[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 130 (Tuesday, October 17, 2000)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1809]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 4205, FLOYD D. SPENCE NATIONAL DEFENSE 
                 AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                     HON. MARSHALL ``MARK'' SANFORD

                           of south carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, October 11, 2000

  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4205, the 
Floyd Spence National Defense Authorization Act. It might strike some 
as odd that I support the Authorization conference report after I 
opposed the Appropriations bill, and I wanted to spell out why.
  Admittedly, I have some disappointment with parts of H.R. 4205:
  Base Realignment and Closure Commission--H.R. 4205 does not include 
funding for two new BRAC rounds, despite the fact that the pentagon has 
estimated it has an excess base capacity of 23 percent. CBO estimates 
that two new BRAC rounds would save the Defense Department $4.7 billion 
by 2010, and that after completion in 2012, DOD could realize recurring 
savings of about $4 billion per year which could then be re-channeled 
toward better training, readiness and quality of life initiatives. It 
is my hope that Congress sees fit to include a Base Closure round in 
next year's bill
  Choice of Aircraft--H.R. 4205 includes funding for research, 
development and procurement of three different fighter planes (the 
Navy's F-18 E/F, The Air Force F-22, and the Navy & Air Force Joint 
Strike Fighter) when there is not a strong consensus that all three 
fighters are necessary. Some defense experts say the military needs the 
F-18 and F-22. Some say it needs the JSF instead. Congress' answer is 
simply to fund all of the fighter planes in question, at the expense of 
other aircraft (specifically bombers and unmanned aerial aircraft 
[UAVs]) that, while less glamorous, could prove more useful, while 
costing much less money and American lives.
  Colombia--I have deep reservations about the decision to drop a 
provision in the House-passed bill that would establish a limit of 500 
on the number of U.S. military personnel authorized to be on duty in 
the Republic of Colombia at any one time. I think that it would be a 
serious mistake for the U.S. to allow itself to get involved in a civil 
war in Colombia.
  But the conference report does include some very important items:
  Health Care Improvement--There are thousands of military retirees in 
the First District of South Carolina. Each of these retirees was once 
either a draftee or a recruit. They did their duty with the 
understanding that after 20 years of service, they were to have access 
to quality health care when they retired, and that that access would 
continue for the rest of their lives. That has not been the case. The 
Defense conference report extends Tricare to military retirees beyond 
age 65 as a supplement to Medicare. It is my hope that eventually 
Congress may move to a voucher system, in which the government ensures 
that vets get the care they deserve, without the accompanying 
bureaucracy and waiting periods. Any military retiree could simply get 
health care at the facility of their choice, and then be reimbursed.
  Readiness Funding--I'm concerned about the Administration's lack of a 
coherent national defense strategy. Our men and women in uniform have 
been dispatched across the globe in peacekeeping and humanitarian 
operations that are not in the national interest. This is wearing out 
our soldiers and equipment. Aircraft mission capability rates have 
declined, spare parts shortages continue, and recruiting and retention 
of quality personnel has become a major challenge. These problems have 
left the military less prepared to defend real national interests. The 
conference report to H.R. 4205 provides an additional $1.2 billion for 
critical readiness funding. I would prefer that Congress and the 
President turn away from trying to be the world's policeman. But if the 
Administration insists on dispatching troops across the globe, then 
Congress must ensure that these troops are at least prepared to carry 
out the mission.
  I might have done things a little differently, but I think that the 
country's soldiers and military retirees have some serious problems, 
and the gentleman from South Carolina and his committee have made an 
honest effort to address those problems. On balance, H.R. 4205 is a 
fair attempt at assessing and meeting the country's defense needs. I 
find it disturbing that the Defense Appropriations Act looks so 
different. There are many unauthorized items in the Appropriations 
bill, that at least appear more directed toward ensuring victory at the 
ballot box, rather than on the battlefield.
  I choose to base my national security votes on national priorities. 
Therefore, I support the Defense Authorization Conference Report, but 
oppose the Defense Appropriations bill.

                          ____________________