[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 73 (Tuesday, June 13, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4980-S4993]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2001
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will now resume consideration of
H.R. 4576, which the clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
A bill (H.R. 4576) making appropriations for the Department
of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001, and
for other purposes.
Pending:
Boxer/Reid amendment No. 3308, to prohibit the use of funds
for the preventative application of dangerous pesticides in
areas owned or managed by the Department of Defense that may
be used by children.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
Mr. REID. 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. REID. 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the quorum call be rescinded.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. REID. Mr. President, it is my understanding that the unanimous
consent agreement that we are now operating under in the Senate means
that I am next in order to offer an amendment.
Is that true?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is to offer an amendment at 10:40.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, the amendment which I will offer shortly
deals with a very unique situation. We certainly control the building
of computers in the United States. We are the great superpower. We are
also the superpower of computer development. But in spite of that fact,
about 60 percent of the computers manufactured in the United States are
sold overseas. Only 40 percent of the computers manufactured in this
great country are sold internally.
The problem is there is now a provision requiring a 180-day review
period to sell a computer, meaning that we are slowly but surely losing
our ability to control the computer market. Why is that?
I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record a letter to me
from the Information Technology Industry Council which represents
generally the technology industry.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
[[Page S4981]]
Information Technology
Industry Council,
Washington, DC, June 13, 2000.
Hon. Harry Reid,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Reid: I am writing to let you know that ITI
strongly supports legislative relief addressing the current
180-day waiting period whenever US computer export thresholds
are updated. ITI is the leading association of U.S. providers
of information technology products and services. ITI members
had worldwide revenue of more than $633 billion in 1999 and
employ an estimated 1.3 million people in the United States.
We are grateful for your efforts to secure relief in the
defense bills currently before the Senate and wanted you and
your colleagues to know we anticipate that votes pertaining
to computer exports will be included in our annual High Tech
Voting Guide. As you know, the High Tech Voting Guide is used
by ITI to measure Members of Congress' support for the
information technology industry and policies that ensure the
success of the digital economy.
ITI has endorsed your legislation (S. 1483) to shorten the
Congressionally mandated waiting period to 30 days. While we
strongly support our country's security objectives, there
seems no rationale for treating business-level computers that
are widely available on the world market as inherently more
dangerous than items being removed from the nation's
munitions list--an act that gives Congress just 30 calendar
days to review.
Computer exports are critical to the continued success of
the industry and America's leadership in information
technology. Computers today are improved and innovated
virtually every quarter. In our view, it does not make sense
to have a six-month waiting period for products that are
being innovated in three-month cycles. That rapid innovation
is what provides America with her valuable advantage in
technology, both in the marketplace and ultimately for
national security purposes--an argument put forth recently in
a Defense Science Board report on this very subject.
As a good-faith compromise, ITI and the Computer Coalition
for Responsible Exports (CCRE) backed an amendment to the
House-passed defense authorization bill that established a
60-day waiting period and guaranteed that the counting of
those days would not be tolled when Congress adjourns sine
die. The House passed that amendment last month by an
overwhelming vote of 415-8.
Further, as you know, the current provision in law was
understandably aimed at protecting the highest performing
computers from being exported to countries of particular
foreign policy concern. Yet, just last year, a late threshold
adjustment coupled with the six-month waiting period led to
American companies Apple and IBM being effectively denied the
ability to sell single-processor personal computers in some
markets because technology has advanced so rapidly that
yesterday's supercomputers had literally become today's
personal computers.
We have been heartened in recent weeks by the bipartisan
agreement that the waiting period must be shortened. The
Administration has recommended a 30-day waiting period. The
House, as mentioned above, endorsed a 60-day waiting period.
And Gov. George W. Bush has publicly endorsed a 60-day
waiting period as well in recognition that commodity
computers widely available from our foreign competitors
cannot be effectively controlled.
We thank you for your strong and vocal leadership in this
matter and look forward to working with you and other
Senators to achieve a strong, bipartisan consensus on this
and other issues critical to continuing America's
technological pre-eminence.
Best regards,
Rhett B. Dawson,
President.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, they set forth the problem in this letter.
Among other things, this letter says:
. . .the current provision in law would understandably be
aimed at protecting the highest performing computers from
being exported to countries of particular foreign policy
concern. Yet just last year, a late threshold adjustment
coupled with the 6-month waiting period, led to American
companies, Apple and IBM, being effectively denied the
ability to sell single-processor personal computers in some
markets because technology has advanced so rapidly that
yesterday's supercomputers had literally become today's
personal computers.
It wasn't many years ago that I went to the fifth floor of the Clark
County Courthouse in Las Vegas. I took a tour of the fifth floor. On
the entire fifth floor of this big building was a big computer that
handled all of the processing for Clark County. The temperature had to
be perfectly controlled. That floor is now gone. It is used for other
things. That same processing of information can now be accomplished
with a computer the size of a personal computer.
I was able, fortunately, to work with Congress and obtain a
supercomputer for the University of Nevada at Las Vegas. We had a big
celebration. At that time, the computer was very large. It was probably
the size of two of these Senate desks. That supercomputer is now 10
years old. A supercomputer today is not a big piece of equipment.
We are living in the Dark Ages. We have to change the law.
In an effort to compromise, the House established a 60-day waiting
period. It passed by a vote of 415-8.
We worked very hard to get a bill in the Senate. We have been
stymied, quite frankly.
There has been a bipartisan effort by Senator Gramm of Texas, Senator
Enzi, Senator Johnson, and I. We worked very hard last year.
The amendment that I am going to offer today is cosponsored by
Senator Bennett of Utah, a Republican. This is not a partisan issue. It
shouldn't be. But it is being held up for reasons that are so
antiquated. The cold war is over. There is no need to have this
legislation stymied. We are hurting the American manufacturing base.
We are going to get letters from the Chamber of Commerce. Literally
all business in America wants this to pass. But in the Senate, two or
three people are holding this up and preventing it from moving forward.
As I indicated, this amendment has the broad support from the high-
tech industry.
I would bet, if we get a chance to vote on this, that 90 Senators
will vote for it.
This amendment will shorten the congressional review period for high-
performance computers from 180 days to 30 days.
On the Appropriations Committee alone, just to pick out one
committee, Senators Bennett, Murray, and Gorton are cosponsors of this
legislation introduced in the Senate, and there will probably be more
today.
We are operating, as I have said, under cold-war-era regulations. If
we want to remain the world leader in computers and the high-tech
arena, we must make this change immediately.
As I have indicated, I worked for the past year to try to get an
amendment up so we could do this. We started debate on one measure. It
was pulled from the floor. The congressional review period is six times
longer than the review period for munitions.
If there is a company that wants to sell rockets, tanks, warships, or
high-performance aircraft under the foreign military sales program, it
requires a 30-day review period. But if you want to sell a laptop
computer such as the one I have in my office, you have to wait 6
months. In that period of time, American industry could not meet the
demand. We are falling behind. Manufacturing is already beginning in
other places. We don't have a lock on how to manufacture computers. We
are ahead of the world right now.
I repeat that 60 percent of the computers we manufacture in the
United States are sold outside the United States. The review period for
computers is six times longer than for selling to another country a
battleship, a high-performance aircraft, or a rocket.
In February, the President, at the urging of Members of Congress,
proposed changes to the controls on high-performance computers, the so-
called MTOPS, but because of the 180-day review period, the changes
have yet to be implemented. The U.S. companies are losing foreign
market share to many different entities. This is a bipartisan effort,
and we should pass it. We are stifling U.S. companies' growth.
Last week, I had a meeting in my office with a number of CEOs of big
companies--IBM, Compaq, and others. This is their No. 1 agenda item. It
is the base of their business. They make computers, and they want to be
able to sell them. A strong economy and a strong U.S. military depend
on our leadership. U.S. companies have to be given the opportunity to
compete worldwide in order to continue to lead the world in
technological advances. Our export regulations are the most stringent
in the world, giving foreign competitors a head start, to say the
least.
U.S. industry faces stiff competition as foreign governments allow
greater export flexibility, placing America at a greater disadvantage.
Many of the manufacturers have no export controls. The current export
control system interferes with legitimate U.S. exports because it
doesn't keep pace with technology. The MTOPS level of microprocessors
increased fivefold from 1998 to 1999. This is the speed of computers
for my base description.
From 1998 to 1999, there has been a fivefold increase. Today's level
will
[[Page S4982]]
more than double in 6 months because they are introducing something
called the Intel Itanium chip. In a period of 2 years, there is going
to be a tenfold increase in the ability of these microprocessors. New
export controls will not take effect until the completion of the
required 6-month waiting period. By then, the thresholds will be
obsolete and American companies will have lost considerable market
share again to foreign markets. The current export control system
doesn't protect U.S. national security.
The ability of American defense systems to maintain technological
advantages relies increasingly on the U.S. computer industry's ability
to be on the cutting edge of technology. We need to move forward with
this legislation. Protection of capabilities and technologies readily
available in the world market is, at best, unhelpful for maintenance of
military dominance and, at worst, counterproductive, according to the
final report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Globalization
Security that came out in December of last year.
It doesn't make sense to impose a 180 waiting-day period for products
with a 3-month innovation period that are available for foreign
countries. We have to keep changing.
Right now, American companies are forbidden from selling computers in
tier III countries, while foreign competitors are free to do so.
The removal of items from export controls imposed by the munitions
list, such as tanks, rockets, warships, and high-performance aircraft,
requires a 30-day waiting period. We need to put our priorities in
order; 180 days is too long. It is way too long.
The new Intel microprocessor will be available very soon, with
companies all over America already signed on to use this
microprocessor. Foreign countries have signed on to using it, including
Hitachi and Siemens. They will be so far ahead of us in sales to other
countries that we will never catch up unless we change this law.
The most recent export controls announcements made by the
administration on February 1 will therefore be out of date in less than
6 months.
Lastly, a review period, comparable to that applied to other export
control and national security regimes, will still give Congress
adequate time to review national security ramifications of change in
the U.S. computer export control regime.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. There is no doubt in
my mind that this amendment would pass overwhelmingly. I hope the
managers of this bill will allow this amendment to go forward. It would
be too bad if we were stymied, once again, from allowing something that
has the overwhelming support of the American people, including the
American business sector, whether they are in the computer industry or
not. It has the total support of the computer industry. It also has the
support of Members of Congress, as I have indicated. It passed the
House of Representatives overwhelmingly. The vote was 415-8. In the
Senate, it will get 90 votes. It would be a shame that a point of
order, some technicality, would prevent the Senate from going forward
on this legislation. This is a Defense appropriations bill. There could
be no finer vehicle to consider this amendment. I hope some
technicality does not prevent me from having this voted upon.
Amendment No. 3292
(Purpose: To amend the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1998 with respect to export controls on high performance
computers)
Mr. REID. I send the amendment to the desk on behalf of Senators Reid
and Bennett.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Reid], for himself and Mr.
Bennett, proposes an amendment numbered 3292.
Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent reading of the amendment be
dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following new section:
SEC. __. ADJUSTMENT OF COMPOSITE THEORETICAL PERFORMANCE.
Section 1211(d) of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 1998 (50 U.S.C. App. 2404 note) is amended--
(1) in the second sentence, by striking ``180'' and
inserting ``30''; and
(2) by adding at the end, the following new sentence: ``The
30-day reporting requirement shall apply to any changes to
the composite theoretical performance level for purposes of
subsection (a) proposed by the President on or after January
1, 2000.''.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I am constrained to raise a point of
order that this amendment contains legislative matter and therefore is
in violation of rule XVI.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. In the opinion of the Chair, the amendment is
legislation on appropriations and is in violation of rule XVI.
Mr. STEVENS. Therefore, the amendment is not in order; is that
correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
Mr. STEVENS. 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. STEVENS. 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. STEVENS. For the information of the Members of the Senate, we
have a list now of the amendments that have been reviewed by the
Parliamentarian and have an indication of those that violate rule XVI.
It is our intention to raise rule XVI for those amendments that are in
violation of rule XVI. We do have a list that the staff says we may
modify so they are not in violation of rule XVI, which we would then be
willing to accept, if the sponsors are willing to accept the
modification.
There are other amendments that have been offered that are not in
violation of rule XVI that we intend to oppose. For those, I urge
Senators to have their staffs discuss these amendments with the staff
of Senator Inouye and myself. It is my understanding we are in
agreement on the position on these amendments that we find
unacceptable, even though they are not in violation of rule XVI.
I do think we can proceed in a very rapid fashion to determine how
many votes we will have today if Members will state whether or not they
are going to accept our modification. If they accept the modification,
we will put them in a managers' package that we will offer around 11:30
as being acceptable under the unanimous consent request we obtained
yesterday, to give the managers the right to modify amendments to make
them acceptable under rule XVI.
It is my understanding the Senator from California is now going to
offer an amendment. Could I inquire of the Senator if she intends to
ask for a vote on this amendment?
Mrs. BOXER. Yes, I do.
Mr. STEVENS. We are prepared to accept the amendment of the Senator.
Does she still want a vote?
Mrs. BOXER. On the medical privacy?
Mr. STEVENS. Yes.
Mrs. BOXER. I need to think about it for a couple of minutes.
Mr. REID. If the Senator from Alaska will yield?
Mr. STEVENS. I am happy to yield.
Mr. REID. We now have 61 amendments not subjected to rule XVI, 25
Democrat, 36 Republican amendments. We want to make sure the majority
understands we will do everything we can to cooperate with the
majority. We would like to move this bill along as quickly as possible
and get back to the Defense authorization bill at an early time. But I
suggest, as I have indicated, there are more Republican amendments than
Democratic amendments. We are going to do what we can to work on this
side. I have spoken to Senator Inouye and he has indicated the two
managers would accept a number of these amendments. Throughout the day
we will work on these to see what we can do to move this bill along. I
hope the same will happen on the Senator's side if we are to complete
this legislation.
Mr. STEVENS. I say to my distinguished friend, the Democrat whip, we
have reviewed these and there are a series on both sides. It is true
there are more on our side than on the Democratic side that we intend
to oppose, but the majority of the ones we would oppose are subject to
rule XVI.
[[Page S4983]]
Mr. REID. None of the 36 are subject to rule XVI, I say to the
manager of the bill. Regarding the 36 Republican amendments, the
Parliamentarian has preliminarily indicated they are not subject to
rule XVI. We, through the efforts of the staffs, working with the
Parliamentarian, believe there are some 35 or so amendments that are
knocked out because of rule XVI. But we do have 61 remaining, 36
Republican and 25 Democrat.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I regret to say I have a 5-page list and
I didn't have 2 pages in front of me. The Senator is right. We are
working on those now, to notify Members on our side that we will oppose
the amendments as listed on the basis we do not feel we can accept them
because of the provisions of the existing bill and because of the
availability of funds.
We will proceed to do just as the Senator has indicated. If Members,
however, will accept our modifications--the Senator is aware of the
modifications list? We again repeat, if they accept our modifications,
although we oppose the amendments in the present form, we will include
them in the managers' package. We hope to get a reply back from
Members. Of course, Members have the right to offer their amendments
and request a vote of the Senate. We are indicating, regarding those
that we have not put on the acceptable list, we will oppose those
amendments.
Mr. REID. We will also try to work with the manager of the bill to
make sure we have people available to offer these amendments so there
is not a lot of time in quorum calls.
Mr. STEVENS. I yield the floor.
Amendment No. 3363
(Purpose: To protect the privacy of an individual's medical records)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senator from
California, Mrs. Boxer, is recognized to call up an amendment.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I call amendment No. 3363.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from California [Mrs. Boxer] proposes an
amendment numbered 3363.
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
SEC. . PRIVACY OF INDIVIDUAL MEDICAL RECORDS.
None of the funds provided in this Act shall be used to
transfer, release, disclose, or otherwise make available to
any individual or entity outside the Department of Defense
for any non-national security or non-law enforcement purposes
an individual's medical records without the consent of the
individual.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I believe anyone who listens to us will
agree this issue of privacy of medical records is really moving to the
forefront of American public discourse. I think we all believe certain
things should be private. Certainly our medical records should be
private unless we are very willing to discuss them or have them
discussed. I am very pleased Senator Stevens and Senator Inouye support
this amendment, and having received assurances they will work for it in
the conference, I am not going to ask for a recorded vote. But I think
it is a breakthrough that the managers have accepted this amendment.
I wish to make a point here about privacy of medical records. The
Department of Defense is no better or no worse than any other Federal
agency because all the Federal agencies have been going by the rules
that were set forth in 1974. I do not know how old you were in 1974,
Mr. President, but it was a long time ago. That is when we wrote the
rules surrounding privacy, the Privacy Act of 1974, that really govern
all the rules of privacy surrounding Federal employees, be they in the
military or in the nonmilitary.
A cursory reading of the Privacy Act of 1974 will make your hair
stand on end. It governs the privacy of medical records, but it says
that no one can get your record unless you give prior written consent
``unless''--and here is the part you have to hear:
Unless the records are disclosed within an agency to a
person who needs it in the performance of the job.
So anyone can get your record if they decide they want to see it as
they do a job performance. Then it says an agency can get your record
without your approval if it is for a routine use specified in the
Federal Register. They can get your record, and listen to this, give it
to the Census Bureau with your name attached: Barbara Boxer, this is
her medical record. The Census Bureau needs your record so they can
carry out a census survey. Maybe they want to find out which Federal
employees had what disease. They can get those records for the census
for statistical purposes, but they say the records would not be
individually identifiable, so I suppose that is OK.
Listen to this. The National Archives can get your record without
your permission if your record has a sufficient historical value. So I
say to the Presiding Officer, maybe someone in the National Archives is
interested in his dad, the great Senator who preceded him, because they
feel his records have sufficient historical value. That is absurd; they
could get them if the agency released them.
Then there is a big loophole:
* * * because of a compelling circumstance affecting the
health or safety of an individual.
Imagine, someone decides there is a compelling circumstance to know
any Senator's or any employee's or any clerk's disabilities, what
medicines they are on. Oh, they can get it if there is a compelling
circumstance. That is not defined. Congress can get your record.
Congress has a right to get the record of every clerk sitting here, any
person in any Federal agency, without their consent. Talk about Big
Brother or Big Sister, as the case may be. They have the right to find
out anybody's record, their medical record. What a stunning revelation
this is, to read the 1974 Privacy Act.
How about this one? The General Accounting Office, the GAO, doing a
study--and we know we ask them to do many studies--can, in fact, get
the record of any Federal employee with their name attached.
A consumer reporting agency can go ahead and get that information.
So here we have the Privacy Act of 1974. I have gone through it. Out
of the 12 provisions, the exceptions, only 2 of them make sense. They
have to do with criminality, but everything else makes no sense.
I am very pleased Senators Stevens and Inouye understand this. I say
to my friend from Alaska, under the Privacy Act that applies today, it
is not just the military; it is all Federal agencies. I am just doing
it here because this bill came out first. The DOD is absolutely no
worse than any other agency. They are just following the Privacy Act of
1974. It is chilling to see how Congress can get an individual's
medical record with their name attached or how the Census Bureau can
get an individual's medical record with their name attached, without
approval.
In our amendment we simply say that, in fact, an individual needs to
give permission, unless it is for a national security or law
enforcement purpose. Then we say: Fine, you give up your rights in that
particular case.
Again, I am pleased; we are breaking fine new ground. We should apply
what we are doing here to every agency. I will do that, by the way, on
every appropriations bill I can because this is absolutely critical.
I am delighted we are going to have a voice vote on this. I would
like to have it accepted. A voice vote will be fine. This is not a
complicated issue. This is a question of people in the military having
peace of mind, knowing their records are secure. I will go away very
pleased on this one.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the Senator from California is correct in
regard to the defense operations. I do note the exemption, where
necessary, in the interest of national security. There are situations
in which a commander has to know the medical conditions of people whom
they might dispatch. That exception makes it acceptable for the
Department of Defense.
However, I do not think we are going to proceed with having a piece-
by-piece amendment to the Privacy Act on the appropriations bills. This
is very much acceptable on this bill. With the conditions that are
being applied, it is a step in the right direction.
I urge the Senator from California not to consider a piece-by-piece
amendment to the Privacy Act on these appropriations bills as they come
through because this Senator is not going to
[[Page S4984]]
support that. It becomes legislation on an appropriations bill on other
matters, I can say that.
With regard to military records, it is an entirely different
circumstance. Military records are part of the Department of Defense
operation, and this is a step in the right direction. I am happy to
accept the amendment on that basis.
I know of no other agency that has access to the medical records of
the individuals who are employed by the agency as this one does. The
Department of Defense does, and I think the Department of Defense will
welcome this guidance. I am pleased to accept it on that basis.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Enzi). The question is on agreeing to
amendment No. 3363.
The amendment (No. 3363) was agreed to.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mrs. BOXER. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I will not offer amendment No. 3309 which
was a backup amendment in case I was unsuccessful. I will be offering
this when it is appropriate, not when it is inappropriate. I am
absolutely delighted. I make the point, this is the first time we
protected medical records. I could not be more pleased. I thank the
managers for their support.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, we are awaiting additional amendments.
Does the Senator from California intend to offer amendments Nos. 3310
or 3311?
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I do plan to offer amendments Nos. 3310
and 3311, but I need a little more time to get all my ducks in a row on
them. I will be back as soon as I can do that.
Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 3346
(Purpose: To provide for an additional payment from the surplus to
reduce the public debt)
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I have an amendment at the desk.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Colorado [Mr. Allard], for himself, Mr.
Voinovich, Mr. Grams, and Mr. Enzi, proposes an amendment
numbered 3346.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
bureau of the public debt
gifts to the united states for reduction of the public debt
For deposit of an additional amount into the account
established under section 3113(b) of title 31, United States
Code, to reduce the public debt, $12,200,000,000.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I thank Senators Voinovich, Grams, and
Enzi for agreeing to cosponsor this particular amendment.
As everybody in the Senate knows, I have been working for some time
to put a plan before the Senate that would pay down the debt over a
period of time. I have always been a strong proponent of paying down
the debt. I believe Congress needs to live within its own spending
restraints.
In 1961, Congress established within the Department of Treasury the
Bureau of the Public Debt. It is an account for citizens to repay the
public debt. Our amendment relates to the surplus from fiscal year
2000. The surplus projected by the Congressional Budget Office has been
projected to be $26.5 billion; that is over and above what was provided
for when we passed the budget last year.
There was an emergency resolution that provided for some spending, so
we have already spent part of the $26.5 billion: $14.3 billion went to
reversing the payday delays and moving appropriation spending back into
fiscal year 2000, which was a procedural issue early on in the year. It
took $7.2 billion to do that. We took $5.5 billion for agriculture
relief and $1.6 billion for natural disaster relief, Kosovo, and
assistance to the Government of Colombia for drug relief. That totals
$14.3 billion. That leaves $12.2 billion that has not been obligated
that is going to be surplus in this year's budget.
We have another estimate that will be coming in later on in the year.
Very likely, there will even be additional dollars at some point in
time over and above the $12.2 billion on which the Senate can make a
decision. Basically, what we are asking with this amendment is that the
$12.2 billion ought to go towards paying down the public debt. It is
based on figures released by the Congressional Budget Office, and it is
within the budget resolution that was passed earlier this year. It
takes care of emergency spending needs.
I am asking Members of the Senate to support me in helping to pay
down the debt. In recent years, we have had an unprecedented amount of
surplus. The surplus has illustrated the importance of showing some
fiscal restraint. Actually, the budget resolution we passed earlier, in
both the House and Senate, is an agreement between the House and the
Senate to stay within certain spending parameters. This falls within
those guidelines. The only enforcement mechanism is our willingness to
live by our own rules.
We are saying with this amendment that we ought to live by the
agreement that was earlier arranged between the House and the Senate,
and passed. And if there is any spending, instead of increasing
spending, we ought to be paying down the debt.
The emergency spending is not counted for under the budget caps or
the 302(b) allocation. In my view, the spending privilege that we had
in the past years has been abused. We have spent more and not worked
hard enough to hold down and stay within the caps.
The increased spending may ultimately threaten the Social Security
surplus. We have all talked about how important it is to save Social
Security. I have been of the view that if you pay down the debt, you
can free up resources so that we can work at Social Security reform in
future years. Obviously, it is not going to happen this year.
In my view, we cannot, in good conscience, continue to spend when we
have such huge obligations that are facing us in future years,
particularly in Social Security trust funds. The Congressional Budget
Office, again, has scored this as a no-cost transfer.
The amendment appropriates $12.2 billion to an already existing
account at the Bureau of Public Debt, which we set up in past years for
taxpayers to pay into because this Congress thought it was important to
the American taxpayers.
I am saying to the American taxpayer that you have shown a commitment
to want to pay down the public debt. Members of the Senate and the
House need to carry forward with their desire and their commitment and
show an equal desire to pay down the public debt. This transfers money
away from spending and locks it into debt owed to the public.
New estimates will be coming later on in the year and promise to
offer similar opportunities for dedicating more of the fiscal year 2000
money to repay debt owed to the public.
I have an article that was written by Peter B. Sperry of the Heritage
Foundation entitled ``Making Sure Surplus Revenue Is Used To Reduce The
National Debt.'' I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Heritage Foundation Backgrounder, June 13, 2000]
Making Sure Surplus Revenue Is Used To Reduce the National Debt
(By Peter B. Sperry)
Although most Americans assume that a federal budget
surplus in any year is automatically used to reduce the
national debt, or at least the debt held by the public, this
actually is not the case. The U.S. Department of the Treasury
must implement specific financial accounting procedures if it
is to use a cash surplus to pay down the debt held by the
public. If these procedures are not followed, or if they
proceed slowly, then the surplus revenue just builds up in
the Treasury's operating cash accounts.
This excess cash could be used in the future to further
reduce the debt, but only if it
[[Page S4985]]
is protected from other uses in the meantime. Until the
excess cash if formally committed to debt repayment, Congress
could appropriate it for other purposes. Consequently, the
current surplus will not automatically reduce the publicly
held national debt of $3.54 trillion unless Congress acts now
to make sure these funds are automatically used for debt
reduction and for no other purpose.
There is a parallel to this in household finance. When a
family with a large mortgage, credit card debt, and several
student loans receives an unexpected financial windfall, it
usually deposits the funds in a checking account and takes a
little time to consider how best to allocate the revenue--
whether to refinance the mortgage, pay off credit cards, or
establish a rainy day fund. Meanwhile, the family's debt
remains, and will not be reduced until the family formally
transfers funds to one or more of its creditors. If the
family does not take some action in the interim to wall off
the cash, it often ends up frittering away the money on new
purchases, and the debt remains.
The federal government faces a similar situation. Surplus
revenues are accumulating in the Treasury Department's
operating cash accounts faster than the Bureau of the Public
Debt can efficiently dedicate them to reducing the public
debt. Consequently, surplus balances in these accounts have
reached historic levels, and they are likely to accumulate
even faster as the size of the surplus grows. Unless Congress
takes formal action to protect these funds, they are
available to be used or misused at any time in the
appropriations process. Fortunately, the House soon will
consider a bill (H.R. 4601) that would protect the budget
surplus from being raided by appropriations until prudent
decisions can be made about its use.
why debt reduction needs a boost
Thanks to unexpected budget surpluses, the U.S. Department
of the Treasury issued less new debt than it redeemed each
year. It conducted several ``reverse'' auctions to buy back
old high-interest debt. And it successfully reduced the
amount of federal debt held by the public in less than three
years by $230 billion, from $3.77 trillion in October 1997 to
$3.54 trillion in April 2000. Chart 1 clearly shows that its
efforts have been successful and impressive.
[Charts not reproducible in the Record.]
Despite this effort, the Treasury still is awash in cash.
Examining the Treasury Department's monthly reports over this
same period (see Appendix) reveals that, after accounting for
normal seasonal fluctuations, the closing balances of its
operating cash accounts have grown dramatically and, more
important, the rate at which cash is accumulating in them has
accelerated. The linear trend line in Chart 2 shows both
the growth in the closing balances in the cash accounts
and the projected growth under current conditions.
Essentially, if no provisions are made to protect these
balances, in August 2002--two months before the midterm
elections--appropriators would have access to almost $60
billion in non-obligated cash.
Unfortunately, even this projection may be too
conservative. Examination of month-to-month changes in the
closing balances indicates that the rate of cash accumulation
has started to accelerate, which will cause the closing
balances to grow even faster. The trend line in chart 3 shows
that the amount of positive monthly change in closing cash
balances has, after accounting for normal fluctuation,
increased since October 1997, and cash balances could start
to increase by an average of $20 billion per month within two
years.
The Treasury Department faces extraordinary cash management
challenges as it attempts to repay the debt held by the
public steadily and without destabilizing financial markets
that depend on federal debt instruments as a standard of
measurement. By protecting accumulated cash balances from
misuse, Congress could provide the Treasury Department with
the flexibility it needs to do its job more effectively.
treasury's limited debt management tools
The Treasury relies on three basic debt management tools to
reduce the debt held by the public in a controlled manner.
Issuing less debt
As old debt matures and is redeemed, the Treasury
Department issues a slightly smaller amount of new debt in
return, thereby reducing the total debt held by the public.
This is the federal government's most cost-effective and
preferred method of debt reduction. However, it is not a
simple process to determine how much new debt should be
issued. If the Treasury Department returns too much debt to
the financial market, it misses an opportunity to retire
additional debt. If it returns too little to the markets, the
cost of federal debt instruments will rise, driving down
their yields and disrupting many private-sector retirement
plans.
Reverse auctions
The Treasury Department periodically conducts reverse
auctions in which it announces that it will buy a
predetermined amount of specific types of debt instruments
from whoever will sell them for the best price. This method
quickly reduces debt held by the public, but it can be
expensive. Investors holding a T-bill that will be worth
$1,000 in 20 years may be willing to sell it for $995 if they
need the money now and believe that is the best price they
can get. However, if they know the Treasury Department has
made a commitment to buy a large number of T-bills in a short
period of time, investors may hold out for $997--a premium of
$2 million on every $1 billion of debt the Treasury
Department retires.
Purchasing debt instruments
The Treasury Department can use private-sector brokers to
purchase federal debt instruments on the open market without
having it revealed that the client is the federal government.
This method is slow, but it allows the Treasury Department to
take advantage of unpredictable fluctuations in financial
markets to buy back federal debt instruments for the best
possible price. This method must be used carefully and
discreetly to avoid having investors, upon realizing that the
true buyer is the federal government, hold out for higher
prices.\1\
why timing and flexibility are important
The Treasury Department needs time and flexibility to use
debt management tools effectively. It often will need to
allow large balances to accumulate in the operating cash
accounts while it waits for the opportunity to buy back
federal debt instruments at the best possible price. If these
balances are unprotected, they may prove irresistible
temptations for appropriators with special-interest
constituencies.
A prudent Secretary of the Treasury would not risk
disrupting financial markets by recklessly reducing the
amount of new debt issued each year, but might increase
the number and size of reverse auctions to ensure that
surplus revenues are used for debt reduction rather than
remain available to congressional appropriators. The
taxpayers would, at best, pay more than necessary to
retire the federal debt, and they might find that
appropriators have spent the surplus before it could be
used to pay down debt
making debt reduction automatic
Fortunately, Congress has the opportunity to ensure that
the Treasury's large cash balances are not misused in the
appropriations process. The U.S. House of Representatives
will soon consider H.R. 4601, the Debt Reduction
Reconciliation Act of 2000, recently approved by the House
Ways and Means Committee. This legislation, sponsored by
Representative Ernest Fletcher (R-KY), is designed to give
the Treasury Department the time and flexibility it needs to
use debt management tools most effectively. It would protect
the on-budget surplus revenues collected during the remainder
of fiscal year (FY) 2000 and appropriate them for debt
reduction by depositing them in a designated ``off budget''
Public Debt Reduction Account.
Although the surplus revenues could still cause an increase
in cash balances, the cash would be dedicated in the Debt
Reduction Account rather than in the Treasury Department's
operating cash account. Appropriators would be able to
reallocate these funds only by first rescinding the
appropriation for debt reduction in legislation that would
have to pass both houses of Congress and gain presidential
approval. Once surplus revenues are deposited in the Debt
Reduction Account, appropriators would have very limited
ability to increase spending without creating an on-budget
deficit, which many taxpayers would perceive as a raid on the
Social Security trust fund.
H.R. 4601 would effectively protect the surplus revenues
that are collected during the remainder of FY 2000; moreover,
it serves as model for how Congress should allocate
unexpected windfalls in the future. It does not preclude tax
reform because it is limited to the current fiscal year and
therefore affects only revenues that have already been
collected or that will be collected before any tax reform
legislation takes effect. Nevertheless, once the Debt
Reduction Account is established, Congress could continue to
appropriate funds to the account at any time. Consequently,
Congress would retain the option to reduce revenues through
tax reform and still have a mechanism to prevent unexpected
surplus revenues, once collected, from being used for any
purpose other than the debt reduction.
H.R. 4601 would give the Treasury flexibility to use its
debt reduction tools in the most effective manner. Surplus
revenues deposited in the Debt Reduction Account would remain
available until expended, but only for debt reduction. The
department would be able to schedule reverse auctions at the
most advantageous times, make funds available to brokers
buying back debt on the open markets, or decrease the size of
new debt issues--depending on which mechanism, or combination
of tools, proves most cost effective.
how to improve h.r. 4601
Although H.R. 4601 demonstrates a real commitment of
members of the House to fiscal discipline, the legislation
could be improved. Congress should consider requiring the
Secretary of the Treasury also to deposit all revenue
received from the sale of Special Issue Treasury Bills (which
are sold only to the Social Security Administration) in the
Debt Reduction Account. This would preclude the possibility
of any future raids on the Social Security trust fund.
Congress should also consider adding language to H.R. 4601
to automatically appropriate future real (rather than
projected) surplus revenues to the Debt Reduction Account.
This would allow Congress the flexibility to implement tax
reforms while also guaranteeing that surplus revenues, once
collected, could be used only for debt reduction.
conclusion
Many Americans assume that if surplus revenues are not used
for spending or tax
[[Page S4986]]
cuts, they automatically reduce the national debt. Indeed,
this has become an unstated premise in discussions of fiscal
policy, whether in the press, academia, or Congress.
Unfortunately, the premise is incorrect.
To make the premise true, the Treasury Department should be
able to make specific provisions for retiring debt. If it is
not given the power and obligation to do so, the surplus
revenues accumulating in its operating cash accounts will be
subject to misuse by appropriators. Congress has an
opportunity and obligation to give the Treasury Department
the time and flexibility it needs to utilize its debt
management tools effectively when it considers H.R. 4601.
This bill offers an effective first step toward the goal of
making sure that budget surpluses do not disappear in new
spending programs.
What Is the National Debt?
The national debt consists of Treasury notes, T-bills, and
savings bonds that were sold to raise cash to pay the ongoing
operational expenses of the federal government. National debt
held by the public consists of debt instruments sold to
anyone other than a federal trust fund, such as the Social
Security trust fund. Most federal debt held by the public is
owned by state and local governments, pension plans, mutual
funds, and individual retirement portfolios.
Most investors consider federal debt instruments to be cash
equivalents that pay interest, and they are strongly
motivated to hold them until maturity--up to 30 years in the
case of T-bills. Many institutional investors, particularly
pension funds, are required to maintain a certain portion of
their portfolio in cash equivalents, and they depend on the
federal government to issue new debt when their old
investments mature and are redeemed. In addition, many
lenders, particularly mortgage companies, use the market
price of federal debt instruments as a measurement device to
determine appropriate rates of return on alternative
investments. These lenders rely on the federal government to
maintain enough federal debt in circulation to make this
measurement valid.
APPENDIX
U.S. TREASURY OPERATING CASH AND TOTAL PUBLIC DEBT: OCTOBER 1997--APRIL 2000
[In millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Total
Treasury Treasury borrowing from borrowing from
Date operating operating Change the public: the public: Change
cash: opening cash: closing opening closing
balance balance balance balance
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997:
October............................................... 43,621 20,261 -23,360 3,771,141 3,777,456 6,315
November.............................................. 20,261 19,778 -483 3,777,456 3,806,564 29,108
December.............................................. 19,978 31,885 12,107 3,806,564 3,804,792 -1,772
1998:
January............................................... 31,885 40,307 8,422 3,804,792 3,779,985 -24,807
February.............................................. 40,307 16,280 -24,027 3,779,985 3,810,549 30,564
March................................................. 16,280 27,632 11,352 3,810,549 3,830,686 20,137
April................................................. 27,632 88,030 60,398 3,830,686 3,770,099 -60,587
May................................................... 88,030 36,131 -51,899 3,770,099 3,761,503 -8,596
June.................................................. 36,131 72,275 36,144 3,761,503 3,748,885 -12,618
July.................................................. 72,275 36,065 -36,210 3,748,885 3,732,515 -16,370
August................................................ 36,065 36,427 362 3,732,515 3,766,504 33,989
September............................................. 36,427 37,878 1,451 3,766,504 3,720,092 -46,412
October............................................... 38,878 36,217 -2,661 3,720,092 3,735,422 15,330
November.............................................. 36,217 15,882 -20,335 3,735,194 3,757,558 22,364
December.............................................. 15,882 17,503 1,621 3,757,558 3,752,168 -5,390
1999:
January............................................... 17,503 57,070 39,567 3,752,168 3,720,919 -31,249
February.............................................. 57,070 4,638 -52,432 3,720,919 3,722,607 1,688
March................................................. 4,638 21,626 16,988 3,722,611 3,759,624 37,013
April................................................. 21,626 58,138 36,512 3,759,624 3,674,416 -85,208
May................................................... 58,138 25,643 -32,495 3,674,416 3,673,865 -551
June.................................................. 25,643 53,102 27,459 3,673,865 3,651,619 -22,246
July.................................................. 53,102 39,549 -13,553 3,651,619 3,652,812 1,193
August................................................ 39,549 36,389 -3,160 3,652,812 3,679,282 26,470
September............................................. 36,389 56,458 20,069 3,681,008 3,633,290 -47,718
October............................................... 56,458 47,567 -8,891 3,632,958 3,638,712 5,754
November.............................................. 47,567 6,079 -41,488 3,639,079 3,645,212 6,133
December.............................................. 6,079 83,327 77,248 3,645,212 3,680,961 35,749
2000:
January............................................... 83,327 62,735 -20,592 3,680,961 3,596,976 -83,985
February.............................................. 62,735 21,962 -40,773 3,596,570 3,613,071 17,131
March................................................. 21,962 44,770 22,808 3,653,701 3,653,447 39,746
April................................................. 44,770 92,557 47,787 3,653,447 3,540,781 -112,666
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sources: U.S. Department of the Treasury.
Endnote
1. There is no way to know whether this particular debt
management tool is being used by the Treasury Department at
the time. If such knowledge were available, it would
demonstrate a lack of discretion that would make this tool
ineffective.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I think Senator Voinovich is going to be
on the floor shortly. I would like to be briefed on what our time
restraints are. How much time do we have on the amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is no time limitation. We have the usual
unanimous consent agreement to recess at 12:30 for the policy
luncheons.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized.
Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague,
Senator Allard, in offering this amendment. It is an important
amendment if we are ever going to make a dent in our tremendous
national debt.
Like all of my colleagues, I am thrilled that the United States is in
the midst of the greatest economic expansion in the history of our
nation. It has provided opportunity and prosperity for millions of
Americans.
However, even with all of our good fortune, we cannot ignore the
tremendous debt that we owe, and we certainly cannot allow the booming
economy to blind us to this reality.
For nearly a year and a half now, Mr. President--throughout my
service in this body--I have made it my mission to remind my colleagues
of the size of our national debt. Right now, the debt of the United
States of America stands at $5.7 trillion. Right now, it costs us more
than $224 billion a year to service that debt--which is more than $600
million a day in interest costs alone.
Thirteen cents out of every Federal dollar goes to pay interest on
the national debt, at a time when 16 cents goes for national defense,
18 cents goes for nondefense discretionary spending and 53 cents goes
for entitlement spending. We currently spend more on interest to the
national debt than we spend on Medicare.
I agree with General Accounting Office (GAO) Comptroller General
David Walker, who, in testimony before the House Ways and Means
Committee last year, said:
This generation has a stewardship responsibility to future
generations to reduce the debt burden they inherit, to
provide a strong foundation for future economic growth, and
to ensure that future commitments are both adequate and
affordable. Prudence requires making the tough choices today
while the economy is healthy and the workforce is relatively
large--before we are hit by the baby boom's demographic tidal
wave.
That is a wonderful quote.
We should also listen to other experts, such as CBO Director Dan
Crippen, who, earlier this year, testified before the Senate Budget
Committee that ``most economists agree that saving the surpluses,
paying down the debt held by the public, is probably
[[Page S4987]]
the best thing that we can do relative to the economy.''
And then there is Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, who has
testified that ``my first priority would be to allow as much of the
surplus to flow through into a reduction in debt to the public. From an
economic point of view, that would be, by far, the best means of
employing it.''
Logic dictates that the money we are spending for our debt interest
payments could be better spent elsewhere, and in my view--as well as
the experts' view--the sooner we can pay down that debt, the sooner we
will be able to use tax dollars where they are most needed.
In other words, if we pay down the debt and get rid of the interest,
we can use that money to reduce taxes or to address some of the
priorities that we continue to talk about every day on the floor of the
Senate.
That is why I believe our top fiscal priority should be reducing the
national debt. It is the best thing we could do with our on-budget
surplus. And as I have said a number of times on the Senate floor, if
families and businesses use their surplus cash to pay off debts, then
our Nation should do the same thing.
If I have big credit card debt, or if I am in business and I owe
debt, and I have an opportunity to pay off that debt, most families and
most businesses would do so.
It is also interesting to note that if you look at the companies
today on the New York stock exchange, the ones whose values have held
up are those companies that do not have a substantial amount of debt. I
think we know that if families in America were in the same position we
are in, they would pay off that debt and get rid of that interest cost.
The amendment that Senator Allard and I propose would take the first
step in putting us on a course of fiscal responsibility.
According to the latest estimates put forth by the Congressional
Budget Office (CBO), the United States is projected to achieve an on-
budget surplus of $26 billion in fiscal year 2000.
We are talking about fiscal year 2000 money. For my colleagues who
want to cut taxes, we are talking about the on-budget surplus for the
year 2000. We can't use it to reduce taxes. The only thing we can do
with it is to spend it or use it to pay down the debt. There is no
other alternative. We have already set aside $14 billion in the budget
resolution to pay for military operations in Kosovo, natural disaster
relief in the U.S., Colombian drug eradication assistance, and other
supplemental spending.
Under the Allard-Voinovich amendment, the remaining $12 billion on-
budget surplus would be applied towards debt reduction, not more
spending. In addition, when the CBO releases its re-estimates of the FY
2000 on-budget surplus in July, Senator Allard and I intend to offer
another amendment that will allocate any additional on-budget surpluses
to debt reduction.
I remind my colleagues that this money can't be used to reduce taxes.
It can only be spent. We want to get it off the table before it is
spent.
Of the $26 billion on-budget surplus that we have today, $22 billion
of that is overpayment into Part A of Medicare. This extra money we
have is Medicare money that has been paid into Part A.
The concern that I have is if we don't pay down the national debt
with whatever on-budget surplus we achieve, Washington will spend the
money. Ever since the CBO first projected we would have a budget
surplus back in 1998, Congress and the administration have looked for
every possible way to spend the money.
I remind my colleagues, if you include the supplemental
appropriations, fiscal year 2000 discretionary spending will increase
by $37 billion, a 6.4 percent increase over fiscal year 1999. When
compared to the Consumer Price Index, that is nearly three times the
rate of inflation. This is tremendous growth in Government spending. We
have to stop it. We have to put a lid on our spending.
Our amendment strikes a fair balance that allows us to use a portion
of the on-budget surplus for debt reduction instead of just spending
the entire on-budget surplus for the sake of spending. We have to show
discipline and use our on-budget surplus to pay down our debts.
I am proud we have worked in the last couple of years in the Senate
to rein in spending. I believe we must use whatever on-budget surplus
that we have to pay down the debt. When we reduce the national debt, we
send a positive signal to Wall Street and Main Street. Lowering the
debt encourages more savings and investment, the kind that fuels
productivity and continued economic growth. It also lowers interest
rates, which is a real tax reduction. In addition, it ensures we won't
return to deficit spending.
If we can't at this time with the economy booming do something about
reducing the national debt, we will have missed a golden opportunity.
We will have said to the young people of this country: We don't care
about your future; we are going to let you pay for those things that we
weren't willing to pay for or do without during the last number of
years.
Mr. ALLARD. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. VOINOVICH. I yield.
Mr. ALLARD. I compliment the Senator from Ohio for his hard work on
this particular issue. It is a pleasure to work with the Senator on
looking at fair alternatives to pay down the debt. This is important to
future Americans.
People ask, how will it affect me personally? If you buy a new car,
the Government is not competing with you for that money; or if you go
to pay for college education, the Government is not competing with you
for that money; if you buy a home, the Government is not competing with
you for that money. It tends to hold down interest rates. That means it
costs less. It costs less to get a college education, costs less to pay
for your home, and it costs less to buy a new car.
It is important not only to the security of this country, but to
Americans individually.
I thank Senator Voinovich from Ohio for his steadfastness in fighting
this issue. It has been a pleasure to work with him and the other
cosponsors on this amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this bill becomes effective on October 1
of this year. I am pleased to accept the amendment. It will affect the
budget surplus that is in effect at that time.
We accept the amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3346) was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. ALLARD. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendment No. 3304, As Modified
(Purpose: To set aside $43,000,000 for research, development, test and
evaluation for the extended range conventional air-launched cruise
missile program of the Air Force)
Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I call amendment No. 3304 and send a
modification to the desk that I believe has been cleared by both sides,
and I ask for its immediate consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Missouri [Mr. Ashcroft], for himself and
Mr. Bond, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Breaux, and Ms. Landrieu, proposes
an amendment numbered 3304, as modified.
Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of
the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 109 of the substitute, between lines 11 and 12,
insert the following:
Sec. 8126. Of the total amount appropriated by this Act for
the Air Force for research, development, test and evaluation,
up to $43,000,000 may be made available for the extended
range conventional air-launched cruise missile program of the
Air Force.
[[Page S4988]]
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, this is one of the amendments we have
indicated, under the authority we received yesterday, Senator Inouye
and I have modified, and, as modified, we are prepared to agree with
the Senator and ask for him to proceed on that basis.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri.
Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for his continuing
support for this amendment and his continuing support for our national
defense. I also thank my cosponsors, Senators Bond, Conrad, Landrieu,
and Breaux.
This amendment will provide an additional $23 million, bringing the
total to $43 million, for the development of an extended-range cruise
missile, which is the successor to what is known as the CALCM, the
Conventional Air-Launched Cruise Missile.
The Defense authorization bill contains $86.1 million for this
project. This amendment increases the appropriation to half of the
authorized amount. According to the Air Force and their officials, this
new total, $43 million, is needed to start this program.
This cruise missile will be launched from the B-52 bomber to
accurately strike strategic targets deep inside enemy territory without
significant risk to our pilots or our planes. It will provide the Air
Force its only air-launched, long-range, all-weather, precision weapon
with a range of over 600 miles. I believe this amendment has been
approved by both sides, and I thank the chairman and ranking member for
their support.
It is important we have this kind of capacity. We have found that our
ability to have precision capacity for striking the enemy is very
important to the maintenance of our own independence and the protection
of our own fighting individuals in our Armed Forces. I am grateful for
the cooperation in this respect, and I yield the floor.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am pleased to rise today to offer with
my colleague from Missouri, Senator Ashcroft, an amendment which
increases the appropriation for a new, more advanced cruise missile for
the B-52 from $20 million to $43 million.
As my colleagues are aware, the B-52 is the sole carrier of the
Conventional Air Launched Cruise Missile [CALCM], a conventional
variant of the nuclear-capable Air Launched Cruise Missile [ALCM]. Our
nation has relied on the CALCM in all recent conflicts and it has
become the weapon of choice for theater commanders. The CALCM offers
range, payload, and accuracy that are superior to any other
conventional stand-off munition in service today, including the Navy's
Tomahawk.
A year ago, as Operation Allied Force was underway, we had a
tremendous problem. The United States had expended more than 200 CALCMs
against Iraq and Yugoslavia and we had less than 100 remaining.
I asked the Pentagon what they were going to do about this situation
and they recommended that we convert the remaining, ALCMs not needed by
the United States Strategic Command for nuclear missions to CALCMs. I
was pleased to work with the Air Force and the defense committees to
secure funding to do just that. Today, the remaining unneeded 322 ALCMs
are being converted to CALCMs.
However, conversion will only give us around 400 CALCMs, and to meet
future threats our nation will require around 1,000 of these missiles.
In May 1999 I was informed that there was no plan to make up the
shortfall.
I went to Senators Warner and Levin, the chairman and ranking member
of the Armed Services Committee, and asked them to adopt my amendment
requiring the administration to come up with a plan to replace the
CALCM. That amendment passed on May 27, 1999, and I was pleased to have
my friend from Missouri, Senator Ashcroft, as an original cosponsor.
The result of the Air Force's study was inclusion in General Ryan's
unfunded priority list of $86.1 million in fiscal year 2001 and $689.7
million throughout the future years defense plan for research and
development and production of more than 600 extended range cruise
missiles (ERCMs), also referred to as extended range CALCMs (CALCM-
ERs). The ERCM will offer all of the advantages of the CALCM and
dramatically extend its range, to beyond 1,000 miles.
I am pleased that both the Senate and House Defense authorization
bills fully support General Ryan's request for $86.1 million in Fy01.
However, the Senate Defense appropriations bill provides only $20
million and the House Defense appropriations bill includes no funding.
Consequently, I am very pleased that the chairman of the
Appropriations Committee, Senator Stevens, and the ranking member of
the Defense Subcommittee, Senator Inouye, have agreed to support the
amendment that Senator Ashcroft and I have brought to the floor today.
This amendment will increase the ERCM appropriation to $43 million,
enough for the Air Force to begin work on this important program during
the coming fiscal year.
A quick start to ERCM program will ensure that the B-52 remains
relevant and our nation retains the capability to strike vital targets
with tremendous accuracy at long range in the coming years. I
appreciate the cosponsorship of Senators Bond and Breaux and look
forward to continuing to work with Senator Ashcroft, the Senate's
defense committees, and the Air Force to make the ERCM a reality.
I thank the chairman and ranking member again for their support, and
yield the floor.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no further debate, the question is
on agreeing to the amendment.
The amendment (No. 3304), as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. ASHCROFT. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. INOUYE. 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. INOUYE. Mr. President, section 8118 of H.R. 4576, a bill making
appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending
September 30, 2001, and for other purposes, refers to the National
Center for the Preservation of Democracy. What is the National Center
for the Preservation of Democracy? What is the rationale and purpose of
the National Center for the Preservation of Democracy?
I will do my best to respond to the above questions.
The history of America demonstrates the vision and intent of its
Founding Fathers when framing the Constitution. As a living document
the Constitution has proven over time its capacity to meet the changing
needs of the United States, ensuring the protection of all of its
people. The story of Americans of Japanese ancestry represents a
complete lesson of democracy in action and exemplifies the American
dream. From immigration in the late 1800s, to issues of citizenship in
the early 1900s, to the incarceration of citizens and the heroics of
Japanese-American soldiers during World War II, and to redress in the
1980s, the Japanese-American story is about the struggles and victories
of individual freedoms in the United States. Through their experiences,
Japanese-Americans have validated all that is possible and all that is
right with our constitutional guarantees. The Japanese-American story
celebrates the triumphs of American democracy.
The National Center for the Preservation of Democracy will be
headquartered in the renovated and transformed Historic Building of the
Japanese-American National Museum in Los Angeles, CA. The Historic
Building is a National Historic Landmark as designated by the National
Trust for Historic Preservation. This space will keep alive and teach
about a remarkable time in U.S. history, a period of shame and
sacrifice and insult that ended with a burst of glory demonstrating the
majesty of our government to recognize its errors and make a public
apology and some restitution.
The Japanese-American story illustrates the splendor of the United
States and the magnificence of the Constitution. Since their initial
immigration in the late nineteenth century, Japanese-Americans have
believed
[[Page S4989]]
strongly in the American dream and have sought to make America their
home. Although confronted by prejudice and discrimination, Japanese-
Americans have utilized that very democratic process in the spirit
intended by the Framers of the Constitution. The story of Japanese-
Americans is about democracy in action.
Like other immigrants, Japanese journeyed to the United States
seeking opportunity and dreams of a better life. From the moment they
arrived in the late nineteenth century, however, they were confronted
with social prejudice and discriminatory laws already in place. The
Naturalization Act passed by Congress on March 26, 1790, which
restricted naturalization to ``free white men,'' was unavailable to
persons of Japanese ancestry. Designated as ``aliens ineligible for
citizenship'' (the only racialized group so defined until 1952),
Japanese immigrants were rendered as perpetual aliens, a condition that
prevented their full enjoyment of life, liberty and property.
Nonetheless, the Issei--Japanese immigrants--courageously maintained
their belief in America and moved forward to establish their new lives
in the United States. More than that, through hard work and
perseverance, Japanese enterprise prospered in the face of
indifference.
Without citizenship, Japanese immigrants were subject to alien land
laws, which prohibited ownership of land by ``aliens ineligible for
citizenship.'' Although denied full participation as Americans,
Japanese immigrants consistently sought, through non-violent legal
efforts, to undo the intent of discriminatory laws through public
campaigns, litigation, and other peaceful strategies. Their hopes in
becoming citizens were further hindered, however, when on November 13,
1922 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the Ozawa case, definitively
prohibiting Japanese immigrants from become naturalized citizens on the
basis of race. Moreover, the future of the Japanese in the United
States was further restricted when President Calvin Coolidge signed the
Immigration Law of 1924, which was based on race and omitted Japanese
from the quota system.
When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, America was
stunned and angered. For Japanese Americans, who had been subject to
discrimination because of their ancestry, the whole world turned dark.
However, as the United States confronted the threat of fascism in Asia
and Europe, American democracy itself was put to a challenge and, for
Japanese Americans, it fell short. Because they ``looked like the
enemy'' and were thought to be a military threat, 120,000 individuals
of Japanese ancestry, two-thirds of whom were American born citizens,
were excluded from the West Coast, forcibly removed, and incarcerated
in concentration camps. These prison camps were at first operated by
the Army, and then the War Relocation Authority. This event has become
the largest violation of constitutional rights in American history.
For Japanese-American males, the beginning of the war was especially
humbling and painful as the Selective Service designated them as, IV-C,
enemy aliens. Although they were loyal to the United States, these
American born citizens were rendered ineligible to enlist in the armed
services. Nonetheless, when the government announced the formation of
the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, a segregated unit of Japanese-
Americans, thousands of young Japanese-American men enthusiastically
volunteered to serve. Stigmatized by the classification as enemy
aliens, they were eager to prove their loyalty to the United States.
Government officials were surprised by the overwhelming response. While
family and friends were incarcerated behind barbed wire, the soldiers
of the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team,
as well as the Military Intelligence Service fought and died for the
United States and for the preservation of democracy with no guarantee
that their civil rights would be restored. There service demonstrates
the ultimate in patriotism and love of country.
In 223 days of combat, the 100th Infantry Battalion and 442nd
Regimental Combat Team became one of the most decorated units in United
States military history. Among the many awards and decorations received
by the men of the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental
Combat Team are 20 Congressional Medals of Honor, 354 Silver Star
Medals, 33 Distinguished Service Crosses and over 3600 Purple Heart
Medals. Their distinguished record includes the rescue of the ``Lost
Battalion'' and participation in the assault that cracked the Gothic
Line of Nazi strongholds. Affirming the unending truth that loyalty to
one's nation is not modified by racial origin, these soldiers fought
two wars, one for democracy overseas and the other for racial
discrimination back home in the United States. As President Harry
Truman said, ``You fought not only the enemy but you fought prejudice--
and you have won.'' Indeed, these brave and courageous young men
believed that their sacrifices would make life better not only for
Japanese-Americans but for all Americans. The privileges of democracy
that Americans enjoy today are the result of the blood shed by these
American heroes. The sacrifices of officers and men of the 442nd
Regimental Combat Team, the 100th Infantry Battalion, the Military
Intelligence Service, and others have helped to make America a more
democratic nation, and their valiant service continues to be a source
of pride for all Americans.
In response to their heroic achievements, President Harry Truman
challenged ``Keep up the fight and we will continue to win and to
assure that this republic stands for what the Constitution says it
stands for: the welfare of all of the people, all of the time.'' Many
members of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team took President Truman's
words to heart. Several soldiers went on to fight for democracy through
their service as elected officials while others continued to serve in
the armed forces. Eventually Japanese-Americans went on to fight in the
Korean War and later the Vietnam War. Unlike Japanese-American soldiers
during World War II who, after being designated as ``enemy aliens,''
served to prove their loyalty, Japanese-American soldiers in the Korean
war and the Vietnam war served in the Armed Forces as Americans, full-
fledged citizens of the United States. Without the need to prove their
status as Americans, the reason for these courageous men to serve was
purely for the love of country.
Inevitably, the impact of the heroic service of Japanese-American
soldiers during World War II went on to enhance the civil liberties of
all Americans. In 1948, segregation in the armed services ended in
large part from the efforts of the 442nd and in 1952 the Walter-
McCarran Act made all races eligible for naturalization and eliminated
race as a bar to immigration. Thus, Japanese immigrants, many of whom
were parents of World War II veterans, were able to finally attain
their citizenship as Americans.
One of the more magnificent examples of American democracy at its
most powerful form is the passage of the Civil Liberties Act of 1988,
signed into law by President Ronald Reagan, in which the United States
recognized its grave and fundamental injustice of violating the civil
liberties of its own citizens. Advanced by many Japanese-American war
veterans, the law makes a formal apology and provides token restitution
to former internees. No other country in the world can make the claim
of acknowledging and apologizing for its mistakes--a point that further
illustrates the grand majesty of the United States. More importantly,
to demonstrate its commitment of assuring that similar events do not
happen, the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 provided funds to educate all
Americans about the lessons from the incarceration.
While $50 million was authorized in the Civil Liberties Act of 1988
for educational purposes, the appropriations were significantly reduced
because of the lack of funds available to pay the eligible individual
claimants. The Civil Liberties Public Education Fund received only $5
million to fulfill its congressional mandate to educate the public
about the lessons learned from the incarceration. With limited funding,
the education of the exclusion, forced removal, and incarceration of
Japanese-Americans during World War II was dramatically compromised and
the government's commitment to educating the public has yet to be
effectively fulfilled. The National Center
[[Page S4990]]
for the Preservation of Democracy established in the Historic Building
of the Japanese-American National Museum will achieve that objective.
Through their efforts since the late 19th century, Japanese-Americans
have secured the civil rights of all Americans, contributing to the
most basic tenets of America's foundational ideals and promises--of
life, liberty, and property. Although clearly denied many of those
freedoms at various times throughout history, Japanese-Americans
consistently sought, through non-violent legal efforts, to secure
Constitutional guarantees and the promise of the American dream. With
that, they deepened and enriched the meaning of the American identity--
the notion of who is an American--and the rights, privileges, and
obligations that comprise the Republic's very core.
The National Center for the Preservation of Democracy will be
assisted by the Japanese-American National Museum in the examination of
the rights and freedoms of Americans in the United States through the
Japanese-American experience. Because its mission is dedicated to the
study, preservation, and interpretation of democratic issues, the
National Museum maintains extensive expertise that will enable the
National Center for the Preservation of Democracy to:
Develop and exhibit nationwide programs about the issues of
democracy;
Have ready access to significant collections relating to these
issues, especially the legacy of Japanese-American military service,
including artifacts of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team and other
military units;
Benefit from the relationships established and maintained by the
National Museum, especially with federal institutions and related
community organizations; and
Provide a dynamic visitor experience in a historic building.
The National Center for the Preservation of Democracy will be created
as a dedicated space where visitors can learn about the enduring
fragility and ultimate success of individual and constitutional rights.
The headquarters will be established in a renovated and transformed
historic building provided by the Japanese American National Museum.
Some of the historical highlights of the building, which was
constructed in 1925, include:
Served as the first Buddhist temple in Southern California and as a
center for social and religious life for the immigrant community;
Site where priests, who lived in the building, were arrested without
due cause immediately following the bombing of Pearl Harbor;
Used as one of the sites where the Army instructed ``aliens and non-
aliens of Japanese ancestry to assemble for transportation to Santa
Anita Racetrack, which had been transformed into an Assembly Center;
Served as a storage site for personal articles that could not be
taken by those forced to leave; and
Served as a hostel for many returning from camp and had no where to
go.
The National Center for the Preservation of Democracy will provide
educational programming that includes exhibitions, media arts
presentations, public programs, conferences, and civic dialogue/public
forums. The National Center for the Preservation of Democracy will:
Present a permanent, audience-focused exhibition addressing American
democracy through the Japanese-American experience, including the
military service of Japanese-Americans (in World War I, World War II,
the Korean war, and the Vietnam war);
Maintain and pursue key civil and military materials for a
comprehensive collection;
Create and esttablish new opportunities for civil and military
research, especially through collaboration with federal institutions
such as the National Archives and the Smithsonian Institution to make
documents more accessible;
Conduct education and public programs examining democracy in action;
and
Produce educational media arts productions that present and interpret
related issues of democracy for broad national and international
broadcast and distribution as well as for on-site exhibitions.
I respectfully believe that the National Center for the Preservation
of Democracy is most worthy of our support.
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. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Amendments Nos. 3175, as modified, 3284, as modified, 3288, 3289, 3291
as modified, 3298, 3299, 3300, as modified, 3301, as modified, 3305,
3312, 3314, as modified, 3315, as modified, 3316, 3321, 3323, 3324,
3325, 3326, 3329, 3331, 3332, as modified, 3334, 3335, as modified,
3336, as modified, 3337, 3338, 3339, as modified, 3342, 3343, 3344,
3352, 3357, as modified, and 3293, as modified, en bloc
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I am now prepared to present the first
managers' package that we worked out with my good friend from Hawaii.
These amendments have now been cleared in a modified form, or in the
original form. But I call attention of the Chair to the numbers of the
amendments that are included in our package.
It is: 3175 by Senator Collins; 3284 by Senator Bingaman; 3288 and
3289 by Senator Shelby; 3291 by Senator Kyl; 3298 and 3299 by Senator
Helms; 3300 and 3301 by Senator Robb; 3305 by Senator Abraham; 3312 by
Senator Leahy; 3314, 3315, and 3316 by Senator Kennedy; 3321 by myself;
3323 by Senator Roberts; 3324 and 3325 by Senator Snowe; 3326 by
Senator Landrieu; 3329 by Senator Gregg; 3331 and 3332 by Senator
Feinstein; 3334 and 3335 by Senator Warner; 3336 and 3337 by Senator
Nickles; 3338 by Senator Allard; 3339 by Senator Coverdell; 3342 by
Senator Bingaman; 3343 and 3344 by Senator Inhofe; 3352 by Senator
Roth; 3357 by Senator Roberts; 3293, as modified, by Senator Landrieu.
I send a modification to the desk of the last item, amendment No.
3293, which I just mentioned, of Senator Landrieu.
Mr. President, I believe all of those amendments are before the desk.
To the extent they be modified, they have been agreed to by Senator
Inouye and myself pursuant to the unanimous consent agreement last
night.
I ask unanimous consent that these amendments be considered en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. STEVENS. I ask unanimous consent that they be agreed to en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendments (Nos. 3175, 3284, 3288, 3289, 3291, 3298, 3299, 3300,
3301, 3305, 3312, 3314, 3315, 3316, 3321, 3323, 3324, 3325, 3326, 3329,
3331, 3332, 3334, 3335, 3336, 3337, 3338, 3339, 3342, 3343, 3344, 3352,
3357, 3293, and 3293, as modified) were agreed to, as follows:
AMENDMENT NO. 3175, AS MODIFIED
(Purpose: To provide for the continued design and analysis under the
reentry systems applications program for the advanced technology
vehicle)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:
Sec. . Of the funds made available in Title IV of this
Act under the heading ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Navy'', up to $2,000,000 may be made available
for continued design and analysis under the reentry systems
applications program for the advanced technology vehicle.
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3284, AS MODIFIED
(Purpose: A substitute to amendment No. 3284, offered by Mr. Bingaman
that provides for the conversion of the configuration of certain AGM-65
Maverick missiles)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section.
Sec. . Of the funds made available in Title III of this
Act under the heading ``Missile Procurement, Air Force'', up
to $5,000,000 may be made available for the conversion of
Maverick missiles in the AGM-65B and AGM-65G configurations
to Maverick missiles in the AGM-65H and AGM-65K
configurations.
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3288
(Purpose: To increase funding for carrier modifications)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:
Sec. . Of the funds available under the heading ``Weapons
and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army'' in Title III of this Act,
up to $10,000,000 may be made available for Carrier
Modifications.
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3289
(Purpose: To increase funds for End Item Industrial Preparedness)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:
[[Page S4991]]
Sec. . Of the fund available under the heading ``Research
Development Test and Evaluation, Army'' in Title IV of this
Act, under ``End Item Industrial Preparedness'' up to
$5,000,000 may be made available for the Printed Wiring Board
Manufacturing Technology Center.
____
amendment no. 3291, as modified
(Purpose: To provide, with an offset, $6,000,000 for research,
development, test, and evaluation Defense-Wide for the Arrow Missile
Defense System (PE603875C) for enhanced interoperability of the system
between the United States and Israel)
On page 109, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:
Sec. 8126. Of the amount appropriated under title IV under
the heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense-Wide'', up to $6,000,000 may be made available for
the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization International
Cooperative Programs for the Arrow Missile Defense System in
order to enhance the interoperability of the system between
the United States and Israel.
____
amendment no. 3298
(Purpose: to provide funding for the Display Performance and
Environmental Evaluation Laboratory Project of the Army Research
Laboratory)
At the appropriate place in the bill, add the following new
section:
Of the funds made available in Title IV of this Act under
the heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Army'', up to $3,000,000 may be made available for the
Display Performance and Environmental Evaluation Laboratory
Project of the Army Research Laboratory.
____
amendment no. 3299
(Purpose: to provide funding for the Innovative Stand-Off Door
Breaching Munition (ISODBM) technology)
At the appropriate place in the bill, add the following new
section:
Of the funds made available in Title IV of this Act under
the heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Navy'', up to $4,500,000 may be made available for the
Innovative Stand-Off Door Breaching Munition.
____
amendment no. 3300, as modified
(Purpose: To make available $3,000,000 for high-performance, non-toxic,
inturnescent fire protective coatings aboard Navy vessels)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:
Sec. . Of the amount appropriated under title II under
the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', up to
$3,000,000 may be available for high-performance, non-toxic,
inturnescent fire protective coatings aboard Navy vessels.
The coating shall meet the specifications for Type II fire
protectives as stated in Mil-Spec DoD-C-24596.
____
Amendment No. 3301, As Modified
(Purpose: To make available $2,000,000 for advanced three-dimensional
visualization software with the currently-deployed, personal computer-
based Portable Flight Planning Software (PFPS))
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:
Sec. . Of the amount appropriated under title II under
the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Air Force'', up to
$2,000,000 may be available for advanced three-dimensional
visualization software with the currently-deployed, personal
computer-based Portable Flight Planning Software (PFPS).
____
Amendment No. 3305
(Purpose: modification of H.R. 4576, Department of Defense
Appropriations Bill, 2001)
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
Sec. . Of the funds appropriated in title IV under the
heading RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND EVALUATION, ARMY; up
to $15,000,000 may be made available to continue research and
development on Silicon carbide research (PE 63005A).
____
Amendment No. 3312
(Purpose: To make available $5,000,000 for Other Procurement for the
Army for the development of the Abrams Full-Crew Interactive Skills
Trainer)
On page 109, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:
Sec. 8126. Of the amount appropriated under title III under
the heading ``Other Procurement, Army'', $5,000,000 shall be
available for the development of the Abrams Full-Crew
Interactive Skills Trainer.
____
Amendment No. 3314, As Modified
(Purpose: To make available $5,000,000 for the Environmental Security
Technical Certification Program (PE603851D) for technologies for the
detection of unexploded ordinance from live-fire activities)
On page 109, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:
Sec. 8126. (a) Availability of Funds.--Of the amount
appropriated under title IV under the heading ``Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', up to
$5,000,000 may be available for the Environmental Security
Technical Certification Program (PE603851D) to develop and
test technologies to detect unexploded ordinance at sites
where the detection and possible remediation of unexploded
ordinance from live-fire activities is underway.
____
amendment no. 3315, as modified
(Purpose: To make available $5,000,000 for the Strategic Environmental
Research and Development Program (PE603716D) for technologies for the
detection and transport of pollutants resulting from live-fire
activities)
On page 109, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:
Sec. 8126. (a) Availability of Funds.--Of the amount
appropriated under title IV under the heading ``Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'' up to
$5,000,000 may be available for the Strategic Environmental
Research and Development Program (PE6034716D) for the
development and test of technologies to detect, analyze, and
map the presence of, and to transport, pollutants and
contaminants at sites undergoing the detection and possible
remediation of constituents attributable to live-fire
activities in a variety of hydrogeological scenarios
____
amendment no. 3316
(Purpose: To make available $5,000,000 for Surface Ship & Submarine
HM&E Advanced Technology (PE603508N) for continuing development by the
Navy of the AC synchronous high-temperature superconductor electric
motor)
On page 109, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:
Sec. 8126. Of the amount appropriated under title IV under
the heading ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation,
Navy'', up to $5,000,000 may be available for Surface Ship &
Submarine HM&E Advanced Technology (PE603508N) for continuing
development by the Navy of the AC synchronous high-
temperature super-conductor electric motor.
____
amendment no. 3321
(Purpose: To provide $1,000,000 from Operation and Maintenance, Navy to
continue a public service initiative)
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
Sec. . Of the funds provided in Title II under the
heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', up to $1,000,000
may be available to continue the Public Service Initiative.
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3323
(Purpose: To provide research and development funds for a chemical and
biological defense program)
In the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:
Sec. . Of the funds made available in Title IV of this
Act under the heading ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', up to $3,500,000 may be made
available for Chem-Bio Advanced Materials Research.
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3324
(Purpose: to set aside $3,000,000 for the Navy for operation and
maintenance of a Navy benefits center)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert:
Sec. 8126. Of the total amount appropriated by title II
under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'', up to
$3,000,000 may be available only for a Navy benefits center.
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3325
(Purpose: To clarify that the authority to enter into contracts for
LPD-17 class ships on an incrementally funded basis is to provide for
two such ships)
On page 25 of the substituted original text, line 9, insert
``two'' after ``and''.
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3326
(Purpose: to add funding to the Navy Information Technology Center)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following:
Sec. .Of the funds available in Title IV under the
heading ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation,
Navy'', up to $8,000,000 may be made available for the Navy
Information Technology Center.
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3329
(Purpose: To provide research and development funds for the Solid State
Dye Laser project)
In the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:
Sec. . Of the funds made available in Title IV of this
Act under the heading ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', up to $7,000,000 may be made
available for Solid State Dye Laser project.
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3331
(Purpose: To make available $1,000,000 for Middle East Regional
Security Issues)
At the appropriate place, insert:
Sec. . Of the amount available in Title II under the
heading ``Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'',
$1,000,000 shall be available for Middle East Regional
Security Issues.
[[Page S4992]]
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3332, AS MODIFIED
(Purpose: To make available $5,000,000 for research, development, test,
and evaluation for the Navy for continuation of the Compatible
Processor Upgrade Program (CPUP))
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:
Sec. . Of the total amount available under title IV under
the heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Navy'', up to $5,000,000 may be made available for
continuation of the Compatible Processor Upgrade Program
(CPUP).
____
AMENDMENT NO. 3334
(Purpose: To provide, with an offset, funds for five additional Weapons
of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CST) and for additional
equipment for the Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Team
program)
At the appropriate place, insert the following:
Sec. __. (a) Additional Funds for Weapons of Mass
Destruction Civil Support Teams.--The amount appropriated
under title II under the heading ``Operation and Maintenance,
Army'' is hereby increased by $3,700,000, with the amount of
the increase available for the activities of five additional
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CST).
(b) Additional Funds for Equipment for Weapons of Mass
Destruction Civil Support Team Program.--(1) The amount
appropriated under title III under the heading ``Other
Procurement, Army'' is hereby increased by $11,300,000, with
the amount of the increase available for Special Purpose
Vehicles.
(2) The amount appropriated under title III under the
heading ``Procurement, Defense-Wide'' is hereby increased by
$1,800,000, with the amount of the increase available for the
Chemical Biological Defense Program, for Contamination
Avoidance.
(3) Amounts made available by reason of paragraphs (1) and
(2) shall be available for the procurement of additional
equipment for the Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support
Team (WMD-CST) program.
(c) Offset.--The amount appropriated under title II under
the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' for
the Defense Finance and Accounting Service is hereby reduced
by $16,800,000, with the amount of the reduction applied to
the Defense Joint Accounting System (DJAS) for fielding and
operations.
____
amendment no. 3335, as modified
(Purpose: To add $30,000,000 for information security initiatives; and
to provide offsets)
On page 109 of the substitute, between lines 11 and 12,
insert the following:
Sec. 8126. (a) Of the funds available in title II under the
heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'',
$30,000,000 may be available for information security
initiatives: Provided, That, of such amount, $10,000,000 is
available for the Institute for Defense Computer Security and
Information Protection of the Department of Defense, and
$20,000,000 is available for the Information Security
Scholarship Program of the Department of Defense.
____
amendment no. 3336, as modified
(Purpose: To provide funds for a live-fire side-by-side test of the
air-to-air Starstreak and Stinger missiles)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:
Of the funds provided in Title IV of this Act under the
heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Army''
up to $12,000,000 may be made available to commence a live-
fire, side-by-side operational test of the air-to-air
Starstreak and air-to-air Stinger missiles from the AH64D
Longbow helicopter, as previously specified in section 8138
of Public Law 106-79.
____
amendment no. 3337
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:
Of the funds appropriated in the Act under the heading
``Operations and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'' up to $5,000,000
may be made available to the American Red Cross for Armed
Forces Emergency Services.
____
amendment no. 3338
(Purpose: To set aside for the XSS-10 micro-missile technology program
$12,000,000 of the amount appropriated for RDTE, Air Force)
On page 109 of the substitute, between lines 11 and 12,
insert the following:
Sec. 8126. Of the amount appropriated by title IV under the
heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation, Air
Force'', up to $12,000,000 is available for the XSS-10 micro-
missile technology program.
____
amendment no. 3339, as modified
(Purpose: To provide for a demonstration project for the development of
a chemical agent warning network to benefit the chemical incident
response force of the Marine Corps)
At the appropriate place in the bill, insert the following
new section:
Sec. . Of the funds made available in Title IV of this
Act under the heading ``Research, Development, Test and
Evaluation, Navy'', up to $3,000,000 may be made available
for the development of a chemical agent warning network to
benefit the chemical incident response force of the Marine
Corps.
____
amendment no. 3342
(Purpose: To provide support for the Bosque Redondo Memorial)
On page 109, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:
Sec. 8126. Of the amounts appropriated under title II under
the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Defense-Wide'',
$2,000,000 may be made available for the Bosque Redondo
Memorial as authorized under the provisions of the bill S.
964 of the 106th Congress, as adopted by the Senate.
____
amendment no. 3343
(Purpose: To make available, with an offset, $300,000 for research,
development, test, and evaluation Defense-Wide for Generic Logistics
Research and Development Technology Demonstrations (PE603712S) for air
logistics technology)
On page 109, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:
Sec. 8126. (a) Increase in Amount.--Of the amount
appropriated under title IV under the heading ``Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', $300,000
shall be available for Generic Logistics Research and
Development Technology Demonstrations (PE603712S) for air
logistics technology.
(b) Offset.--Of the amount appropriated under title IV
under the heading referred to in subsection (a), the amount
available for Computing Systems and Communications Technology
(PE602301E) is hereby decreased by $300,000.
____
amendment no. 3344
(Purpose: To make available, with an offset, $5,000,000 for research,
development, test, and evaluation Defense-Wide for Explosives
Demilitarization Technology (PE603104D) for research into ammunition
risk analysis capabilities)
On page 109, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:
Sec. 8126. (a) Increase in Amount.--Of the amount
appropriated under title IV under the heading ``Research,
Development, Test, and Evaluation, Defense-Wide'', $5,000,000
shall be available for Explosives Demilitarization Technology
(PE603104D) for research into ammunition risk analysis
capabilities.
(b) Offset.--Of the amount appropriated under title IV
under the heading referred to in subsection (a), the amount
available for Computing Systems and Communications Technology
(PE602301E) is hereby decreased by $5,000,000.
____
amendment no. 3352
(Purpose: to make available $92,530,000 for C-5 aircraft modernization)
On page 109, between lines 11 and 12, insert the following:
Sec. 8126. Of the amount appropriated under title IV under
the heading ``Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation,
Air Force``, $92,530,000 may be available for C-5 aircraft
modernization, including for the C-5 Reliability Enhancement
and Reengining Program.
____
amendment no. 3357, as modified
(Purpose: To increase by $2,000,000 the amount available for Military
Personnel Research (PE61103D); and to offset that increase by reducing
the amount available for the AFCC engineering and installation program
(PE65123D) by $2,000,000)
On page 110 of the substituted original text, or at the
appropriate place, insert the following:
Sec. . Of the total amount appropriated by title IV under
the heading ``Research, Development, Test and Evaluation,
Defense wide'', up to $4,000,000 may be made available for
Military Personnel Research.
____
amendment no. 3293, as modified
(Purpose: To make available an additional $21,000,000 for the
Information Technology Center and the Human Resource Enterprise
Strategy)
At the appropriate place in the bill insert the following
new section:
Sec. . Of the amounts appropriated under title II under
the heading ``Operation and Maintenance, Navy'' up to
$7,000,000 may be available for the Information Technology
Center.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in
order to move to reconsider the vote en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, and I move
to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators
Lott and Cochran be added as original cosponsors to the Leahy
amendment, No. 3312.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, we are going now to our respective party
[[Page S4993]]
luncheons. We expect to have additional items to present to the Senate
upon our return.
I again call attention of Members to the report of the
Parliamentarian on those amendments that are subject to rule XVI. It
will be my intention when we return to ask that the Chair rule that
rule XVI applies to those amendments, and that they be declared out of
order.
____________________