise counsel.
  Mr. President, I hope the Senate will act immediately to pass this 
conference report, and send this bill to the President.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I support adoption of this supplemental 
appropriation bill, H.R. 889, and compliment the distinguished 
chairman, Mr. Hatfield, for his excellent work in putting together this 
conference report prior to the April break. It was a difficult task, 
but it was driven by the need to replenish vital funding for the 
readiness accounts of our armed services.
  The conference agreement includes a total of over $3 billion for 
these vital defense purposes. These accounts were seriously depleted in 
fiscal year 1995 because of unanticipated operations, in particular 
Somalia, Rwanda, and Haiti, as well as elsewhere, and the conference 
had to balance this need to restore DOD readiness funding with the goal 
of maintaining our progress toward deficit reduction. The result was to 
shift defense funding from lower-priority items in the defense budget 
to replenish these readiness accounts.
  Mr. President, I note that the conferees, in the statement of 
managers, have addressed their deep concern and desire not to repeat 
the problem of engaging in expensive, non-traditional, humanitarian-
oriented military operations without a more careful assessment of the 
costs. The conference agreement rightly recommends that prior 
congressional approval should be sought and obtained for such 
operations. Given the budgetary constraints we are facing in 
discretionary spending, including defense spending, I do not think that 
the Congress will easily approve supplementals in the future such as we 
have before us today, for operations which do not have the advance-
approval of the Congress. Certainly it is in the interest of the 
President to have Congress on board if and when he decides to launch 
the Nation into these kinds of expensive, non-traditional operations, 
which are not directly related to the vital interests of the United 
States.
  In addition to over $2 billion in DOD rescissions, the conference 
agreement includes a number of rescissions of international and 
domestic funds, including foreign operations, the Departments of 
Transportation, Commerce-Justice-State, Interior, Education, Veterans 
Affairs, and a variety of other accounts. The net effect of the bill on 
Federal spending is a reduction in excess of $700 million.
  Again, I compliment the chairman of the committee, as well as the 
managers of the Defense Chapter, specifically, Mr. Stevens and Mr. 
Inouye, for a particularly workman-like job in rearranging, in a 
deficit-neutral manner, the department's accounts so as to support the 
basic readiness of our armed forces.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I want to commend my colleagues on the 
Appropriations Committee for a conference agreement which is, on the 
whole, an excellent bill.
  It is fully paid for.
  It contains needed funds to reimburse DOD for the costs of conducting 
humanitarian and peacekeeping operations.
  It provides full funding for authorized military pay raises.
  It rescinds $300 million from TRP and places restrictions on the 
ability to provide grants for projects with little or no military 
relevance.
  It also rescinds $122 million from the Service R&D accounts for 
general science and technology programs--low-priority programs with 
little demonstrable relevance to defense requirements.
  It puts in place a requirement to notify Congress in advance of large 
obligations from the Emergency and Extraordinary Expenses account.
  It rescinds funding from excess Guard and Reserve equipment which was 
added by Congress.
  It restores much of the funding in the BRAC cleanup and construction 
accounts that is recommended for rescission in H.R. 1158, the domestic 
rescission bill currently before the Senate.
  I particularly want to thank my colleague from Montana, Senator 
Burns, for his successful efforts in negotiating an excellent 
compromise with the House regarding elimination of military 
construction at closing bases. I understand the opposition he faced in 
defending the provision adopted by the Senate, and I appreciate his 
diligence. The compromise--which prohibits obligation of funds for 
military construction at closing bases or for realigning functions--is 
actually an improvement over the Senate position, since it makes these 
funds available for other high-priority defense needs, rather than 
returning them to the Treasury.
  Mr. President, there are a few rescissions with which I am not in 
agreement, namely, the rescission of environmental cleanup funds in the 
Departments of Defense and Energy. I believe it is irresponsible to 
reduce these accounts at a time when all indications are that the cost 
of cleaning up Federal facilities
 is skyrocketing. These funds will likely have to be restored in the 
fiscal year 1996 appropriations process.

  On March 1, I provided a list of more than $6 billion in suggested 
rescissions of low-priority and non-defense items funded in the fiscal 
year 1995 defense bill. With a few exceptions, the Senate chose not to 
rescind these funds, and they were therefore not within the scope of 
the conference. However, I believe rescinding earmarked funds would 
have been a much better decision for the conferees than rescinding 
environmental restoration funds.
  In addition, I am disappointed that the conferees chose not to 
rescind $400 million for construction of two aeronautical wind tunnels, 
as proposed by the House. Our nation's fiscal crisis requires that we 
eliminate projects that do not return good value to the American 
people. I believe half a billion dollars for wind tunnels is one of 
those projects that should be cut in favor of a higher purpose--deficit 
reduction.
  I also question the necessity to set aside additional funds in this 
emergency bill to renovate Penn Station in New York, when many other 
train stations in the country could probably use a portion of this 
funding to upgrade their facilities. I understand that this requirement 
arises from safety concerns and recent fires at the station, but I have 
not seen any official estimates of repair costs or safety 
modifications. In addition, last year, cost-sharing was an essential 
element of providing Federal funding for this [[Page S5524]] project; I 
trust that will also be the case with these additional funds.
  There are a number of other rescissions which were not accepted by 
the conferees which could have provided additional deficit reduction in 
this bill. While these projects are a very, very small part of this 
bill, I feel it is imperative that I bring to the attention of the 
Senate that certain Members are still able to protect their special 
interests at the expense of the American taxpayers.
  Mr. President, again, I commend my colleagues, Senator Hatfield and 
Senator Byrd, for this conference agreement. On the whole, it is a 
responsible balance between restoring military readiness funds and 
eliminating unnecessary Federal spending across-the-board. My outlook 
on the upcoming fiscal year 1996 appropriations season is much improved 
because of the excellent work in this bill. I hope we can eliminate, or 
at least minimize, as this bill does, the earmarks and pork barrel 
projects in the fiscal year 1996 appropriations bills.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise in support of the conference 
agreement accompanying H.R. 889, the emergency defense supplemental 
appropriations and rescission bill for the fiscal year 1995.
  The bill provides for a net decrease in fiscal year 1995 budget 
authority and outlays of $4.0 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively. 
These are real cuts to the deficit.
  Title I of the bill provides supplemental appropriations of $3.1 
billion in budget authority and $1.2 billion in outlays for the 
Department of Defense. These funds, largely for unanticipated 
contingency operations, are necessary to maintain the readiness of our 
Armed Forces.
  This title also rescinds $2.9 billion in budget authority and $1.2 
billion in outlays for various defense programs to help offset the cost 
of this additional military spending.
  Title II provides for non-defense rescissions amounting to $1.1 
billion in budget authority and $0.1 billion in outlays for fiscal year 
1995. Most of these savings are to be devoted to deficit reduction.
  The final bill does include the emergency designation for these 
additional funds as requested by the President and approved by the 
House.
  I must note, however, that the spending in this bill is largely 
offset by the rescissions in the bill, and I think this is an important 
achievement by both the Senate and House.
  I thank my colleagues for the fine job they have done, and I urge the 
adoption of this bill.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that tables showing the 
relationship of the pending bill to the Appropriations Committee 602 
allocations and to the overall spending ceilings under the fiscal year 
1995 budget resolution be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                   H.R. 889, DEFENSE EMERGENCY SUPPLEMENTAL AND RESCISSIONS CONFERENCE REPORT                   
                                       [FY 1995, in millions, CBO scoring]                                      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                           Senate     Total comp
                 Subcommittee                     Current    H.R. 889\2\  Subcommittee     602(b)         to    
                                                 Status\1\                    total      allocation   allocation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture-RD:                                                                                                 
    Budge Authority...........................       58,117  ...........        58,117       58,118           -1
    Outlays...................................       50,330  ...........        50,330       50,330           -0
Commerce-Justice:                                                                                               
    Budge Authority...........................       26,873         -180        26,693       26,903         -210
    Outlays...................................       25,429          -42        25,387       25,429          -42
Defense:                                                                                                        
    Budge Authority...........................      243,628       -2,685       240,943      243,630       -2,687
    Outlays...................................      250,661       -1,106       249,555      250,713       -1,158
District of Columbia:                                                                                           
    Budge Authority...........................          712  ...........           712          720           -8
    Outlays...................................          714  ...........           714          722           -8
Energy-Water:                                                                                                   
    Budge Authority...........................       20,493         -200        20,293       20,493         -200
    Outlays...................................       20,884         -100        20,784       20,888         -104
Foreign Operations:                                                                                             
    Budge Authority...........................       13,679         -142        13,537       13,830         -293
    Outlays...................................       13,780          -18        13,762       13,816          -54
Interior:                                                                                                       
    Budge Authority...........................       13,578           -2        13,577       13,582           -5
    Outlays...................................       13,970           -2        13,968       13,970           -2
Labor-HHS\3\:                                                                                                   
    Budge Authority...........................      266,170         -300       265,870      266,170         -300
    Outlays...................................      265,730          -12       265,718      265,731          -13
Legislative branch:                                                                                             
    Budge Authority...........................        2,459  ...........         2,459        2,460           -1
    Outlays...................................        2,472  ...........         2,472        2,472           -0
Military construction:                                                                                          
    Budge Authority...........................        8,836          -36         8,800        8,837          -37
    Outlays...................................        8,525           -2         8,523        8,554          -31
Transportation:                                                                                                 
    Budge Authority...........................       14,265          -72        14,193       14,275          -82
    Outlays...................................       37,087           -1        37,085       37,087           -2
Treasury-Postal\4\:                                                                                             
    Budge Authority...........................       23,589  ...........        23,589       23,757         -168
    Outlays...................................       24,221  ...........        24,221       24,225           -4
VA-HUD:                                                                                                         
    Budge Authority...........................       90,256         -365        89,891       90,257         -366
    Outlays...................................       92,438  ...........        92,438       92,439           -1
Reserve:                                                                                                        
    Budge Authority...........................  ...........  ...........  ............        2,311       -2,311
    Outlays...................................  ...........  ...........  ............            1           -1
                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------
      Total appropriations\5\:                                                                                  
    Budge Authority...........................      782,655       -3,981       778,674      785,343       -6,669
    Outlays...................................      806,241       -1,283       804,957      806,377      -1,420 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\In accordance with the Budget Enforcement Act, these totals do not include $1,394 million in budget authority
  and $6,466 million in outlays in funding for emergencies that have been designated as such by the President   
  and the Congress, and $877 million in budget authority and $935 million in outlays for emergencies that would 
  be available only upon an official budget request from the President designating the entire amount as an      
  emergency requirement.                                                                                        
\2\In accordance with the Budget Enforcement Act, these totals do not include $3,070 million in budget authority
  and $1,232 million in outlays in funding for emergencies that have been designated as such by the President   
  and the Congress.                                                                                             
\3\Of the amounts remaining under the Labor-HHS Subcommittee's 602(b) allocation, $1.3 million in outlays is    
  available only for appropriations from the Violent Crime Reduction Trust Fund.                                
\4\Of the amounts remaining under the Treasury-Postal Subcommittee's 602(b) allocation, $1.3 million, in budget 
  authority and $0.1 million in outlays is available only for appropriations from the Violent Crime Reduction   
  Trust Fund.                                                                                                   
\5\Of the amounts remaining under the Appropriations Committee's 602(a) allocation, $1.3 million in budget      
  authority and $1.4 million in outlays is available only for appropriations from the Violent Crime Reduction   
  Trust Fund.                                                                                                   
                                                                                                                
  Note: Details may not add to totals due to rounding.                                                          
                                                                                                                
  Prepared by SBC majority staff, Apr. 6, 1995.                                                                 


                                                                                                                
[[Page S5525]]
   FISCAL YEAR 1995 CURRENT LEVEL--H.R. 880, DEFENSE SUPPLEMENTAL AND   
                            RESCISSIONS BILL                            
                          [Dollars in billions]                         
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Budget             
                                                   authority    Outlays 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current level (as of Mar. 24, 1995\1\)...........    1,236.5    1,217.2 
H.R. 889, Defense supplemental and rescissions,                         
 conference report\2\............................       -4.0       -1.3 
                                                  ----------------------
      Total current level........................    1,232.5    1,215.9 
Revised on-budget aggregates\3\..................    1,238.7    1,217.6 
Amount over (+) / under (-) budget aggregates....       -6.2       -1.7 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\In accordance with the Budget Enforcement Act, the total does not    
  include $1,394 million in budget authority and $6,466 million in      
  outlays in funding for emergencies that have been designated as such  
  by the President and the Congress, and $877 million in budget         
  authority and $935 million in outlays for emergencies that would be   
  available only upon an official budget request from the President     
  designating the entire amount requested as an emergency requirement.  
\2\In accordance with the Budget Enforcement Act, these totals do not   
  include $3,070 million in budget authority and $1,232 million in      
  outlays in funding for emergencies that have been designated as such  
  by the President and the Congress in this bill.                       
\3\Reflects revised allocation under section 9(g) of House Concurrent   
  Resolution 64 for the deficit-neutral reserve fund.                   
                                                                        
 Note: Details may not add to totals due to rounding.                   
                                                                        
 Prepared by SBC majority staff, Apr. 6, 1995.                          

Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to note that the conference 
report for the Department of Defense supplemental appropriations bill 
includes an appropriation of $21.5 million for capital improvements 
associated with safety-related emergency repairs to Pennsylvania 
Station in New York City.
  Pennsylvania Station is the busiest intermodal station in the Nation, 
with almost 40 percent of Amtrak's passengers nationwide passing 
through every day. Unfortunately, it is also the most decrepit of the 
Northeast corridor stations, others of which, such as Washington, DC's 
own Union Station, have been renovated with Federal grants. Today, 
Pennsylvania Station handles almost 500,000 riders a day in a 
subterranean complex that demands improvement. According to the New 
York City Fire Commissioner, there have been nine major fires at the 
station since 1987. Luckily, these fires have occurred at off-hours; as 
it stands, the station could not cope with an emergency when it is 
crowded with the 42,000 souls who pass through every workday between 8 
and 9 a.m. In addition, structural steel in the station has shown its 
age and needs immediate repair. And these are just the most pressing 
needs.
  There is a redevelopment plan to change things for the better, a $315 
million project to renovate the existing Pennsylvania Station and 
extend it partially into the neighboring historic James A. Farley Post 
Office, almost doubling the emergency access to the station's platforms 
which lie far below street level beneath both buildings. Moreover, 
there is a financing plan in place that could do this with $100 million 
from the Federal Government ($31.5 million has already been 
appropriated), $100 million from the State and city, and $115 million 
from a combination of historic tax credits, bonds supported by revenue 
from the project's retail component, and building shell improvements by 
the Postal Service, owner of the James A. Farley Building. Governor 
Pataki of New York and Mayor Giuliani of New York City strongly support 
the project and have made available funding in their budgets in 
accordance with a Memorandum of Agreement signed in August, 1994.
  Thanks to our colleagues on the Committee on Appropriations, $21.5 
million can now be used immediately for pressing safety repairs at the 
existing station, in the first step of the overall redevelopment 
effort. These are the first Federal funds into the project that will 
actually go toward construction, and they will count towards the 
Federal share of the $315 million project to transform the station into 
a complex capable of safely handling the crowds that have made 
Pennsylvania Station the Nation's busiest intermodal facility. For 
myself and the 75 million other people a year who use the station, I 
would like to thank all those who have labored hard to make the station 
safer, in particular our colleagues Senator Hatfield, Senator Byrd, and 
Senator Lautenberg.
  Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the conference 
report be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the 
table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  So the conference report was agreed to.
