[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 110 (Wednesday, September 15, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9242-S9245]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will proceed to consideration of S. 2674, which the clerk will 
report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 2674) making appropriations for military 
     construction, family housing, and base realignment and 
     closure for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.


                     Amendments Nos. 3660 and 3661

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
managers' amendments are agreed to.
  The amendments (Nos. 3660 and 3661) were agreed to, as follows:


                           amendment no. 3660

(Purpose: To direct the Defense Department to assess the impacts on the 
  military family housing program if the family housing privatization 
                     limitation is not eliminated)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:
       Sec.   . (a) Assessment of Budget Authority Limitation on 
     Military Housing Privatization Initiative.--(1) The Secretary 
     of Defense shall assess the impacts on the military family 
     housing program of having the total value of contracts and 
     investments undertaken under the Military Housing 
     Privatization Initiative reach the limitation on budget 
     authority for the initiative specified in section 2883(g) of 
     Title 10, United States Code.
       (2) The assessment shall include: an estimate of the 
     appropriations and period of time necessary to provide the 
     level and quality of housing contemplated under the Military 
     Housing Privatization Initiative in the event that limitation 
     in 10 USC 2883(g) is not eliminated and the potential impact 
     on military families if the limitation is not eliminated.
       (b) The Secretary of Defense shall, no later than December 
     31, 2004, provide to the congressional defense communities a 
     report of the assessment required by subparagraph (a).
       (c) Military Housing Privatization Initiative Defined.--In 
     this section, the term ``military housing privatization 
     initiative'' means the programs and activities undertaken 
     under the alternative authority for the acquisition and 
     improvement of military housing under subchapter IV of 
     chapter 169 of title 10, United States Code.


                           amendment no. 3661

  (Purpose: To make available additional funds for the Commission on 
  Review of Overseas Military Facility Structure of the United States)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:
       Sec. 131. Of the amount appropriated by this Act, 
     $1,500,000 shall be available to the Commission on Review of 
     Overseas Military Family Structure of the United States.

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there 
will be 1 hour of debate equally divided.
  The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, I yield such time as he needs to the 
distinguished chairman of the Homeland Security Appropriations 
Committee, who did such a wonderful job this week passing our Homeland 
Security appropriations bill that is going to fund homeland security 
for all of our country, after which I would like to reclaim the floor 
for the Military Construction Subcommittee report.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Mississippi.
  Mr. COCHRAN. Madam President, I thank the distinguished Senator from 
Texas for yielding briefly to me.
  I take this opportunity to thank the staff members who worked so hard 
on the appropriations subcommittee for homeland defense for helping 
ensure the passage of the bill and handling the bill in such a 
professionally competent way. They all reflected credit on the Senate 
by their professional way of handling their duties. It was because of 
their hard work that we successfully completed action on the bill last 
night. I commend them all.
  On our side of the aisle, Rebecca Davies is the chief clerk of that 
subcommittee. She is assisted ably by Carol Cribbs, Les Spivey, James 
Hayes, Kimberly Nelson, and Avery Forbes. The staff members who served 
on the minority side were equally professional and helpful in carrying 
out their duties.
  I commend Senator Byrd for his cooperation with our efforts to 
complete action on the bill. I especially thank Senator Reid, the 
assistant leader, who was actively involved on the floor helping to 
ensure the orderly flow of amendments. I am very grateful for his 
assistance as well.
  My good friend Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska was here when he was 
needed during the handling of that bill, and without his guidance and 
good judgment on several occasions, we would not have successfully 
completed action on the bill last evening.
  But for all Senators who cooperated with us on time agreements and 
the like, I express my deepest appreciation and thank them.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Madam President, I am very pleased to bring forward 
for the Senate's consideration the fiscal year 2005 Military 
Construction appropriations bill. I am also pleased to be joined by the 
ranking member of the Military Construction Subcommittee, Senator 
Feinstein from California. We have worked very closely on this bill. 
That has been our tradition. We have never had a problem with our 
Military Construction bill. Frankly, we have done some very important 
work and begun to help the Department of Defense shape the military for 
the future.
  Our bill provides, including $5.3 billion for military construction, 
$4.2 billion for military family housing; $166 million for NATO 
infrastructure, and $246 million for base realignment and closure 
costs.
  Although the military construction needs continue to exceed resources 
available, I am very pleased that the bill provides a significant 
increase over last year's funding. I believe the bill we have on the 
floor today attends both to the President's most pressing priorities 
and to the concerns of Senators.
  Since September 11, 2001, we have made great demands on our military 
personnel as they have waged the global war on terror. The sacrifices 
have been widely shared, but the demands have been particularly acute 
for our Reserve components who have faced deployments on a scale and 
for durations unprecedented in the post-World-War II era. Facilities 
support for the Guard and Reserve have traditionally failed to keep 
pace with need.
  I am pleased that this year the administration increased the request 
for Reserve component funding by 68 percent. Even this higher figure, 
however, is not adequate and the bill adds an additional $194 million 
or 31 percent more for critically needed projects in the Guard and 
Reserve. We believe this bill does a very good job of providing the 
resources needed to accomplish our military mission. But nothing is so 
critical to the mission as the people who carry it out, particularly in 
a time in which so much is being asked of them. For that reason, we 
have paid particular attention to projects that enhance the quality of 
life of our military members and their families.
  The bill provides over $1 billion for construction of new modern 
barracks, $188 million for design and construction of new hospital and 
medical facilities, and $11 million for child development centers to 
serve our military families. It also provides a 9-percent increase over 
last year for family housing construction operations and maintenance.
  Because we are concerned about the quality of life of our military 
families, I want to comment briefly on a provision that is addressed in 
our bill and is very important to meeting the needs in the future for 
military housing. In 1996,

[[Page S9243]]

Congress passed legislation to provide the Defense Department with 
authority to enter into partnerships with private entities for the 
acquisition and management of military family housing. Because the 
initiative was unprecedented, the budget authority for the program was 
capped at $850 million, pending an evaluation of the program's success. 
The success has been striking.
  To date, the Department of Defense has awarded 34 privatization 
projects comprising 63,200 housing units. Another 63 projects involving 
116,000 housing units in 37 States and the District of Columbia are 
pending. The program has accelerated significantly the elimination of 
inadequate housing for our Armed Forces and has placed thousands of 
military families in better housing far sooner than would have been 
possible otherwise. Customer satisfaction with privatized housing is 
extremely high, and the Defense Department estimates the program will 
decrease long-term housing costs by 10 to 15 percent due to more 
efficient maintenance. The Department expects to reach the statutory 
cap late this fall, and the cap must be raised or the program would 
end. However, the Congressional Budget Office has decided to change its 
methods for scoring the additional authority, counting not just the 
annual appropriations required to fund the Government's contribution to 
privatized housing but also all the estimated benefits that accrue to 
the Government over time.
  Effectively, the CBO intends to score the additional authority to 
enter into partnerships as though there were no partnerships, and the 
Government was paying for all of the new housing itself and paying for 
it all this year. That approach, besides seriously overstating the 
Government's expenditures for housing, negates any advantage of 
privatized housing over traditional military construction.
  Public-private partnerships are relatively new, and we recognize CBO 
is struggling to account for them properly. We acknowledge the appeal 
of a theoretically comprehensive accounting of Federal financial 
activities. But the practical reality of CBO's proposed approach will 
be prolonged substandard housing for tens of thousands of our military 
families, with not a dollar difference in the amount of money 
Government is spending. So we are not going to allow that to stand.
  I hope a sensible solution to this issue will prevail. We are going 
to continue to work with the Budget Committee, CBO, the Armed Services 
Committee, and in our own Military Construction conference. In the 
meantime, there is an amendment that is now part of our package that 
will direct the Defense Department to assess the impact on our military 
families if we fail to resolve this issue and, by doing so, put a 
marker down to address the issue in conference if it is not settled 
elsewhere.
  Last year this bill differed from the administration's request in 
only one significant way, and that was overseas construction. The 
administration was in the early stages of its global posture review and 
there were many uncertainties about the future of the U.S. military 
presence overseas. Today, the Department's vision is clearer. The 
Department has made significant progress in thinking about the future 
of our overseas military facilities and, over the recess, began to 
publicly disclose some of that thinking. They have made a major step in 
the right direction. The Independent Overseas Basing Commission created 
by last year's Military Construction Appropriations bill is up and 
running and has begun its assessment of overseas infrastructure needs. 
The commission's work will help inform our evaluation of our overseas 
construction requirements.
  I and my colleague, Senator Feinstein, have visited numerous military 
installations all over the world. I know our colleagues have as well. I 
am certain they have found the same thing we have--that the needs at 
these installations almost always outstrip the resources we are able to 
direct to them. Although most of the needs are eventually addressed, 
sometimes the urgency of the requirement isn't fully appreciated here 
in Washington, where the budget requests are being prepared.
  This bill provides funding for a number of projects which are badly 
needed at particular installations and are in the future years defense 
plan, but which were not included in this year's budget request. All of 
them have been carefully screened by the military services to ensure 
that they meet urgent military requirements; all are top priorities for 
installation commanders, and all have been authorized in the Senate 
version of the Defense authorization bill. A significant percentage of 
them support our Guard and Reserve forces, and I am pleased we were 
able to include them in this bill. They are a priority.
  The bill before the Senate was approved by the Committee on 
Appropriations on a unanimous vote of 29-0. I thank my ranking member, 
Senator Feinstein, for her cooperation and counsel throughout this 
process, and compliment her staff, Christina Evans and B.G. Wright, who 
have worked so cooperatively with my staff in preparing this bill. My 
staff, Dennis Ward and Sean Knowles, also have done a terrific job. 
They have traveled to the bases where we have requests to find out for 
themselves that these requests are needed and how we can best meet the 
needs of all of the military installations in our country and where our 
troops are based overseas. I so appreciate their professionalism and 
support.
  I am pleased to offer the 2005 Military Construction appropriations 
bill for the Senate's consideration.
  I yield the floor to my colleague, Senator Feinstein.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Graham of South Carolina). The Senator 
from California is recognized.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my chairman, 
Senator Hutchison, in recommending the 2005 Military Construction 
appropriations bill to the Senate. I thank her because it has been 
quite wonderful for me to work with her over the years. We have 
exchanged positions, ranking and chairman, on this subcommittee. I 
think we have always worked in a collegial and very productive way. Her 
leadership has been outstanding and I, for one, am very grateful. I 
also thank Senator Stevens and Senator Byrd for their leadership and 
assistance in guiding this bill through committee and to the floor.
  America's men and women in uniform need all the support we can give 
them, so expeditious consideration of defense bills, such as this one, 
sends an important signal of support to our troops. I know both Senator 
Hutchison and I want to send that signal.
  The President's budget request for MilCon was $9.55 billion. That was 
only 2.5 percent over last year's enacted level. But with the support 
of Chairman Stevens and Senator Inouye, the committee was able to add 
another $450 million to meet the urgent construction needs of our 
active and reserve military bases.
  As Senator Hutchison indicated, one issue that dominated discussion 
in the 2005 Military Construction program is the question of how to 
rescue the military family housing privatization initiative from 
running out of budget authority. I agree very much with my chairman. By 
accelerating the pace at which new family housing can be provided, the 
program has had a tremendous impact on the quality of life for 
thousands of military families. The question is, what do we do now? 
This year, the subcommittee was faced with that dilemma because we will 
shortly be out of money. So as the chairman said, we hope the 
authorizing committee--the Budget Committee as well as the Armed 
Services Committee--can find a solution to this problem by the time 
this bill is in conference.
  Again this year, the subcommittee was faced with a still evolving 
proposal for realigning our overseas military force structure. I want 
to take a couple of minutes to discuss it because I think it is 
important. Last year, the Defense Department unveiled a preliminary 
plan for a major restructuring of forces in Europe and Korea, a plan 
that has now evolved into a wide-ranging global rebasing plan. The 
President publicly announced the plan last month, noting that 60,000 to 
70,000 troops currently stationed overseas would return home over the 
next decade. Unfortunately, the administration offered few other 
details about the plan, and it appears some key basing decisions remain 
unresolved. This year's budget request included more than $700 million 
for overseas military construction.
  The planning and rebuilding of military facilities is a complicated 
process, constrained by long lead times, and the

[[Page S9244]]

lack of a fully developed basing plan by the Department of Defense has 
hampered the subcommittee's ability to make prudent and informed 
decisions about overseas military construction.
  For this reason, several proposed overseas construction projects were 
deleted from the Senate bill pending a clearer understanding of how 
they might be affected by the global basing plan.
  It is clear the Department is continuing to fine-tune and adjust its 
global realignment plan. Although the President has announced plans to 
realign and significantly reduce the number of U.S. troops stationed 
overseas, the committee has received no requests from the Defense 
Department that would support moving forces back to the United States; 
nor has the Defense Department provided Congress with any cost estimate 
or timetable for its global restructuring plan. It is said that ``the 
devil is in the details'' and we do need those details. Only when the 
Defense Department provides Congress with a comprehensive, well-
reasoned plan will the committee have a sufficient understanding of the 
associated military construction requirements to proceed with 
confidence.
  Until the Defense Department completes its overseas basing review and 
presents a plan to Congress, projects supporting activities that may be 
subject to further change should remain on hold. I think we are both in 
agreement on that.
  The Overseas Basing Commission that Senator Hutchison led, and I 
supported, was established last year. That, we hope, will provide some 
valuable insights for Congress regarding this process. We have given 
this matter great consideration, and I commend Senator Hutchison for 
laying out the position of the subcommittee so clearly and completely 
in the report accompanying our bill. I very much agree with that.
  I thank Chairman Hutchison and the members of the Appropriations 
staff, Dennis Ward and Sean Knowles, for their hard work on this bill. 
I also thank my Appropriations staff, Christina Evans and B. G. Wright, 
sitting to my left, and my personal staff, Michael Schiffer and Chris 
Thompson, who does our appropriations, for their contributions.
  The work of the Military Construction Subcommittee enhances our 
Nation's efforts to build quality facilities for our military men and 
women, and I urge my colleagues to approve this bill.
  Mr. President, I want the chairman to know that at the appropriate 
time, I would like to enter into a colloquy between Senator Nelson and 
myself, to which the chairman has agreed.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, this would now be the appropriate time 
because I know of no speakers.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. There is one, and I would like to yield a few minutes 
to the Senator from Delaware, if I may, Senator Carper.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware.
  Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I thank Senator Feinstein for yielding to 
me at this time. I wish to express my appreciation on behalf of 
everyone at Dover Air Force Base for project funds that are included in 
this bill.
  Is this an appropriate time for me to make that statement?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Certainly.
  Mr. CARPER. I will proceed. Dover Air Force Base has been in 
existence a half century or more. The oldest control tower on any Air 
Force base in America, as far as I am aware, is at Dover Air Force 
Base. There has been a request for a number of years to try to replace 
that tower and put in new technology to provide better safety control 
of our aircraft on the Delmarva Peninsula.
  The committee sought to include that project last year and was unable 
to do so for the 2004 funding cycle. Senator Feinstein has been 
terrific in making sure it was included in the funding for this year. I 
express my gratitude to her and to Senator Hutchison for that 
inclusion.
  The importance of airlift today is great. We have, as my colleagues 
know, operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, supporting our personnel in 
Nigeria, Haiti--all over the world. The importance of airlift is only 
going to grow in the years ahead because of the redeployment of our 
forces, as we bring folks home and the need in the future to deploy 
them through airlift, and if we want to do it quickly, airlift is the 
key. Bases where we provide airlift today will only be more critical to 
our Nation's military security. There are a lot of Air Force bases. I 
do not know of any base on the east coast that does more in terms of 
providing the lift for our men, women, troops, materiel, and equipment 
than Dover Air Force Base.

  Within a few weeks, we are going to be breaking ground at Dover Air 
Force Base for a new aerial port. This is a new huge modernized cargo 
warehouse through which equipment will move from ground transportation, 
truck and rail, onto aircraft to be shipped all around the world, and, 
in other cases, off the aircraft to the port, and distributed through 
this country. It is a huge project. It was funded in the 2004 budget, 
and we break ground in a few days. We are excited about it. And we are 
finally seeing the oldest control tower in the Air Force being replaced 
by a modern, technologically current tower.
  There are 5,000 people who work at Dover Air Force Base. Many are 
families. A lot of their loved ones are abroad. Today they are all over 
the world. Their housing is not especially good. I believe there is 
some money in this Military Construction bill to help us on the housing 
side as well.
  For all of that and for all the families at Dover Air Force Base, for 
those of us who know how important the base is to our military 
readiness, we say our heartfelt thanks.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, before I yield back the remainder of 
my time, I would like to thank the Senator from Delaware for his 
comments. The control tower at Dover Air Force Base, which is I think 
about a $9 million appropriation, was on their ask list in 2004. 
Unfortunately, we could not do it, so we made it a high priority this 
year. I know both Senator Hutchison and I were really pleased to be 
able to do it.
  It is very nice for the Senator from Delaware to come to the floor to 
say thank you. Very few do that. It is appreciated. I thank the Senator 
very much.
  Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, speaking not only for myself, I know I 
speak for Senator Biden as well, for both of us.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I thank the Senator.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, before Senator Feinstein yields the 
floor, in case she has anything else to say, I say to the Senator from 
Delaware that he was very persistent last year. We did everything to 
try to help him with that last component of the increase in the 
capacity for Dover. We were not able to do that last year.
  Senator Feinstein did make it her highest priority this year. I want 
the Senators from Delaware to know that. I supported it fully, but we 
did remember that the Senator had pressed hard.
  Every one of us knows the great role that Dover Air Force Base plays 
in our military. They have one of the hardest jobs in all of our 
military, and that is the comforting of families when their loved ones 
are returned home, many times no longer alive in body but certainly in 
spirit. That is a huge job that is done beautifully at Dover. We 
appreciate that.
  We have added to the capacity of Dover Air Force Base that has such 
an important place in our military facilities throughout our whole 
country. We thank the Senator from Delaware for coming to the floor of 
the Senate to reemphasize that importance. I thank him very much.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I believe I can yield back the 
remainder of our time.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, before the Senator from California yields 
back her time, may I be recognized?
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Absolutely.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. I had some meetings this morning and was not planning on 
coming to the Chamber, but walking through the Senate today took me 
back to when I went to law school.
  When I went to law school in a very large class at George Washington 
University, as I recall, we had two women in that very large class. 
When I took the bar in Nevada after having graduated from law school, I 
think we had one woman who took the bar.
  It has been a while since I went to law school and took the bar but 
not that long, and the face of America has changed dramatically. Since 
I have come to the national legislature, the

[[Page S9245]]

face of the legislature has changed dramatically. The biggest change 
and I believe the most positive change that has taken place is women. 
Half the people going to law school today are now women. There are 
significantly larger numbers of women in the Congress than when I came 
here 22 years ago.
  When I first saw this Military Construction Appropriations 
subcommittee, this big important committee, being chaired by two women, 
I was so impressed I gave a little speech at that time.
  I cannot express my satisfaction of walking into this Chamber and 
seeing two women in charge of something as important as this 
Subcommittee on Appropriations. The legal profession--I have only 
picked that one area--and the second area I pick is the national 
legislature, are much better places as a result of women being 
involved, and there is no better example of that than these two 
wonderful human beings, the Senator from Texas and the Senator from 
California, who lead us on this committee.
  I hope people watching understand what a message this sends. It is 
said young girls are shunted aside because they do not have 
proclivities to go into science; let them do other things; let them 
become teachers and nurses--they have different kinds of minds. They 
are not scientists.
  One of the people I worked with, a brilliant man, told me women would 
never be able to be lawyers because their briefcases were too heavy. 
All of these old ideas are gone and these young girls who are hopefully 
watching or hear about this should focus on these two women who are 
leading us on this multibillion-dollar bill.
  I am so, I guess, enthralled with it. Walking into this Chamber and 
seeing these women lead this committee, I know--and I say this wherever 
I go, if I have the opportunity--we do much better work as a result of 
women becoming more a part of our legislative body. As far as I am 
concerned, there are no two better Senators than these two women who 
are on the Senate floor today directing what we should do in spending 
for our military construction throughout the world.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, the Senator from Nevada appeared on 
the floor and said similar words a year ago. I never expected he would 
come back a second time and do that again. I had his words printed up 
and gave a copy to my chairman and put one copy in my memory book. What 
should not be so rare, but I guess is rare, is the fact that women can 
do this work, women can participate in the great public policy debates 
of our day, women can work together, they can be effective and I think 
the fact that that is now becoming the given is important.
  The message Senator Reid sent to young women who may be out there 
saying, could I do this job some day, is absolutely, yes, if they get 
an education.
  The old proverbial myths that women cannot work together or women are 
jealous or women are this or women are that are not true. We are living 
examples of this, both Republican and Democratic women in the Senate. 
It is one of the great treats of our service that we are able to share, 
develop collegiality, be real professionals, and care about the people 
we represent.
  It is a great pleasure for me to hear and see the Senator from Nevada 
saying these things, and also, as I said before, to be able to work 
with Senator Hutchison. We have become good friends in the process. We 
do not always agree, but that does not matter. The point is there is a 
basic integrity and a commitment to do the right thing for the people 
we represent and the people in the military.
  So I thank Senator Reid and my thanks to my chairman. I yield the 
remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I thank Senator Reid for his very kind 
words. It means a lot to Senator Feinstein and myself that he would 
come to the floor and recognize the job we are doing. It is very 
thoughtful and we appreciate it very much.
  Once again, I think we have a good bill that has taken into 
consideration the priorities of our military, our administration, and 
the Senators who all came together to put a bill on the floor that 
would address the needs in a fair and balanced way throughout our 
country, and I thank my colleague from California. We have a great 
working relationship, which shows in the bill because it passed 
unanimously out of the committee, and I think it will pass unanimously 
out of the Senate. Hopefully we can go forward to start the 
construction projects October 1, the beginning of fiscal year 2005.
  I yield back the remainder of my time.


                florida national guard hurricane damage

  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, would the Senators from Texas 
and California be willing to engage me in a colloquy?
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. I would be pleased to engage in a colloquy with the 
Senator from Florida.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I would also be willing to engage in a colloquy with 
my friend from Florida.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I have come to the floor today 
to speak about the Florida National Guard and the damage to their 
critical facilities as a result of Hurricanes Charley and Frances. 
Although no armory or readiness center was lost to total destruction, 
there are many significant problems to over thirty facilities that need 
immediate attention. I am concerned that funds are made immediately 
available to fix buildings to ensure that they are not exposed to 
further damage and that the Florida National Guard can return to its 
high readiness in their home stations.
  I have received the assurances of LTG Steve Blum, Chief of the 
National Guard Bureau, that the $5 million necessary to make repairs to 
Florida's armories is already available in contingency accounts and 
will be released for obligation as soon as practical. Accordingly, I 
will not seek additional funds in the military construction bill for 
this purpose.
  The Florida National Guard has performed its State and Federal 
missions superbly over the last 2 years. At home and overseas the 
Florida National Guard has time and again been there for the people of 
the United States and Florida. We owe them our total support in the 
fastest possible repair of their facilities so that they can remain 
ready for all that we will continue to ask them to do in the days 
ahead.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. I thank the Senator from Florida for bringing this 
issue to the attention of our committee and the Senate. Contingency 
funds exist to support the requirements of the Florida National Guard 
and I am confident they will have what they need when they need it.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. I also thank the Senator from Florida for bringing 
this to our attention. I appreciate his sharp attention to the needs of 
Florida in this time of crisis, his determined efforts on behalf of 
their relief, and his unwavering support of the Florida National Guard.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. I thank the distinguished chairman and ranking 
member for their interest and I look forward to working with them on 
the range of issues that confront Florida in its recovery from these 
hurricanes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time having been yielded back, the 
question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read 
the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
proceed to the consideration of H.R. 4837, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (H.R. 4837) making appropriations for military 
     construction, family housing, and base realignment and 
     closure for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year 
     ending September 30, 2005, and for other purposes.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the text of the 
Senate measure is substituted for the House bill. The question is on 
the engrossment of the amendment and the third reading of the bill.
  The bill was read the third time.

                          ____________________