[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 106 (Thursday, July 18, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8065-S8070]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kyl). Under the previous order, the Senate
will now resume consideration of S. 1894, which the clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (S. 1894) making appropriations for the Department
of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997, and
for other purposes.
The Senate resumed consideration of the bill.
Pending:
Harkin/Simon amendment No. 4492, relating to payments by
the Department of Defense of restructuring costs associated
with business combinations.
Levin amendment No. 4893, to strike funding for new
production of F-16 aircraft in excess of six, and transfer
the funding to increase funding for anti-terrorism support.
Amendment No. 4492
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will now proceed to rollcall votes
with respect to amendments offered on Wednesday, July 17, with 2
minutes for explanation equally divided prior to each vote. The first
amendment is No. 4492, the motion to table. The yeas and nays have been
ordered.
Who yields time?
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I understand we have a minute on each side
to explain the amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, all I can say is:
Remember the $600 toilet seat and the $500 hammers that had
taxpayers up in arms during the mid-1980's. Today's
subsidized mergers are going to make them look like bargains.
That is not my quote. That is a quote of Lawrence Korb, President
Reagan's Under Secretary of Defense.
In 1993, DOD changed its policy to allow payments to defense
contractors for the costs of mergers and acquisitions. The GAO and
inspector general have both recently issued reports that seriously
question DOD's purported savings.
This amendment simply puts a 1-year hold on merger costs while the
GAO, the IG, and OMB put together a mechanism to make sure that future
payments actually result in savings. It does not affect Government
assistance to laid-off workers. It does not prohibit payment of any
merger costs which DOD is contractually obligated to pay in the fiscal
year 1997.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this amendment would prevent severance
[[Page S8066]]
pay for employees under a restructuring plan. It would eliminate early
retirement incentive payments for employees, employee retraining costs,
relocation expenses for retrained and retained employees, placement
services for employees, and continued medical-dental-life insurance
coverage for terminated employees. In the past 3 years, the Department
of Defense has reimbursed contractors $300 million in restructuring
costs and will save $1.4 billion, a 450-percent return on the
investment.
Mr. President, it is my understanding this will be a 20-minute vote,
regular vote, and the following votes will be 10 minutes. Is that
correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska is correct.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the yeas and nays have been ordered?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The
question is on agreeing to the motion to table. The clerk will call the
roll.
The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Bumpers] and
the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Dodd] are necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
who desire to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 71, nays 27, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 198 Leg.]
YEAS--71
Abraham
Ashcroft
Bennett
Biden
Bingaman
Bond
Bradley
Breaux
Bryan
Burns
Campbell
Chafee
Coats
Cochran
Cohen
Conrad
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
DeWine
Domenici
Exon
Faircloth
Ford
Frahm
Frist
Gorton
Graham
Gramm
Grams
Gregg
Hatch
Heflin
Helms
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnston
Kassebaum
Kempthorne
Kerrey
Kyl
Lautenberg
Levin
Lieberman
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Murkowski
Nickles
Nunn
Pell
Pressler
Robb
Rockefeller
Roth
Santorum
Sarbanes
Shelby
Simpson
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Thomas
Thurmond
Warner
NAYS--27
Akaka
Baucus
Boxer
Brown
Byrd
Daschle
Dorgan
Feingold
Feinstein
Glenn
Grassley
Harkin
Hatfield
Hollings
Kennedy
Kerry
Kohl
Leahy
Moseley-Braun
Moynihan
Murray
Pryor
Reid
Simon
Thompson
Wellstone
Wyden
NOT VOTING--2
Bumpers
Dodd
The motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 4492) was agreed
to.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. GRAMM. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Does the Senator from Michigan wish to proceed?
Mr. LEVIN addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.
Amendment No. 4893
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, this amendment would transfer money that
the Air Force did not ask for for two F-16's and transfer it into an
antiterrorist emergency account which we created yesterday which the
Department of Defense very much needs and wants.
The original budget request asked us for four F-16's. Then when we
asked the Air Force, if they had additional funds, what would they
spend those funds on? They said, well, if they had about $2 billion
extra, they would add two more F-16's, for a total of six. In this
appropriations bill, there are eight, four more F-16's than the Air
Force requested in their original budget request and two more even than
they asked for on their wish list.
So what this amendment would do is transfer that $48 million not
requested by the Air Force for F-16's and move it into an antiterrorism
emergency fund.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, after the event of last night, this is a
very serious matter. I want to start off by assuring the Senate that we
have money for counterterrorism in the Commerce bill, in the Treasury-
Post Office bill, in the Transportation bill. I want to tell you as
chairman of this committee, there are significant--very significant--
sums in the classified portions of this bill for counterterrorism. So
the counterterrorism issue should be set aside.
The question is, are the two extra F-16's--the F-4 Wild Weasels are
being retired. The F-16's can take their place in that role. The F-
16's--it is true what the Senator said, they first asked for two. When
we looked at it, and the authorization bill authorized four, we went
into it in depth. I personally talked to General Fogleman, Chief of the
Air Force, about the need. He said they do in fact need this. As a
matter of fact, General Ralston who is now the Vice Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs, has said that we are short 120 airplanes if the F-16's
are to carry out the two contingency roles.
I believe we need these extra two F-16's. That is the issue, not
counterterrorism. I moved to table this amendment. This will be a
rollcall vote.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. FRIST). The question occurs on agreeing to
the motion to lay on the table the Levin amendment No. 4893. The yeas
and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Bumpers] is
necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 58, nays 41, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 199 Leg.]
YEAS--58
Akaka
Ashcroft
Bennett
Biden
Bond
Breaux
Brown
Burns
Campbell
Chafee
Coats
Cochran
Cohen
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
DeWine
Dodd
Domenici
Faircloth
Frahm
Frist
Gorton
Gramm
Grams
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Heflin
Helms
Hollings
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Johnston
Kassebaum
Kempthorne
Kyl
Lieberman
Lott
Mack
McConnell
Moynihan
Murkowski
Nickles
Pressler
Roth
Santorum
Shelby
Simpson
Smith
Snowe
Specter
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Warner
NAYS--41
Abraham
Baucus
Bingaman
Boxer
Bradley
Bryan
Byrd
Conrad
Daschle
Dorgan
Exon
Feingold
Feinstein
Ford
Glenn
Graham
Harkin
Hatfield
Jeffords
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Leahy
Levin
Lugar
McCain
Mikulski
Moseley-Braun
Murray
Nunn
Pell
Pryor
Reid
Robb
Rockefeller
Sarbanes
Simon
Wellstone
Wyden
NOT VOTING--1
Bumpers
The motion to lay on the table the amendment (No. 4893) was agreed
to.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
b-52 modifications amendment
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, yesterday during consideration of the
defense appropriations bill, the Senate adopted my amendment allocating
an additional $11,500,000 in Air Force aircraft procurement funds for
modifications to B-52 bombers. I want to explain the source for these
funds.
In reporting out its version of the fiscal year 1997 Defense
Appropriations Act, the committee added operations and maintenance
funds to maintain the current force structure for B-52 bomber attrition
reserve aircraft.
My amendment allocated funds from within the aircraft procurement
account to modify these aircraft. These modifications are required to
maintain the combat effectiveness of these aircraft should they be
called upon to fly combat missions.
The funds for the bomber modifications are to be offset by a decrease
of funds allocated for the F-15 fighter data link modifications in the
same appropriations account.
The fighter data link funds are excess to program requirements due to
a delay in a projected contract award. The fighter data link program
remains fully funded for fiscal year 1997.
[[Page S8067]]
HARRISBURG INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise to alert my colleagues to an
environmental restoration center at the Harrisburg International
Airport, formerly Olmsted Air Force Base, located in Pennsylvania. My
colleague, Congressman George Gekas, has shown great leadership on the
issue of environmental restoration.
In 1984, this former Air Force base was designated an Environmental
Protection Agency Superfund site. For the last 13 years, an intense
effort under the guidance of the EPA, has been undertaken at the local,
State, and Federal level to determine the nature of the origins,
locations, and the proper remediation of the waste left by the U.S. Air
Force. A database established at the site will enable all future site
users to have an understanding of the remediation efforts undertaken.
By the time all the current participants have left the site, the only
remaining reliable reference source will be this database.
Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Senator from Pennsylvania for his efforts in
keeping the committee informed of his actions on this matter. I will
work with my colleagues during conference to examine this matter more
closely.
Sacrifices for Defense
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I want to congratulate my colleagues on the
Appropriations Committee, Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye, on their
efforts to complete action on the Fiscal Year 1997 Defense
Appropriations bill. Their management of this complex bill is masterful
and executed with their customary efficiency. The bill is within the
602(b) allocations and it is consistent with the amount recommended by
the budget resolution.
This bill addresses legitimate defense needs and provides support for
the men and women in our military. It contains a 3-percent raise in pay
for military personnel and a 4-percent raise in the basic allowance for
quarters, both effective January 1, 1997.
It fully funds the initiative included in the fiscal year 1997
Defense authorization bill to support the operations of, and enhanced
modifications for, the SR-71 reconnaissance aircraft. The rationale for
including this system in the fiscal year 1997 budget is that it is an
invulnerable proven system, available day or night, in all-weather,
regardless of cloud cover. It is available for our commanders in the
theater, on an on-call basis, to provide near-real-time imagery of the
battlefield or area of interest to those Commanders. As such, it is now
available as America's premier tactical reconnaissance airborne system.
Furthermore, it is inexpensive, compared to the costs incurred for the
development of our unmanned aerial vehicles now being funded. I am a
strong supporter of developing UAV's as rapidly as prudent development
schedules allow, but it will still be years before a proven system can
be fielded. When that occurs, I would support retiring the Blackbird
aircraft, but it would be foolish to throw away this unique system
before it is fully replaced. Therefore, I congratulate the managers for
their support of continuing the SR-71 in service. The funding includes
$30 million for 1 year of operations, and $9 million in modification
costs which enhance the real-time downlink from the aircraft directly
to our commanders on the ground. I hope and certainly expect that our
commanders in the field, in Korea, in Bosnia, and in other regions of
interest will call upon the system frequently to provide the unique
data for them that is now available.
My concern regarding this bill is not with the many worthy provisions
contained with it. I do not want a weak military, unable to defend our
legitimate and vital national security interests. But neither do I want
a weak nation, sapped of its vitality, worn down and shabby because
legitimate domestic needs have been neglected in favor of greater
spending on defense. I do not want to see in America a street person,
dirty, dressed in rags, but carrying a shiny new pistol. I want to see
in America a hard-working, educated, prosperous homeowner, with a well-
kept yard where bright-eyed and well-fed children play.
I know that this bill is within its allocation and consistent with
the budget resolution guidelines, but I believe that the budget
resolution guidelines are out of balance with American priorities,
skewed toward military spending at the expense of education,
infrastructure, and other domestic necessities. I would rather rebuild
bridges over mighty rivers than build bridges on unneeded ships. I
would rather spend funds on domestic airline safety measures than on
unrequested fighter aircraft. I would rather support more police on our
city streets stopping bullets than futuristic missile-stopping missiles
aimed at a flimsy threat.
This bill is $10.2 billion over the administration's request for
defense. Some have argued that defense spending has declined in real
terms over the last 10 years, and that buying weapons now rather than
later in the decade saves money. But the funding for domestic programs
has also declined, and continues to decline. If we are to make good on
our promises to reduce the deficit and to bring spending in line with
reality, every program, domestic and defense alike, must share in the
sacrifice. Right now, domestic programs are being cut more deeply in
order to support defense spending that is above the administration's
request. For instance, the Department of Agriculture, as part of its
Water 2000 initiative to provide safe, affordable drinking water to
every home in the United States by the turn of the century, estimates
that $9.8 billion is needed to accomplish that goal. This $9.8 billion
is needed to provide nearly 3 million U.S. households--176,114 of them
in my own State of West Virginia--with clean drinking water. For less
than the amount added to the Department of Defense for 1 year, we could
provide clean, safe, drinking water to 8 million suffering Americans.
The budget resolution, which passed without my support, deliberately
chose to sacrifice safe drinking water, education, highways, medical
research, police, children's programs, and other peaceful domestic
programs, in order to spend more on weapons and war. I regret the
choice and the path that we have taken. This defense appropriations
bill is the result of that decision, and reflects the largess bestowed
upon the Defense Department at the expense of the Departments of
Education, Labor, Agriculture, Environment, Health and Human Services,
Interior, and others. It reflects the decisions taken in the defense
authorization bill, which I voted against. Therefore, I must
regretfully vote against this bill.
Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to S. 1894, the
Department of Defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 1997. This
bill suffers from the same fundamental defect as S. 1745, the national
defense authorization bill, a bill I also opposed.
The appropriations bill adds $10.2 billion to the President's budget
request. The $10.2 billion is spent partially funding programs not
requested by the administration for which we will pay billions in the
outyears. For example, the bill adds $856 million for ballistic missile
defense research, of which $300 million is added to the national
missile defense account. The bill also adds $525 million in unrequested
funds for the DDG-51, $701 million in unrequested funds for the new
attack submarine, $300 million in unrequested funds for the V-22, $489
million in unrequested funds for the F/A-18 C/D, $760 million in
unrequested funds for National Guard and Reserve equipment, $204.5
million in unrequested funds for the C-130, $107.4 million in
unrequested funds for the F-16, and $210 million in unrequested funds
for the JSTARS program.
I have been a long time supporter of our efforts to ensure our
national security. However, Mr. President, this is the second time in
my Senate career that I have felt that I must oppose a Defense
Appropriations bill. I cannot support adding billions and billions of
dollars for programs that I am not convinced and the Pentagon does not
believe we need. It is true that I would support additional funding for
some of these programs but adding $10.2 billion in unrequested funding
is simply too much particularly when we are cutting funding for
critical programs elsewhere in the budget.
Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, as Chairman of the Appropriations
Committee, which is responsible for recommending sound, fiscally
responsible funding legislation to the Senate, I am deeply disturbed
about the spending levels contained in the fiscal year 1997 Department
of Defense appropriation bill.
[[Page S8068]]
This bill provides over $244 billion in budget authority for the
coming year. This reflects the recently passed national defense
authorization bill, which authorized nearly $11.3 billion more than the
administration requested for military spending for 1997. Included in
this legislation are billions of dollars worth of weapons the Pentagon
says it does not want and cannot afford to maintain in the future.
Meanwhile, vital domestic programs are being critically underfunded or
terminated. Fiscally, this is unwise; morally, it is unconscionable.
Despite all the debate about balancing the Federal budget, it is
apparent to me that we are not yet ready to break off our addiction to
excessive military spending. Of even more concern, is the continued
failure of this body to define national security in a truly
comprehensive and meaningful way. As I have stated many times before,
true national security consists of more than our arsenal of military
weapons, it also includes the health and welfare of our population.
Many years ago, the cabinet agency tasked with protecting the
national security of the United States was renamed from the Department
of War to the Department of Defense. This is an important distinction.
The definition of war is a state of open and hostile conflict between
states or nations. The definitions of defense and security carry with
them much broader connotations. Defense, or to defend, is to drive
danger or attack away from. While security means freedom from danger,
freedom from fear or anxiety, freedom from want or deprivation.
The mission of the Department of Defense is to protect the citizens
of the United States against threats to our security. Let us recognize
that these threats can take many forms, that they are internal as well
as external. The American people are under attack today. The attacks
are not as obvious as tanks rolling down Constitution Avenue or nuclear
submarines sailing up the Potomac River. The enemies aren't as easily
identifiable as a soldier pointing a gun, rather they are often subtle
and insidious. But, make no mistake, we do have formidable enemies
threatening our population. The enemies I speak of are disease and
disability.
In one year, more Americans will die from disease than from all the
military battles fought in the twentieth century. The number of
Americans killed in battle during World War I, World War II, Korea,
Vietnam, Panama, the Persian Gulf, and Somalia total 426,175. Certainly
a horrendous number and a tragic loss of life. In contrast, however,
approximately 500,000 people will die of cancer this year alone. Lung
cancer will kill 115,000 Americans, breast cancer 48,000, and prostate
cancer 41,000. I could go on and on. Heart disease will kill over
743,000 people, diabetes 53,000, and AIDS 37,000. The list of
casualties from disease is endless.
Make no mistake, there are thousands of tiny wars being fought in
America today. The battleground is the human body. The command centers
are clinical research laboratories and our weapons are test tubes and
microscopes. The Generals and Admirals leading the fight are the
medical researchers, physicians, and nurses all around the country
searching for new treatments and cures for disease.
But in this war, the front line troops are civilians as well as
soldiers. This battle is as ugly and painful as any military conflict.
Every day men, women, and children are being killed, maimed, and
ravaged by disease. No mortars are being launched, but limbs are being
amputated as a result of diabetes. No napalm has been dropped, but skin
is destroyed and bodies are disfigured by EB. No nerve gas has been
released, but brains and central nervous systems are disabled by
Alzheimers and Parkinsons diseases. It is time to declare war on
disease and disability. This is a battle which is worthy of the full
commitment and resources of our Federal Government, including the
Department of Defense. In fact, this is one war which I fully support.
The Department of Defense also has the responsibility to care for the
men and women who sacrifice to serve and protect our country. In
devoting a small portion of its considerable resources to medical
research and treatment, the Pentagon invests in the health and welfare
of our troops, as well as our military retirees, veterans, and family
members.
Several years ago, Congress appropriated funds for and directed the
Department of Defense to establish a peer-reviewed breast cancer
research program. This program has been a tremendous success and is a
vital component in the effort to find a cure for breast cancer. We have
continued funding for that program in 1997. In this bill, we have also
provided $100 million to establish a similar program for prostate
cancer research.
Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among
men. Yet, it has largely been overlooked by the general public and
research has been grievously underfunded by the Federal Government. In
1996, over 317,000 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer and
41,400 will die from it. Yet, with early detection, 9 out of 10 men can
be successfully treated for prostate cancer. Clearly, an investment in
research to improve detection and treatment of this disease will yield
a tremendous return.
Medical research is the key to winning the war against disease and
disability. I am pleased that the Senate has included some funding for
this critical effort in this legislation. In my view, however, the
amount of resources devoted to life-destroying technologies compared to
life-sustaining endeavors is still critically out of balance. The
health and well-being of our population is every bit as vital to the
Nation's security as our arsenal of military weapons. Until this
imbalance is recognized and corrected, the people of our Nation will
continue to be vulnerable to these destructive enemies and true
national security will not be achieved, no matter what our level of
military might.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the bill, S. 1894,
will be read for the third time.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read
the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate shall
proceed immediately to the House companion bill, H.R. 3610; that all
after the enacting clause be stricken and the text of S. 1894, as
amended, if amended, be inserted, and that H.R. 3610 be read for the
third time.
The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a
third time.
The bill was read for the third time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from
North Dakota is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I rise to discuss briefly today's vote on
the defense appropriations bill. I will be voting for this bill,
because it includes provisions that do support our national defense.
But I have some serious concerns about the overall level of spending,
as well as some other issues that I feel should be addressed in
negotiations during the conference.
On the positive side, this bill contains $150 million to fund the
Nunn-Lugar-Domenici amendment, which will strengthen the Nunn-Lugar
program. As I have said a number of times on this floor, Nunn-Lugar is
exactly the kind of investment in our security that we should be
making. It is far cheaper to destroy Russian missiles and bombers now
than to make new expenditures on a strategic deterrent or a missile
defense system against them later.
The strengthened Nunn-Lugar program will also help us prevent the
spread and use of weapons of mass destruction by terrorists. A
terrorist nuclear, chemical, or biological attack is perhaps our worst
security nightmare today.
Moreover, this defense bill contains $69 million for operating,
maintaining, and upgrading the Nation's full fleet of B-52 bombers. The
defense authorization bill rightly prohibited retirement of B-52's
before Russia ratifies the START II Treaty. I am hopeful that the House
will agree to the Senate's very modest investment. It will enable the
Air Force to abide by the authorization bill's directive to retain this
combat-proven force of long-range bombers.
On the other hand, given our bipartisan commitment to a balanced
budget, the overall funding level in this bill is not sustainable. It
exceeds the President's budget request by $10 billion. The $6 billion
downpayment for unrequested ships and aircraft alone in the bill will
create a funding crunch in
[[Page S8069]]
the years to come. To make expansive procurement decisions as if they
have no consequences for deficit reduction is not responsible.
Second, my colleagues will not be surprised to learn that I am
troubled by the bill's commitment of $808 million for national missile
defense, $300 million above the administration's request. This
additional funding is unwanted, unneeded, unfrugal, and unwise.
So I will reluctantly vote for this bill in order to move the
appropriations process forward. Yet I will closely examine the
conference report on the bill. I urge the conferees to make it more
fiscally responsible than the versions passed by either the Senate or
the House of Representatives.
Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will now be 5
minutes, equally divided, under the control of the two managers.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, in a few minutes, the Senate will vote on
the final passage of this bill. I wanted to use this opportunity to
advise my colleagues of my complete support of this measure. Yes, this
bill provides more funding than sought by the administration, but it is
at a level approved by the Congress in the budget resolution.
Furthermore, while it is $1.3 billion more than appropriated last year,
it still falls short in keeping up with inflation.
Mr. President, it is a very good bill. It funds the priorities of the
administration. It contains no controversial riders on social policy.
It redresses shortfalls identified by our military leaders. It provides
funding to cover overseas contingencies, and it meets the needs of our
field commanders, who have identified many items that they require to
improve the quality of the lives of our men and women in uniform.
Mr. President, it is a bipartisan bill. Yesterday, the Senate agreed
on approximately 60 amendments and, by my count, nearly half were
Democratic amendments. This should come as no surprise to my
colleagues. The Appropriations Committee, particularly this
subcommittee, has a long tradition of bipartisanship.
If I may, I would like to take my hat off to our chairman, who has
done an extraordinary job in preparing the recommendations in the bill
and managing it on the floor. Mr. President, there is no finer floor
manager in the Senate than my friend from Alaska, Ted Stevens.
I thank the staff on both sides of the aisle for their help in this
very difficult legislation. A particular note of thanks to the staff
director, Steve Cortese, for his leadership. On my staff, a special
thanks to Lt. Col. Tina Homeland, who kept her eye on health programs
for me this year. Also Emelie East of the subcommittee who provided
tireless energy in keeping track of all of the amendments and assuring
their adoption.
So, Mr. President, I urge all of my colleagues to support this
measure.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this bill does reflect the partnership
that the Senator from Hawaii and I have shared for many years. I can
assure all Senators that this approach is a bipartisan approach and
will be followed throughout the conference on this bill with the House.
I will make further statements after the vote, if I may. At this
time, I yield the remainder of my time and ask for final passage of
this bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the
question is, Shall the bill pass?
The yeas and nays have been ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk called the roll.
Mr. FORD. I announce that the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Bumpers] is
necessarily absent.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber
desiring to vote?
The result was announced--yeas 72, nays 27, as follows:
[Rollcall Vote No. 200 Leg.]
YEAS--72
Abraham
Akaka
Ashcroft
Bennett
Bingaman
Bond
Breaux
Bryan
Burns
Campbell
Chafee
Coats
Cochran
Cohen
Conrad
Coverdell
Craig
D'Amato
Daschle
DeWine
Dodd
Domenici
Dorgan
Faircloth
Feinstein
Ford
Frahm
Frist
Gorton
Gramm
Grams
Grassley
Gregg
Hatch
Heflin
Helms
Hollings
Hutchison
Inhofe
Inouye
Jeffords
Johnston
Kassebaum
Kempthorne
Kyl
Leahy
Lieberman
Lott
Lugar
Mack
McCain
McConnell
Mikulski
Murkowski
Murray
Nickles
Nunn
Pell
Pressler
Reid
Robb
Roth
Santorum
Shelby
Simpson
Smith
Snowe
Stevens
Thomas
Thompson
Thurmond
Warner
NAYS--27
Baucus
Biden
Boxer
Bradley
Brown
Byrd
Exon
Feingold
Glenn
Graham
Harkin
Hatfield
Kennedy
Kerrey
Kerry
Kohl
Lautenberg
Levin
Moseley-Braun
Moynihan
Pryor
Rockefeller
Sarbanes
Simon
Specter
Wellstone
Wyden
NOT VOTING--1
Bumpers
The bill (H.R. 3610), as amended, was passed.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I thank the Senate for this overwhelming
bipartisan support of this bill. It is a bill that I think meets the
needs as best we can of our defense forces and maintains the defense of
this country. This year we had a record number of requests to our
subcommittee from Members of the Senate and, I might say, also from
Members of the House that we had to consider. Were it not for this fine
working relationship that the Senator from Hawaii and I have, it would
be impossible to deal with a bill of this magnitude in a 24-hour
period.
But we have done that, and there are a number of people who deserve
to be identified now who have worked hard in the preparation of this
bill. The Senator from Hawaii has mentioned the people on his side of
the aisle. This team works together on a bipartisan basis on the staff
level, too. So I want to note the contributions of the subcommittee
staff on our side. We have this long record of bipartisan work
together: Steve Cortese, who is our staff director; Charlie Houy, staff
director on the other side; Peter Lennon, Jay Kimmitt, Mary Marshall,
Jim Morhard, John Young, Sid Ashworth, Susan Hogan, Mazie Mattson,
Justin Weddle, Candice Rogers, and Emelie East.
This year we were assisted by two individuals who were loaned to our
committee. As I said, we have just had a tremendous workload this year.
We have Darrell Roberson from the Air Force and Mike Gillmore from GAO
who worked with us. During the floor debate yesterday, I was pleased to
be able to have two of the high school interns from my office who have
observed our work and were helpful to me yesterday, Brad Brunsdon from
Fairbanks and Meegan Condon of Petersburg.
This was my first opportunity to manage a bill in the Chamber since
the retirement of Senator Dole, and I want to express my thanks to our
new leader, Trent Lott, for his unwavering efforts to help us get this
bill passed. I thank the Senate for its patience.
Additionally, we have received full consideration from many Members.
We started out yesterday morning, I believe, with about 150 amendments,
and they have all been handled in one fashion or another in order to
get to where we are today. I do thank Senator McCain and Ann Sauer of
his staff, who have worked with us this year to review amendments to
make certain that we would not meet objections to them in terms of
their presentation to the Senate here on a unanimous-consent basis.
Today, I have Megan Curry of Juneau and Beth Pozzi of Anchorage with me
in the Chamber.
I am pleased to once again thank the Senate for the support of this
bill. I do think the American people should know that we have firm
support here in the Senate now on a bipartisan basis to maintain the
level of expenditures which we believe are necessary. I hope we can get
the bill into conference and back as soon as possible, because we want
time to work with the White House to make sure that the executive
branch is willing to share with us this burden of maintaining the
funding of our military throughout the world.
Mr. President, I now move to reconsider the vote the Senate has just
taken to pass this bill.
Mr. INOUYE. I move to table the motion.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
[[Page S8070]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate shall
insist on its amendments and request a conference with the House.
The Chair appointed Mr. Stevens, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Specter, Mr.
Domenici, Mr. Bond, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Mack, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Gregg, Mr.
Hatfield, Mr. Inouye, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Johnston, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Leahy,
Mr. Bumpers, Mr. Lautenberg, and Mr. Harkin conferees on the part of
the Senate.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, S. 1894 shall be
returned to the calendar.
Mr. STEVENS. I thank the Chair.
Mr. LOTT addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
Mr. LOTT. Before the two managers of the Department of Defense
appropriations bill leave the Chamber, I want to say again today, as I
did yesterday, how much I appreciate the outstanding work that they
did. We have just seen an unbelievable accomplishment, for this bill to
have been completed in 24 hours, with tremendous effort yesterday. They
obviously are two of the very best managers we have in the Senate, and
on behalf of the Senate I thank them for their good work and hope that
their example will be followed on other appropriations bills and with
the bill that we are about to begin consideration of.
____________________