[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 92 (Thursday, June 20, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6606-S6607]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.


                         Privilege Of The Floor

  Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Johnston, I request 
that a member of his staff, Comdr. Paul Gonzales, a congressional 
fellow, be allowed floor privileges for the duration of debate on the 
Defense authorization bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I wish to express my support for S. 1745, 
the Defense authorization bill for fiscal year 1997. The Armed Services 
Committee has done an outstanding job by bringing to the full Senate a 
bill that responsibly addresses this country's national security needs.
  Fortunately, the end of the cold war has reduced the most immediate 
threat of nuclear war. And while it is natural to feel relief that the 
struggle against Soviet expansionism has been won, it would be naive 
and short-sighted to conclude that real threats to our Nation's 
security no longer exist. The end of the cold war has uncapped a host 
of long-simmering regional conflicts around the globe. Combined with 
the proliferation of nuclear and missile technology as well as chemical 
and biological weapons, these limited conflicts carry the potential for 
far wider consequences. We must recognize that the world is still a 
dangerous place and that maintaining an adequate level of military 
preparedness must continue to be a national priority.
  The fact is that funding for national defense has been on a dangerous 
downward track for over a decade. Funding for national defense has 
fallen by 41 percent in real terms since 1985. The fiscal year 1997 
defense budget will be at its lowest level since the Korean war buildup 
began in 1950.
  Even more alarming is the fact that military procurement has dropped 
by 71 percent over the last 10 years. The practical result is that our 
service men and women are forced to use aging equipment which will 
increasingly impair military readiness. The defense budget submitted by 
President Clinton for fiscal year 1997 would unwisely continue this 
neglect of our military hardware and would--not for the first time, I 
might add--postpone spending for critical weapons modernization 
programs into the future.
  The Armed Services Committee deserves credit for crafting a 
responsible bill that addresses the need for modernization and provides 
the necessary resources. The $12.9 billion added by the committee to 
the administration's defense funding request is mainly for additional 
procurement items including one DDG-51 destroyer, four F-16 fighter 
planes, six F/A-18's, and one C-17 cargo transport. Nearly 30 percent 
of the $12.9 billion added by the committee is for accelerated research 
and development for programs such as missile defense, the new attack 
submarine, and a new arsenal ship armed with cruise missiles. These 
add-ons reflect the concerns and priorities of the military services 
themselves.
  While upgrading and modernizing military hardware deserves a high 
priority, so too does ensuring that our Armed Forces personnel receive 
the benefits they deserve. The best military equipment in the world is 
of little value without the highly trained and hard-working service men 
and women on whom our national defense depends. I am therefore pleased 
that the fiscal year 1997 Defense authorization bill authorizes a 3-
percent military pay raise and a 4-percent increase in the basic 
allowance for quarters.
  Overall, the committee proposes a reasonable level of defense 
spending in the coming fiscal year, one which I believe acknowledges 
that defense resources are not unlimited. The committee's 
recommendation of $267.3 billion in defense spending for fiscal year 
1997 is only $2.1 billion above the fiscal year 1996 level in nominal 
terms. Adjusted for inflation, the committee's recommended defense 
authorization level is actually $5.6 billion below the current level of 
defense spending in real terms.

  Mr. President, the people of Maine support a strong national defense 
and they have always been ready to do their part. Maine's Bath Iron 
Works is one of two private U.S. shipyards that build the Arleigh Burke 
class destroyer for the Navy. I am pleased that the fiscal year 1997 
Defense authorization bill authorizes $3.4 billion for four destroyers 
in fiscal year 1997 plus $750 million in advance procurement for one 
additional ship in fiscal year 1998. The advanced procurement for a 
fiscal year 1998 destroyer is crucial to implementing the Navy's 
acquisition plan of building three ships per year in each of the 4 
years from fiscal year 1998 through fiscal year 2001. As a result of 
this orderly and efficient procurement

[[Page S6607]]

plan, the price per ship will drop significantly and the Navy will 
realize cost savings of $1 billion over the 4-year period.
  The bill also adds $45.3 million to continue the Navy's current 
strength of 13 active and 9 reserve squadrons of P-3 patrol aircraft. 
Four active and three reserve P-3 squadrons are based at Maine's 
Brunswick Naval Air Station, the only active military airfield in New 
England. These squadrons plays an important role in antisubmarine 
warfare in the North Atlantic sealanes and in the Navy's littoral 
warfare mission in Europe and the Mediterranean region. One of the 
active P-3 squadrons based at Brunswick Naval Air Station in Maine is 
targeted for decommissioning for budgetary reasons, not because there 
has been any change in the Navy's mission. The funds authorized in this 
bill will ensure that Brunswick NAS will maintain its current level of 
four active P-3 squadrons.
  Mr. President, S. 1745 embodies a well-balanced approach to our 
national defense in fiscal year 1997. It preserves our readiness to 
meet military emergencies, it emphasizes modernization and new weapons 
procurement, it continues research and development of promising new 
technologies, and it treats our military personnel fairly. Again, I 
congratulate the Armed Services Committee on their work, and I urge 
that the bill be adopted.
  Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________