[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 120 (Thursday, September 5, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9869-S9873]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1997--CONFERENCE REPORT
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will turn
to the consideration of the conference report accompanying H.R. 3517,
which the clerk will report.
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.
3517) making appropriations for military construction, family
housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department
of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1997, and
for other purposes, having met, after full and free
conference, have agreed to
[[Page S9870]]
recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses this
report, signed by a majority of the conferees.
The Senate proceeded to consider the conference report.
(The conference report is printed in the House proceedings of the
Record of July 30, 1996.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There shall now be 20 minutes of debate on the
conference report equally divided in the usual form.
The Senator from Montana.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I thank the Chair very much. We have been
working very closely with my ranking member, Senator Reid, from Nevada.
He has one little duty to perform before he comes to the floor. I would
hate to start without him here because we have worked so closely on
this piece of legislation.
I will suggest the absence of a quorum until he arrives.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I am pleased to bring before the Senate the
conference report on the military construction appropriations bill for
fiscal year 1997.
Mr. President, the conference report is within the revised 602(b)
budget allocation for both budget authority and outlays.
The conference agreement is $850 million over the President's budget
request. This amount is the same as what will be authorized in the
armed services conference report. This conference agreement is $1.2
billion under the amounts approved by the conferees last year.
Mr. President, I believe the military construction budget is not
being adequately funded. We have never recovered from the reductions
that were made in anticipation of the base realignments and closures.
I want to give the Pentagon fair warning. During this period of troop
reductions and base closures throughout the United States and the
world, we should have been dramatically modernizing our defense
infrastructure.
It is no longer business as usual. We must address these mounting
deficiencies.
I would like to mention briefly some provisions in this conference
agreement. First, the conferees approved $2.5 billion for
implementation of the base realignment and closure decisions. This
amount includes $1.2 billion for the 1995 round. There is also $776
million for environmental cleanup of these facilities. We have now
funded the majority of BRAC requirements. Now we must make sure these
funds are being correctly spent.
Mr. President, $4 billion of this appropriation is for housing the
families of our military. This is 41 percent of our appropriation. I am
happy to say this percentage is growing. It was 38 percent last year.
We must address the quality of life issues we have ignored for so long.
Also, we have created a new initiative which will start to relieve
some of the burden of providing adequate housing for our single
soldiers. It is like Secretary Perry's efforts for family housing.
Mr. President, the conference agreement provides an additional $185
million for the National Guard. This includes additional funding for
planning and design. The Army National Guard especially needs this
funding to properly execute their construction program.
I am confident that the President will not veto this bill. This bill
includes funding for Incirlik, Turkey, where our Air Force has been
flying the mission over the northern part of Iraq. Also, there is
funding for Aviano, Italy, where our Air Force and Marines fly missions
over Bosnia. We must all support our troops at this critical time.
There is one issue my colleagues should be aware of. We have tied
funding for the Army programs overseas to the Army National Guard. For
years we have directed the Army to start supporting the Reserve
components. Each year they have chosen to ignore the direction of the
Senate.
Mr. President, the appropriations conferees took a strong course of
action on this issue. This year we have language which directs the Army
to program $75 million for the Army National Guard. Officers within the
Army have suggested that it is only report language. They do not think
they need to follow our direction unless it is in bill language. What
they do not understand is that this body supports the citizen soldier.
We know that we will call on them if we ever have to face another major
conflict. The Army has not figured this out. I want to put them on
record. The Army is going to have a difficult time, until they start
supporting the Guard.
On a brighter note, we have included a sense of Congress which calls
for the Secretary of the Army to name a new administrative facility, at
Redstone Arsenal, AL, the Howell Heflin Complex. This is a small
tribute to one of the great Senators of our time. I wish my friend well
and hope he enjoys his coming years.
Mr. President, this is good bill. It is a bill that meets the demands
of our national security interests. I urge the Senate to approve the
conference action on this issue.
I now yield the floor and ask for the comments of the ranking member
of this committee who has just been a joy to work with. We have worked
on this a long time and, being very comfortable with the bill, I think
it warrants passage. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, it has been a pleasure to work closely with
the distinguished chairman on this measure. We have had an open,
bipartisan approach to the problems of family housing, Reserve and
Guard forces, and the other matters in the bill. We have not had any
significant disagreements. I believe that this is a good product, and I
hope that the Senate will support it overwhelmingly. I thank at this
time the majority staff director, Jim Morhard and his assistant Warren
Johnson, for their work and cooperation with my staff, Dick D'Amato a
member of the Appropriations Committee assigned to me to work on this
and other appropriations matters. B.G. Wright also of the
Appropriations Committee, also has made a significant contribution. I
publicly commend Peter Arapis and Jerry Reed of my personal staff who
have dedicated many hours to the completion of this legislation.
Mr. President, as I indicated, I am pleased to join with the
distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, Senator Burns from Montana,
in presenting this conference report on military construction for
fiscal year 1997 before the Senate. Mr. President, I fully support the
recommendations in this bill. I compliment the chairman of the
subcommittee, the distinguished Senator from Montana [Mr. Burns], for
his excellent work and that of his staff.
The chairman of the subcommittee and I have again this year, enjoyed
an open and productive working relationship in bringing the
recommendations in this bill to the Senate.
This bill, reported here today is $1.195 billion lower than last
year's appropriated amount, and is also $50 million lower than the
construction bill proposed by the House of Representatives.
Again this year, our bill strives to improve the quality of life for
the Nation's military service members. This military construction bill
emphasizes housing initiatives, both for families and improved housing
for single service members. It provides $4.1 billion for the
construction, operation, and maintenance of family housing, and to the
Homeowner's Assistance Program.
I would like to be able to say that spending this $4.1 billion takes
care of all the housing needs of our military, but it does not come
close. We are going to have to continue working on that.
I add, Mr. President, in time of crisis, we rely heavily on the Guard
and Reserve. During the gulf war crisis, we called upon the Guard and
Reserve to bear more than their share of the burden, especially based
on how we have funded them in the past. This year's administration
request included no, I repeat, no major construction projects for the
Army National Guard. This practice is completely unacceptable.
Administration requests including no major construction projects for
the Army Guard mandates that we seriously review any Member request for
[[Page S9871]]
its worthiness, and there are many worthy and badly needed projects,
without which, our Reserve Forces could not continue to function. It
simply would be unfair to not give them some consideration simply
because they have been ignored by the Pentagon.
The committee continues to support the NATO Security Investment
Program, however it is concerned that member nations are not properly
helping to defray construction program costs. The committee therefore
urges the Secretary to seek increased contributions from our allies. A
requirement for preposition exists in Southwest Asia, however, we have
no treaty relationships with our allies there. Although we should
proceed with such projects, we should secure long-term bilateral
agreements and assume full cost-sharing arrangements prior to the
initiation of any construction projects in the region.
The subcommittee has added certain needy projects to the
administrations request: $850 million was added to the budget that
would include $220 million for Guard and Reserve projects, and over
$258 million in badly needed family housing.
I commend the chairman for taking the many requests from Senators to
include projects in this bill. This is necessitated, annually, in large
part, because the Department of Defense has again, as it has in the
past, refused to adequately fund the construction projects for the
National Guard, requiring the subcommittee to review many worthy
projects suggested by Senators and the National Guard and to come up
with a fair and equitable solution to the problem.
To have people come and say, and there are only just a few, come and
say, ``The Pentagon did not request it, how possibly could we be
seeking money here?'' We are doing it because it is the right thing to
do, the only thing to do, and Senator Burns and I greatly appreciate
the support the subcommittee has received in our support for the Guard
and Reserve.
The administration requested only $7 million for Army National Guard
construction, compared to $137 million appropriated in fiscal year
1996, and that amount was well below the previous year's $188 million
appropriation. This is a 95-percent reduction in only 1 year. This type
of request is incomprehensible and irresponsible. To help try to
balance the scale, the subcommittee used strict criteria to evaluate
many worthy projects suggested by Members, and a strong effort was made
to take all Members' interest into consideration. We could not fulfill
all the requests, but we did our best.
While no Senator that I am aware of has been fully satisfied, I think
the result is as fair and equitable as possible, given the significant
budget constraints that we are working under.
Again, I express my appreciation to the chairman of the subcommittee
for his fine work on this legislation. I again ask the Senate to
overwhelmingly support this legislation.
Mr. DOMENICI. The pending military construction conference agreement
provides $9.982 billion in new budget authority and $3.140 in new
outlays for military construction and family housing programs for the
Department of Defense for fiscal year 1997.
When outlays from prior-year budget authority and other completed
actions are taken into account, the outlays for the 1997 program total
$10.375 billion.
This legislation provides for construction by the Department of
Defense for U.S. military facilities throughout the world, and it
provides for family housing for the Active Forces of each of the U.S.
military services. Accordingly, it provides for important readiness and
quality of life programs for our service men and women.
The conference report falls within the revised section 602(b)
allocation for the Military Construction Subcommittee. I commend the
distinguished subcommittee chairman, the Senator from Montana, for
bringing this bill to the floor within the subcommittee's revised
allocation.
The bill provides important increases over the President's request
for 1997, and I urge the adoption of the conference report.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a table showing the
relationship of the conference report to the subcommittee's section
602(b) allocation be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the table was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION SUBCOMMITTEE SPENDING TOTALS--CONFERENCE REPORT
[Fiscal year 1997, Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget
Category authority Outlays
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defense discretionary:
Outlays from prior-year BA and other actions
completed.................................. .......... 7,204
H.R. 3517, conference report................ 9,982 3,140
Scorekeeping adjustment..................... .......... ..........
-----------------------
Adjusted bill total....................... 9,982 10,344
=======================
Senate subcommittee 602(b) allocation: Defense
discretionary.................................. 9,983 10,375
Adjusted bill total compared to Senate
subcommittee 602(b) allocation: Defense
discretionary.................................. -1 -31
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Totals adjusted for
consistency with current scorekeeping conventions.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I wanted to take just a few moments to
commend Senators Conrad Burns and Harry Reid, the chairman and ranking
member of the Military Construction Subcommittee. The conference report
for the fiscal year 1997 Military Construction Appropriations Act that
has been put before the Senate is an excellent product. It protects the
interests of the Senate, and more importantly, it addresses the needs
of our men and women in uniform.
This conference agreement represents a compromise between the House
and the Senate, and I am aware that many items of interest to Members
of both the House and the Senate had to be scaled back or deferred.
Nonetheless, I am convinced that Chairman Burns and Senator Reid
brokered a good deal for the Senate.
I understand that there are several projects which were supported by
the Senate in both the appropriations and authorization processes that
are funded in this conference agreement, but for which no funds are
specifically authorized in the conference report filed by the Armed
Services Committee. I am hopeful that legislation will be enacted by
the end of this session which will clarify the position of the Congress
that these programs should be considered authorized and I will work to
that end.
Once again, I wanted to thank Senators Burns and Reid for their
leadership on this matter and I urge all my colleagues to support this
conference report.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, for several years now, I have tried to
restrain Congress' propensity to add hundreds of millions of dollars of
unrequested, low-priority projects to the military construction
budgets. I have tried to amend the military construction bills when
they come before the Senate to strike these add-ons, but I have failed.
I have tried to impose reasonable criteria for evaluating Members'
requests for add-ons, and although the Senate agreed to abide by these
criteria, there are still projects added that do not meet the criteria.
This year, Mr. President, is no different.
Since 1990, the Congress has added more than $6 billion to the
military construction accounts. That's almost $1 billion in pork-barrel
spending every year. This bill increases the amount of waste by another
$850 million. Where will we stop this endless pork-barrelling using
taxpayers dollars?
When the Senate passed the military construction bill for fiscal year
1997, it contained $700 million in unrequested funding. The House added
$900 million to the request for military construction, and I assumed
that a conference agreement would probably split the difference between
the bills. But I find, in reviewing this conference bill, that it
contains $850 million in unrequested funding. Apparently, in the
interest of protecting as many Senators' add-ons as possible, the
Senate conferees decided to go more than halfway toward the House
position.
Mr. President, I am amazed to find that this bill even includes an
add-on for Arizona. But that add-on of $6.7 million is small potatoes
compared to the magnitude of the add-ons for some States.
There were 13 States that received more than $20 million in add-ons
in this bill. Of those 13 States, 6 States received more than $30
million in add-ons, 3 received more than $40 million in add-ons. And
one State received a whopping $55 million in add-ons.
[[Page S9872]]
Mr. President, I am not going to take up the time of the Senate by
listing all the add-ons in this bill. The information is there in the
conference report, for those who care to review it. I will only say
that I am shocked and saddened that, with the severe shortfalls in
other high-priority military requirements, the Congress is wasting so
much money on pork-barrel projects like these.
This is the same Congress that argued successfully for an $18 billion
increase in the defense budget over the past 2 years, principally
because military modernization had been cut drastically by the Clinton
administration. That is why I am puzzled that we waste nearly $1
billion of this year's $11 billion add-on for military construction
projects.
While the Defense authorization and appropriations bills this year
provide an additional $6 or $7 billion for procurement, this amount is
only about one-third of the $21 billion needed to meet General
Shalikashvili's target of $60 billion per year for procurement of
modern weapons systems. We still have a $14 or $15 billion shortfall in
urgently needed modernization funding. Yet we are wasting $850 million
on unrequested, low-priority military construction projects. It just
does not make sense to me.
Mr. President, I mentioned the criteria the Senate adopted 2 years
ago to evaluate Members' requests for military construction add-ons. I
am somewhat gratified to learn that the close scrutiny focused on
military construction projects has succeeded in forcing at least some
degree of control on the process. The majority of the projects in this
bill meet four of the five criteria established 2 years ago for Senate
consideration of unrequested military construction projects. The
projects are: mission essential; not inconsistent with BRAC; in the
FYDP; and executable in fiscal year 1997.
But none of the projects meet the fifth criterion, which requires the
added funding to be offset by a reduction in some other Defense
account. And five of the projects in this bill, totalling $23.7
million, are not even authorized, although I suspect political pressure
will result in an authorization of each of them at some future time.
Mr. President, I know there are some very good aspects of this bill.
It does provide funding for high-priority quality of life projects,
including child care centers and family housing projects. It includes a
provision which will give the Guard and Reserve components the
opportunity to come to Congress with a long-term plan to meet their
military construction requirements. For these provisions, I applaud my
colleagues on the Military Construction Subcommittee.
But $850 million is a lot of taxpayer dollars to waste. How do we
explain to the American people why we need $11 billion more for Defense
this year, when we spend $850 million for projects that do little or
nothing to contribute to our Nation's security?
I know this bill cannot now be amended, and my words will have little
effect on the final vote on this bill. But I cannot stand aside and
allow a bill laden with $850 million in pork-barrel spending to pass
the Senate without objection. I will vote against this bill, and I will
urge the President to veto this measure when it comes to his desk. And
Mr. President, I will continue to fight against the stubborn
congressional tradition of wasteful, pork-barrel spending.
I ask unanimous consent that a list of unauthorized projects and the
States receiving the largest benefits be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Unauthorized projects in military construction conference
Millions
Hawaii--Army aviation support facility.............................$5.9
Kansas--Consolidated education center...............................6.7
Iowa--Aircraft arresting system....................................1.35
Louisiana--Bachelor enlisted quarters...............................4.8
Mississippi--Quaywall extension....................................4.99
__________
Total.......................................................23.74
States received largest share of add-ons
[In millions of dollars]
Texas......................................................... 55.983
Hawaii........................................................ 45.58
Nevada........................................................ 40.855
Virginia...................................................... 34.969
North Carolina................................................ 34.21
Florida....................................................... 30.248
Montana....................................................... 27.2
New Mexico.................................................... 27.1
Mississippi................................................... 24.7
Georgia....................................................... 24.252
Kentucky...................................................... 23.0
California.................................................... 22.85
Indiana....................................................... 22.0
Mr. GLENN. Mr. President, I will vote today in opposition to the
military construction appropriations conference report. The conference
report adds $850 million to the President's budget request. Like its
authorization counterpart, virtually all of the projects added to the
budget request are the result of requests made by Members of the House
and Senate.
I am gratified that some discipline has been adopted in this annual
process in that added projects now meet what I consider to be minimal
requirements like meeting a national security requirement and being in
the Pentagon's 5-year plan. Nevertheless, I cannot support a process
that results in hundreds of millions of dollars being added to the
military construction budget based merely on Members requesting funding
for those projects.
Mr. BOND. Mr. President, as cochairman for the National Guard Caucus
I rise to comment on the process of funding our Nation's military
construction needs.
The Senate, in the past years, has voted to appropriate necessary
military construction funds to offset the neglect of administrations in
order to make sure that the defense infrastructure would be adequately
funded.
The Senate this year was again forced by the Clinton administration
to make sure that the defense infrastructure would be adequately
funded.
Active Force infrastructure has traditionally been adequately funded
with the Guard Forces traditionally underfunded. Why has it been this
way, many have asked, and the answer which is whispered through the
Halls of this building is that the Congressmen and Senators will take
care of it, and we have and we do and we will because we care about the
welfare and readiness of the National Guard and Air National Guard even
if some administration officials do not.
The administration this year funded the Army Guard to the tune of $7
million, $7 million for the entire Army Guard infrastructure for all 50
States and Puerto Rico; $7 million.
For the entire Army Guard Force. If the Senators here respect our
citizen soldiers, then they must rectify this shoddy treatment of those
who protect us. My colleagues on the committee have done just that and
they have done it with strict adherence to a rigorous set of standards
for these necessary quality of life and readiness projects.
The committee considered each of the programs added to this year's
military construction bill for its executability in fiscal year 1997,
its being of the highest priority for the base commanders and National
Guard tags, its inclusion in the FYDP, and its overall necessity to
quality of life and readiness. Currently, this is the only venue we
have to maintain infrastructure readiness and essential and housing
projects which were designated as critical by each State's adjutant
general. I urge all Senators to support the men and women of the Guard
and support the Guard's ability to carry out its missions.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, how much time do we have remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana has 4 minutes, 15
seconds remaining.
Mr. BURNS. Again, I thank my friend from Nevada for his support and
contribution to this subcommittee this year. We could not have put this
bill together without him and his staff. He is backed by an able staff
that understands what is needed and how to get it done: Dick D'Amato,
B.G. Wright, and Peter Arapis.
I also thank Jim Morhard on the committee staff, Julie Lapeyre in my
office, Warren Johnson, and Mazie Mattson.
Mr. President, I know of no other further debate on this conference
report. I think it is a fair and equitable conference agreement and I
urge its approval by the Senate.
So, Mr. President, I urge the adoption of the conference report and
ask for the yeas and nays.
[[Page S9873]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There appears to be a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I understand we have about 4 minutes left
on the debate on the MilCon appropriations conference report. I ask
unanimous consent to yield back all remaining time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. BURNS. I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the conference
report accompanying H.R. 3517 will be laid aside.
____________________