[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 119 (Friday, July 21, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10468-S10472]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS, 1996

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I think we have 4 minutes equally divided. 
I yield 1 minute to the Senator from Idaho, [Mr. Kempthorne].
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
  Mr. KEMPTHORNE. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the Bingaman 
amendment. During a hearing before the Armed Services Committee earlier 
this year, Defense Secretary Bill Perry testified that under the 
present budget, it will take over 50 years to renovate many of the 
family housing units currently in use by the armed services of America. 
We know we are falling behind in readiness. The military construction 
projects that will be canceled by the proposed amendments will help 
address these quality-of-life and readiness problems.
  We have just gone through three difficult rounds of the base closure 
process. The bases and the facilities that have survived are the 
keepers. We need to make investments to maintain the infrastructure 
that literally serves as the foundation of our armed services. 
Therefore, Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to vote to table the 
Bingaman amendment.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I yield 1 minute to the Senator from 
Kentucky.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I join my cochairman of the State National 
Guard Caucus, Senator Bond of Missouri, and our colleagues in opposing 
the Bingaman amendment. The military construction funds this amendment 
seeks to delete are not frivolous. They are necessary to the very 
backbone of our military.
  In my State alone, these funds go to build barracks to move our 
soldiers out of the World War II clapboard barracks. Why is it not a 
Pentagon priority to replace these barracks and provide a better 
quality of life for our soldiers?
  The citizens of this country are well aware of the military drawdown 
in this country, but they have not asked our young men and women to 
stop volunteering their services, whether it be full-time active duty 
or part time as a reservist or guardsman.
  Mr. President, I have watched them leave our communities, and many of 
them do not come back. I watched the best surgeons in my State and 
scrub nurses go to the Persian Gulf, and they did their job. Let us not 
turn our back on these people now. Vote to table this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico has 2 minutes.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, first, I ask unanimous consent that 
Senator Feingold be added as a cosponsor on the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. I yield 1 minute to my colleague from Arizona, who is 
also a cosponsor.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the fact is that these are nice projects. 
They are in the 5-year plan of the Pentagon, but they are not required 
at this time. There is simply additional spending that is not 
necessary. There are far higher priorities for us to be able to meet 
our national security challenges than adding money for military 
construction at this time. They are good projects. They are not needed 
at this time, and if we are going to spend $300 million additionally, I 
could find seven other areas that are much higher in priority than this 
one. If we are going to show some fiscal responsibility, we ought to 
start now.
  Mr. BINGAMAN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, we are spending extra time voting on 
this amendment since we just voted to rescind $16.4 billion in domestic 
spending. I think that was a courageous vote; it was a hard choice.
  What this amendment that we are now considering does is it says that 
we will allow $474 million of add-ons to military construction, but we 
will not allow an additional $300 million above that. This is not a 
question of funding the National Guard. There is plenty of money in 
this bill to fund the National Guard needs. This is not a question of 
family housing. There is plenty of money in this bill to fund the 
family housing needs of the military.
  What we are saying is deficit reduction has to matter, even when you 
are 

[[Page S10469]]
talking about defense dollars, as well as when you are talking about 
domestic dollars.
  Mr. President, this is a reasonable amendment. It brings the bill 
into line with the President's request. It is fiscally responsible.
  I urge my colleagues to vote against tabling the amendment.


                       Vote On Amendment No. 1834

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to 
table amendment No. 1834 offered by the Senator from New Mexico, [Mr. 
Bingaman].
  The yeas and nays have been ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Ashcroft], 
and the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Faircloth] are necessarily 
absent.
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii [Mr. Inouye], the 
Senator from California [Mrs. Feinstein], and the Senator from Georgia 
[Mr. Nunn] are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 77, nays 18, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 322 Leg.]

                                YEAS--77

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bond
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Coats
     Cochran
     Cohen
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Exon
     Ford
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hatfield
     Heflin
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kempthorne
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Packwood
     Pell
     Pressler
     Pryor
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Shelby
     Simpson
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner

                                NAYS--18

     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Bradley
     Brown
     Feingold
     Glenn
     Graham
     Grams
     Kerrey
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Levin
     McCain
     Moseley-Braun
     Moynihan
     Roth
     Simon
     Wellstone

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Ashcroft
     Faircloth
     Feinstein
     Inouye
     Nunn
  So the motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 1834) was agreed 
to.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I move to table the motion.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, as we consider the fiscal year 1996 Milcon 
appropriations bill, I wish to commend Senator Burns, the chairman of 
the Military Construction Appropriations Subcommittee, and Senator 
Reid, the subcommittee's ranking member, for their hard work in 
preparing this bill for floor action. It is evidence of the able 
leadership of Chairman Burns and Chairman Hatfield that we can consider 
this bill so quickly. I would also like to commend Jim Morhard and 
Warren Johnson of the subcommittee staff for their efforts in crafting 
a comprehensive and responsible bill.
  Mr. President, this is an important bill. It provides the Armed 
Forces with funds to construct facilities which are necessary in 
preparing them to protect the United States and our interests around 
the world. It also fully funds the requested amounts for BRAC II, BRAC 
III, and BRAC IV. In addition, the bill provides funds for the 
renovation and construction of barracks and family housing. The 
military's most important assets are the men and women who sacrifice 
every day to ensure the security of this great Nation. It is the least 
we can do to provide them and their families with quality housing.
  I am pleased that the bill also provides funding for the Department 
of Defense's initiative to develop private sector solutions to the 
current military housing shortfalls. It is a viable option as we 
consider how to better meet the needs of our service men and women. I 
encourage the Department to work with Congress and with the Military 
Appropriations Subcommittee so that this program might move forward 
expeditiously.
  Mr. President, I would also like to commend Chairman Burns and 
Chairman Hatfield for their efforts to meet the construction needs of 
the Reserve components. Last year, during consideration of the fiscal 
year 1995 military construction bill, I expressed my disappointment 
with the President's budget and its lack of funding for Guard and 
Reserve construction projects. At that time, I expressed my hope that 
this year's budget would more adequately address the needs of the 
Reserve component. The Department of Defense did include some Guard and 
Reserve projects in the fiscal year 1996 budget. Chairman Burns went 
further to ensure that additional Guard and Reserve projects were 
funded. In my view, that is a crucial step. As the Active Force 
continues to draw down, the Guard and Reserves will be asked to take on 
more day-to-day missions. In my view, it is our responsibility to 
ensure that they have the necessary facilities to meet these growing 
demands.
  I am aware that the committee has added projects that were not 
included in the President's request. The committee judged each of these 
projects by strict criteria in an effort to ensure that military 
construction dollars are used wisely. The projects that have been added 
directly impact the readiness and quality of life for our Armed Forces.
  In closing, Mr. President, I again commend my colleagues for their 
hard work on this bill. I thank them for their assistance in moving 
this bill forward and urge my colleagues to support it.
air force reserve and michigan air national guard military construction 
                                projects

  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, Senator Levin and I would like to engage 
the distinguished chairman and ranking member of the Senate 
Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction in a brief 
discussion regarding the impact of H.R. 1817 on this year and future 
year's military construction projects. The committee report 
accompanying H.R. 1817 recommends $6.4 million for airfield pavement 
additions at the Phelps-Collins Air National Guard Base in Alpena, MI. 
The requirement justification report for this project states this 
program will increase sortie generation and allow the military to 
conduct much more realistic training operations.
  I also understand an air combat maneuvering instrumentation range for 
operations at the Alpena Combat Readiness Training Center was 
authorized by the 1995 Defense Authorization Act and is contained in 
the Air National Guard future year defense plan for initial 
installation starting 1997. If the Air National Guard were to support 
this future year plan and request an appropriation for the equipment 
housing construction, would you view this project as a reasonable step 
towards providing the needed improvements in operational effectiveness 
at the Phelps-Collins Air National Guard Base and the Alpena Combat 
Readiness Training Center?
  Mr. BURNS. Yes I do. The committee allowance for the Phelps-Collins 
Airfield pavements additions project was done in order to reduce the 
potential for an aircraft mishap, increase sortie generation, improve 
the utilization of the base and the training center, and allow for the 
future expansion of this facility for full operational training, 
including an air combat maneuvering instrumentation range expansion.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I would like to follow up on my colleague's 
question in asking the ranking member whether he agrees that a modern 
Combat Readiness Training Center is warranted given the training 
deployments to Europe have been reduced with the closure of many 
overseas bases, and the fact that the Alpena facility is the only Air 
National Guard Combat Readiness Training Center that does not have an 
air combat maneuvering instrumentation system? I would think that the 
unencumbered supersonic training airspace available for this range 
would make it a uniquely valuable training resource.
  Mr. REID. I am aware that both of my colleagues from Michigan and 
from elsewhere in the Great Lakes region are strongly supportive of 
expanded 

[[Page S10470]]
training opportunities for their Air National Guard and Air Force 
Reserve units. The Air National Guard made a strong case for expanding 
the operations at Alpena given the projected force levels and expected 
military construction funding priorities. Because of that we funded the 
project the subcommittee chairman referred to. I believe the 
subcommittee would entertain such a budget submission by the Air 
National Guard and would follow a logical program for expanding 
operations at Alpena.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the chairman and ranking member of the 
subcommittee for their support and I believe I speak for both myself 
and my colleague from Michigan when we say we look forward to working 
with them on this issue during the 1997
 budget cycle. Mr. President, I wish to continue this discussion with 
the chairman on the issue of the fuel systems maintenance dock at the 
Selfridge Air National Guard Base in Mount Clemens, MI. The Air Force 
Reserve unit here has converted from an C-130 to a KC-135 mission, but 
is forced to tow its aircraft over 2 miles to perform critical fuel 
cell and corrosion control work. A project to provide a facility 
adequate to handle these repairs much nearer to the aircraft flight 
line will preclude major repair scheduling conflicts, sustain aircraft 
material condition, and improve flight safety. Would the submission by 
the Air Force Reserve for this project in the 1997 budget be reviewed 
favorably?

  Mr. BURNS. I believe if current budget projections hold forth, such a 
project would be strongly supported. Considering this project is 
already in the 1997 future year defense plan, I invite the Air Force 
Reserve to submit this project for congressional review.
  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, I thank the chairman and ranking member 
for their time today and this opportunity to discuss these vital 
military construction projects. I join my fellow Senator from Michigan 
in calling upon the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve to submit 
these two vital projects for congressional approval. These two projects 
represent initiatives vital to the operating efficiency of the few 
remaining Michigan Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve units. 
Furthermore, it which will significantly improve the operating 
capabilities of not only these units, but any other aviation unit that 
wishes to utilize this unique facility. I therefore join with my 
colleague from Michigan in calling upon the Air National Guard and the 
Air Force Reserve to submit these two projects, in accordance with 
their future year defense plans, as part of their 1997 budget 
submission.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, the Senate is now considering H.R. 1817, 
the fiscal year 1996 military construction appropriations bill.
  The bill provides a total of $11.2 billion in budget authority and 
$3.1 billion in new outlays for the military construction and family 
housing programs of the Department of Defense for fiscal year 1996.
  When outlays from prior-year budget authority and other completed 
actions are taken into account, the bill totals $11.2 billion in budget 
authority and $9.6 billion in outlays for fiscal year 1996.
  Mr. President, the bill provides for readiness and quality of life 
programs for our servicemen and women. The bill falls within the 
subcommittees 602(B) allocation.
  I want to convey my thanks to the committee for the support given to 
several priority projects in New Mexico.
  I commend the distinguished subcommittee chairman, the senator from 
Montana, for bringing this bill to the floor within the subcommittee's 
section 602(B) allocation.
  I urge the passage of this bill.
  Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, I wish to point out to the chairman of the 
subcommittee that the recent approval of the 1995 base closure list by 
the President has changed the circumstances surrounding one of the 
projects in this legislation. The bill is based on recommendations the 
subcommittee received from the Defense Department, and as a result this 
bill has insufficient funding to complete the construction of the 
distribution facility at Red River Army Depot. Because the Defense 
Logistics Agency suspended work on the distribution facility pending a 
decision by the Base Closure Commission and just recently resumed work 
on the project, an adjustment to the funding level will be required. 
Less than 1 week ago, the Defense Department formally asked the 
building contractor for an estimate of any costs resulting from the 
temporary delay in construction, and an answer is expected within 1 
month. Because we do not yet know how the total cost of the 
distribution facility will change, I ask the chairman and ranking 
member to work with me and the Defense Department in conference to be 
sure this vital Red River Army Depot project has sufficient funds to 
ensure its completion.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am aware of the situation at Red River 
Army Depot, and I want to assure my colleague that our subcommittee has 
no intent to impede the progress of this project. We will be happy to 
work with the distinguished Senator from Texas to ensure this project 
is fully funded so that it may be completed without further 
interruption or delay.
  Mr. CHAFEE. I want to thank the chairman and ranking member of the 
Military Construction Subcommittee, Senators Burns and Reid, for their 
hard work in producing this appropriations bill for fiscal year 1996.
  Included in the bill is $18 million for phase 2 of the Strategic 
Maritime Research Center at the Naval War College in Newport, RI. The 
Naval War College boasts a long and proud tradition of excellence in 
military education and state-of-the-art wargaming.
  Unfortunately, though, the War College's library is badly undersized, 
and its wargaming facility is unsuited to today's technological 
demands. The Strategic Maritime Research Center will jointly house the 
college's wargaming department and library in one modern facility.
  This facility will help continue to provide our military with the 
best-educated, best-prepared officers who will be able to meet the 
increasingly complex national security challenges our Nation faces. It 
will also help us continue an important diplomatic mission, as the 
Naval War College very often hosts military officers from abroad who 
participate in a number of wargaming and educational endeavors.
  Again, I would like to thank Senators Burns and Reid in bringing this 
bill to the floor.
  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, as a member of the Appropriations Committee 
and the Military Construction Subcommittee, I voted to have the fiscal 
year 1996 military construction appropriations bill brought to the 
Senate floor.
  The military construction bill is $2.4 billion more than what we 
spent last year on military construction and $461 million more than the 
administration's requested level of spending for military construction. 
If we truly intend to reduce the budget deficit, we cannot exempt the 
military construction account from cuts. Especially given that the 
Bingaman amendment to eliminate $300 million in add-ons failed, I will 
be voting against final passage of the fiscal year 1996 military 
construction appropriations bill.
  Mr. BRADLEY. Mr. President, it is with regret that I must cast my 
vote against the fiscal year 1996 military construction appropriation 
bill. We simply cannot justify the level of spending contained in this 
legislation.
  This bill funds many worthy projects. For example, I strongly support 
efforts to improve the quality of life for our service men and women. I 
support the infrastructure construction that is absolutely necessary to 
keep our military in fighting shape. I have long supported the military 
value of McGuire AFB in my own State of New Jersey. Indeed, I worked 
hard and successfully to keep McGuire open and performing its vital 
military missions. I will support the spending that McGuire needs to 
prosper.
  But all of these worthy projects are embedded in a bill larded with 
pork. It is $461 million higher than the President's budget request, 
and over $2.4 billion above last year's funding total. It contains 
hundreds of millions of dollars in unauthorized spending. At a time of 
budget stringency, when we are asking all Americans to make sacrifices, 
I simply cannot support a 28-percent increase in spending for military 
construction.
                           Amendment No. 1835

  Mr. SIMON. I have an amendment offered by Senator Moseley-Braun and 

[[Page S10471]]
  myself that I send to the desk for immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Simon] for himself and Ms. 
     Moseley-Braun proposes an amendment numbered 1835.

  Mr. SIMON. I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the 
amendment be dispensed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the appropriate place, insert the following.

     Sec.  . Fort Sheridan.

       (a) In order to ensure the continued protection and 
     enhancement of the open spaces of Fort Sheridan, the 
     Secretary of the Army shall convey to the Lake County Forest 
     Preserve District, Illinois, (in this section referred to as 
     ``the District''), all right, title, and interest of the 
     United States to a parcel of surplus real property at Fort 
     Sheridan consisting of approximately 290 acres located north 
     of the southerly boundary line of the historic district at 
     the post, including improvements thereon.
       (b) As consideration for the conveyance by the Secretary of 
     the Army of the parcel of real property under subsection (a), 
     the District shall provide maintenance and care to the 
     remaining Fort Sheridan cemetery, pursuant to an agreement to 
     be entered into between the District and the Secretary. The 
     Secretary of the Army shall be responsible to continue 
     interments at the cemetery for the remainder of its use.
       (c) The Secretary of the Army is also authorized to convey 
     the remaining surplus property at Fort Sheridan to the 
     negotiating agent, or its successor, for an amount no less 
     than fair market value (as determined by the Secretary of the 
     Army) of the property to be conveyed.
       (d) Description of Property.--The exact acreage and legal 
     description of the real property (including improvements 
     thereon) to be conveyed under subsections (a) and (c) shall 
     be determined by surveys satisfactory to the Secretary. The 
     cost of such surveys shall be borne by the Lake County Forest 
     Preserve District, and the Fort Sheridan Joint Planning 
     Committee, respectively.
       (e) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require such additional terms and conditions in connection 
     with the conveyance under this section as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate to protect the interest of the United 
     States, except for consideration previously provided for in 
     paragraph (c).

  Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, this is an amendment I discussed with 
Senator Burns. It solves a problem that has been festering in regard to 
an abandoned military base.
  Everyone--Congressman Porter from the House side--everyone has agreed 
to it. I understand there may be some problems. I yield to Senator 
Burns.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Illinois. We do 
have some problems on this side with it. We will work with the Senator 
and the Illinois delegation on this as we move through conference.
  I am reluctant to accept the amendment at this present time.


                      Amendment No. 1835 Withdrawn

  Mr. SIMON. With that assurance, I will withdraw my amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  So the amendment (No. 1835) was withdrawn.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I know of no further amendments to this 
piece of legislation. I believe that we are ready to move to third 
reading.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the engrossment of the 
committee amendments and third reading of the bill.
  The amendments were ordered to be engrossed, and the bill to be read 
a third time.
  The bill was read a third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the 
question is, Shall the bill pass?
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. I announce that the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Ashcroft], 
the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Faircloth], and the Senator from 
Washington [Mr. Gorton] are necessarily absent.
  I further announce that, if present and voting, the Senator from 
Washington [Mr. Gorton] would vote ``yea.''
  Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii [Mr. Inouye], the 
Senator from Georgia [Mr. Nunn], and the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. 
Pryor] are necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Grams). Are there any other Senators in 
the Chamber who desire to vote?
  The result was announced, yeas 84, nays 10, as follows:
                      [Rollcall Vote No. 323 Leg.]

                                YEAS--84

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brown
     Bryan
     Bumpers
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee
     Coats
     Cochran
     Cohen
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     D'Amato
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Dole
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Exon
     Feinstein
     Ford
     Frist
     Glenn
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hatfield
     Heflin
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Johnston
     Kassebaum
     Kempthorne
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Packwood
     Pell
     Pressler
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Shelby
     Simon
     Simpson
     Smith
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Warner

                                NAYS--10

     Baucus
     Bingaman
     Bradley
     Feingold
     Kerrey
     Kohl
     Kyl
     McCain
     Moseley-Braun
     Wellstone

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Ashcroft
     Faircloth
     Gorton
     Inouye
     Nunn
     Pryor
  So, the bill (H.R. 1817), as amended, was passed.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I move that the Senate insist on its 
amendments to the bill, H.R. 1817, and request a conference with the 
House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Mr. BURNS. That concludes action on this bill, Mr. President. I wish 
to thank my colleague and ranking member on this committee. I thank our 
staffs, those who have worked so hard on this bill. I appreciate their 
help at every turn.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. HATFIELD addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, I wish to take just a couple minutes to 
indicate my congratulations and my commendation to the Subcommittee on 
Military Construction. I would like to remind the Senate that this is 
the first action of the Appropriations Committee in the Chamber under 
the new majority rule. We came to the floor with very great efficiency 
considering that we were required to wait until the conference 
committee had completed work on the Budget Committee budget resolution.
  We were only able to issue our 602(b) allocations at the first of the 
week. We have now completed two appropriations bills on the floor. We 
will report four more out next week.
  I wish to also acknowledge the efficiency and smooth operation that 
has thus far characterized these two bills. In great part, it is 
because of the professional staff. I raise that first instead of the 
normal way of talking about the Members. I wish to make that a point 
because our staff has been so focused on professionalism on our 
committee and a nonpartisan approach. You can note very little 
disturbance or confusion in the readjustment of moving from the 
majority to the minority or the minority to the majority; our staffs 
have that continuity and expertise.
  I refer specifically to Jim Morhard on our side and Dick D'Amato on 
the minority side. Not only are they experts and have the continuity of 
service, but they really provide us with stability and efficiency 
within this committee.
  Needless to say, the leadership of the committee is in the hands of 
very capable people, Senator Burns of Montana and Senator Reid of 
Nevada. Both of them are veterans on that committee and both of them 
have provided leadership as they have been on that committee, Senator 
Reid first as a part of the majority and now the minority, Senator 
Burns in the minority and now the majority. If you see these two 
gentlemen work in their committee, you 

[[Page S10472]]
would have no way to detect any difference of performance, any less 
dedication or any less efficiency.
  So I wish to commend the leaders for providing that kind of virus 
that infects our staff and creates a harmonious committee. Senator 
Byrd, the ranking member of our committee, certainly has become again a 
part of that overall philosophy and that kind of performance of our 
committee, and I wish to take this time to thank Senator Byrd as well, 
the ranking member of the full committee.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Chair be 
authorized to appoint conferees on the part of the Senate.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Mississippi.

                          ____________________