[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 130 (Monday, October 11, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11223-S11228]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   MILITARY CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2005--CONFERENCE REPORT

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 4837, 
which the clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Making appropriations for military construction, family 
     housing, and base realignment and closure for the Department 
     of Defense for fiscal year ending September 30, 2005.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
Senator from California, Senator Feinstein, and I have 5 minutes to 
speak on the military construction bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Mr. REID. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, I ask 
unanimous consent that the Senator from Connecticut be recognized 
following the disposition of the business the Chair has.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Texas.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, the Military Construction bill is a 
very important bill this year. Senator Feinstein, the ranking member, 
and myself as chairman of the committee wanted to talk about its 
importance.
  This is a bill that focuses on the quality of life for our military 
personnel and also makes sure they have the family housing and training 
facilities they need.
  In addition to our Military Construction bill, this is the disaster 
supplemental. This is the bill that was chosen to provide help for 
hurricane victims in Florida and drought relief for our farmers. Also, 
the Alaska pipeline that is so important to the economy of our country 
as well as to the economy of Alaska is in this bill. I am very pleased 
we were able to produce a bill that encompassed all of these very 
important items at the close of this very important session.
  There is in the military construction conference report $4.5 billion 
for active components construction and $9.45 million for Guard and 
Reserve construction. It is important that we increase the quality of 
the training facilities for our Guard and Reserve. Senator Feinstein 
and I made a point of doing that during this conference because we felt 
the Guard and Reserve is way behind in keeping up with the training 
facilities they need and for the job we are asking them to do. They 
certainly deserve it.
  We increased funding for military housing and worked with the defense 
authorization committee to make sure that the privatization cap was 
lifted--a very important step for the quality of housing for our 
military personnel.
  I am very proud of this bill. I am proud that we are meeting the 
military construction needs. I am proud we were able to provide for the 
needs of Florida in their disaster recovery efforts and also the 
drought that has actually been funded for not only the present drought 
in certain parts of our country but droughts in the past in Texas and 
other places where the money has run out.
  I am proud of this bill. I thank my ranking member, Senator 
Feinstein, for her help and valuable assistance in making this happen.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased that the conferees on the 
fiscal year 2005 Military Construction Appropriations bill have reached 
agreement, and I would like to say a few words about the bill.
  The conference report includes important funding for the 
reconstruction efforts in States affected by recent hurricanes and 
assistance for agricultural producers suffering from drought and other 
natural disasters.
  First, let me address the military construction portion of the 
agreement. While the President's budget request was $9.55 billion, only 
2.5 percent over last year's enacted level, the conference report 
provides $10 billion for military construction and family housing 
programs for fiscal year 2005.
  These new facilities are crucial to the well being of our troops, 
especially at a time when our active and Reserve forces are, along with 
their families, being asked to make enormous sacrifices for our 
country.
  The conference report also provides $11.6 billion in disaster 
assistance, including $8.8 billion for hurricane-related relief which 
is designated as emergency spending and $2.8 billion in assistance for 
agricultural producers suffering through drought and other natural 
disasters, which is offset by a cap on spending for the Conservation 
Security Program.
  I think we all recognize the importance of this assistance package, 
but I am disappointed that the majority insisted on treating 
emergencies in different part of the Nation unequally.
  Drought relief for farmers in the Midwest and across the Nation is no 
less important than hurricane relief in the Southeast and should not 
have required an offset from the Conservation Security Program.
  Offsetting this funding hobbles the effectiveness of one of the most 
important environmental programs in the Department of Agriculture.
  I was also concerned that the package requested by the President 
leapfrogged Federal Highway Administration assistance for damage done 
by the hurricanes ahead of the backlog of projects required to repair 
damage from past disasters.
  However, this concern was addressed by an agreement to fully fund the 
backlogged emergency relief program in the pending omnibus bill.
  Chairman Hutchison indicated at the conference that Speaker Hastert 
and Majority Leader Frist have committed to fully fund the States that 
need this assistance, and I appreciate their help on this issue.

  There are currently $752 million in projects that have not been 
funded, even though they have already qualified for emergency relief.
  California alone has over $240 million in projects that have not been 
funded. I appreciate Chairman Young's willingness to rectify this 
situation and look forward to the emergency relief funding program 
being funded in the omnibus.
  The conference agreement also includes Senator Stevens' provision on 
the Alaska Natural Gas pipeline.
  Senator Stevens has worked for the past few years to authorize 
funding for this pipeline, and I am pleased that we could get this done 
for the senior Senator from Alaska.
  The provision authorizes the construction of a pipeline from Prudhoe 
Bay, AK, to the lower 48, with a dedicated supply of natural gas to 
California.
  The provision provides Federal loan guarantees to whatever entity 
builds/ decides to build the pipeline, as Senator Stevens requested.
  The demand for natural gas in this country is growing exponentially, 
particularly in my State of California. Natural gas prices have risen 
dramatically over the past several years, from $2 per thousand cubic 
feet in 1998 to over $7 just this week.
  We need more natural gas, and I hope that Senator Stevens' provision 
to bring Alaska natural gas down to the lower 48 states and 
particularly California will help meet that demand.
  Mr. President, while I would have preferred to pass the Military 
Construction bill without the contentious issues surrounding this 
disaster assistance package, I support this conference report and hope 
my colleagues will do the same.
  Finally, I want to thank Senator Hutchison for the manner in which 
she handled this process. I have long admired her integrity and her 
leadership in reaching this agreement was outstanding.
  Mr. President, this is a good bill. It has had some hiccups along the 
way. One of them, of course, was the House put in the disaster relief 
package and had the signatures and would have eventually rolled us in 
conference.

[[Page S11224]]

However, Senator Hutchison said that we would have another conference, 
that she would not do this, and she kept her word. That is a very big 
thing in this body, that if you give your word, keep your word, and she 
did. I am very grateful for that.
  Because of this conference we were able to receive an amendment from 
the Senator from South Dakota, Senator Johnson, on drought relief. It 
was defeated, but then we were able to pass the bill without rancor and 
without a sense that in the dark of night the Democratic side had been 
done in.
  I am very proud to say that I think it is a good bill. I want to give 
Senator Hutchison credit for that. She kept her word. That is a very 
big item.
  I thank Senator Hutchison, and I appreciate the time.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, if I could just say thank you. I am 
very humbled by the remarks of the Senator from California and 
appreciate very much her recognition. Her leadership also got a 
commitment and will be in a colloquy regarding the highway funds that 
will also be attached to this report. The Senator from California and 
myself and other States took a back seat to the Florida highway needs 
after the hurricane, but we got assurances from the Speaker, the 
majority leader of the Senate, and the chairman of the Appropriations 
Committee on the House side that we would address this issue and get 
the funds for previous emergencies from the highway fund back into the 
39 States that gave them up for Florida to receive help right now.


            federal highway administration emergency relief

  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, as the ranking member of the 
Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, and General 
Government, I rise to discuss a matter of great importance to my State 
and 33 other States--namely, the continuing backlog of claims for the 
Federal Highway Administration's Emergency Relief program.
  The Military Construction Appropriations conference report that we 
are currently debating includes a title containing emergency disaster 
assistance. Within that title, a total of $1.202 billion is made 
available for the Emergency Relief Program. This appropriation carries 
with it the necessary language designating the funding as emergency 
spending.
  While I support the overall funding for the Emergency Relief Program, 
I strongly object to the bill language governing this appropriation. At 
present, there are 90 projects from a total of 34 States that have been 
waiting to receive emergency relief funds for road projects stemming 
from Presidentially declared disasters. A great many of these projects 
stem from disasters that took place years ago and those States have 
been waiting an inordinate length of time for reimbursement. Despite 
this fact, the language governing the appropriation contained in this 
conference report effectively places the needs stemming from the four 
recent hurricanes as well as one hurricane that took place 2 months ago 
to the head of the list. This language makes the $1.2 billion in the 
bill available only for those five hurricanes and then stipulates that, 
if there is any funding remaining after those needs are met, that 
remaining funding can be used for the projects on the backlog list.
  To my knowledge, we have never allowed certain natural disasters to 
get preferential treatment over other disasters under this program. And 
this new precedent will work a hardship on my state and a great many 
others. My State of Washington is still waiting for reimbursement of 
some $19.4 million stemming from six separate disasters dating as far 
back as the Nisqually earthquake in February 2001. The same can be said 
for 33 other states that are also owed varying amounts.
  Based on my objection and those of several other Senators, I 
understand that there have been a series of discussions among the 
appropriate congressional and administration leaders to set forth a 
plan on how this backlog of emergency relief claims will be addressed 
in the near future. This plan was discussed during the conference 
committee deliberations on the military construction bill so I would 
welcome the comments of the managers of that bill on this matter.
  Mrs. HUTCHINSON. I thank my friend from Washington for raising this 
issue. I share her concern that the existing backlog of emergency 
relief projects has not been adequately addressed under the disaster 
assistance title of this bill. Indeed, my State of Texas is still 
waiting to receive at least $17.2 million from no fewer than seven 
separate disasters including floods, hurricanes and ice storms dating 
all the way back to the end of calendar year 2000.

  During our conversations leading up the final conference meeting on 
this bill, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Mr. 
Young of Florida, assured me that an agreement had been reached on this 
matter between himself, the Speaker of the House and our majority 
leader. Under that agreement, sufficient emergency funding will be 
provided in the final omnibus appropriations bill for this year to 
ensure that the existing backlog of projects will be fully compensated. 
I made mention of this agreement during our open conference committee 
deliberations and I want to assure my friend from Washington that our 
mutual concern over this matter will be addressed fully in the final 
omnibus appropriations bill.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I too wish to thank the Senator from 
Washington for raising this critically important issue. Indeed, no 
State has been more disadvantaged than my own by the decision to target 
the available emergency relief funding in this bill largely if not 
exclusively to the recent hurricanes. That decision was not made by the 
conferees on the military construction portion of the bill. Rather, it 
was made by the full committee leadership. As such, I am grateful to 
the subcommittee chairman, Senator Hutchison, for working with her own 
leadership and Chairman Young in gaining their assurance that these 
outstanding emergency relief claims will be fully funded in this year's 
omnibus appropriations bill.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I thank the managers of the bill for their attention to 
this matter and I'm pleased that they have received assurances that 
this problem will be addressed fully in the omnibus appropriations act. 
For the interest of all Senators, I ask unanimous consent that the most 
up-to-date backlog list provided to me by the Federal Highway 
Administration be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 CURRENT EMERGENCY RELIEF PROGRAM FUND REQUESTS
                                           [Updated 10/4/04 8:00 a.m.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Amount         Subtotal  by
                  State                                  Event                    Requested           State
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska...................................  AK02-1, Spring 2002 Flood........           603,262
Alaska...................................  AK03-1, October & November 2002           9,931,409
                                            Floods.
Alaska...................................  AK03-2, November 3, 2002                 30,296,337        40,831,008
                                            Earthquake.
American Samoa...........................  AQ03-1, May 2003 Flooding/                4,243,500
                                            Landslides.
American Samoa...........................  AQ04-1, January 4, 2004 Tropical         15,725,525        19,969,025
                                            Cyclone Heta.
Arizona..................................  AZ01-1, October 2000 Flood.......           514,800
Arizona..................................  AZ02-1, Rodeo-Chediski Wild Fire          2,280,200         2,795,000
                                            2002.
Arkansas.................................  AR01-1, December 2000 Ice Storm..         4,586,937
Arkansas.................................  AR04-1, April 2004 Flooding......         1,585,011         6,171,948
California...............................  CA83-1, 1983 Devil's Slide.......       150,316,533
California...............................  CA03-1, December 2002 Storms.....        45,863,000
California...............................  CA04-1, October 2003 San Diego           44,300,000       240,479,533
                                            Wildfires.
Colorado.................................  CO03-1, June 2003 Sinkhole I-70..         2,048,928         2,048,928
Connecticut..............................  CT04-1, March 25, 2004 I-95 Truck         9,200,000         9,200,000
                                            Fire.
Delaware.................................  DE03-1, 2003 Hurricane Isabel &           1,058,000         1,058,000
                                            Storm Henri.
Guam.....................................  GQ02-1, October 13, 2001                    264,000
                                            Earthquake.

[[Page S11225]]

 
Guam.....................................  GQ02-2, July 2002 Typhoon                 1,581,500
                                            Chata'an.
Guam.....................................  GQ03-1, December 2002 Typhoon             8,442,526        10,288,026
                                            Pongsonga.
Idaho....................................  ID02-1, April 2002 Flood.........           287,000           287,000
Illinois.................................  IL02-1, April 2002 Storm.........         3,001,600         3,001,600
Iowa.....................................  IA04-1, May/June 2004 Storms and          3,000,238         3,000,238
                                            Flooding.
Kansas...................................  KS03-1, June 2003 Flood..........           868,285           868,285
Louisiana................................  LA03-1, 2003 Hurricane Lilli.....         6,029,552         6,029,552
Maryland.................................  MD03-1, September 2003 Hurricane          4,413,500         4,413,500
                                            Isabel.
Michigan.................................  MI02-1, April 2002 Flood.........         1,035,000
Michigan.................................  M103-1, May 2003 Storms..........         1,779,736         2,814,736
Minnesota................................  MN01-1, April 2001 Flood.........           404,016
Minnesota................................  MN02-1, June 2002 Flood..........         2,148,415         2,552,431
Mississippi..............................  MS03-1, April 2003 Storms........         2,381,684         2,381,684
Missouri.................................  MQ02-1, April 2002 Flood.........         1,177,000         1,177,000
Montana..................................  MT04-1, November 18, 2003 US 2            3,678,076         3,678,076
                                            Bridge Damage.
Nebraska.................................  NE02-1, July 2002 Flood..........         2,262,000
Nebraska.................................  NE03-1, May, 2003 I-80 Overpass           1,269,000         3,531,000
                                            Collapse.
New Hampshire............................  NH03-1, August 2003 Storms.......         2,282,000         2,282,000
New Jersey...............................  NJ99-1, 1999 Hurricane Floyd.....         1,692,000
New Jersey...............................  NJ00-1, August 2000 Flood........         3,564,000
New Jersey...............................  NJ01-1, June 22, 2001 I-80 Truck          1,028,000
                                            Fire.
New Jersey...............................  NJ02-1, May 30, 2002 Creek Road             335,769         6,619,769
                                            Br over I-295.
New York.................................  NY01-1, December 2000 Flood......           121,000
New York.................................  NY02-1, April 20, 2002                      584,016
                                            Earthquake--Clinton Co..
New York.................................  NY03-1, April 2003 Ice Storm.....         5,662,951
New York.................................  NY03-2, Summer 2003 Storms.......         2,241,669
New York.................................  NY03-3, August 2003 Power Outage.           846,000
New York.................................  NY04-1, May/June 2004 Storms and          1,600,000        11,055,636
                                            Flooding.
N. Mariana Islands.......................  CN02-1, July 2002 Typhoon                    21,579
                                            Chata'an.
N. Mariana Islands.......................  CN03-1, December 2002 Typhoon               988,157         1,009,736
                                            Pongsonga.
North Carolina...........................  NC03-1, December, 2002 Winter            15,231,000
                                            Storm.
North Carolina...........................  NC03-2, February 2003 Ice Storm..         5,077,000
North Carolina...........................  NC03-3, September 2003 Hurricane         16,923,000        37,231,000
                                            Isabel.
North Dakota.............................  ND01-1, Spring 2001 Devils Lake..        19,157,000
North Dakota.............................  ND04-1, Spring 2004 Flooding in           1,980,949
                                            NE ND.
North Dakota.............................  ND04-2, May 2004 Devils Lake.....        13,572,000        34,709,949
Ohio.....................................  OH04-1, January 3, 2004 Flooding.        32,423,648
Ohio.....................................  OH04-2, May/June 2004 Flooding...         2,610,000        35,033,648
Oklahoma.................................  OK01-1, Dec/Jan 2001 Ice Storm...         2,938,000
Oklahoma.................................  OK02-1, May 26, 2002 I-40 Bridge         11,665,000        14,603,000
                                            Failure.
Pennsylvania.............................  PA01-1, June 2001 Flood..........           447,000
Pennsylvania.............................  PA03-1, July 2003 Storms.........         1,616,956
Pennsylvania.............................  PA03-2, September 2003 Flooding..         2,743,600
Pennsylvania.............................  PA04-1, January 24, 2004 Route 33         5,839,886        10,647,442
                                            Sinkhole.
Puerto Rico..............................  PR01-2, November 2001 Flood......           516,000
Puerto Rico..............................  PR03-1, Rains, Runoff, &                  2,200,000
                                            Flooding, April 2003.
Puerto Rico..............................  PR04-1, November 2003 Rainfall...         5,800,000         8,516,000
South Dakota.............................  SD01-1, Spring 2001 Flood........           282,000           282,000
Texas....................................  TX01-1, Dec/Jan 2001 Ice Storm...           925,000
Texas....................................  TX01-2, June 2001 Storm Allison..           850,000
Texas....................................  TX01-3, Sept.15, 2001 Qn.                 3,253,000
                                            Isabella Br. Failure.
Texas....................................  TX02-1, July 2002 Flood..........         5,366,000
Texas....................................  TX03-1, 2003 Hurricane Claudette.           898,212
Texas....................................  TX04-1, April 2004 I-20 Bridge            4,766,192
                                            Failure.
Texas....................................  TX04-2, May 2004 Flooding........         1,156,871        17,215,275
Vermont..................................  VT03-1, August 2003 Storm........           690,500           690,500
Virginia.................................  VA01-1, July 2001 Flood..........           702,034
Virginia.................................  VA02-1, March 2002 Flood.........         3,738,073
Virginia.................................  VA03-1, September 2003 Hurricane         29,921,948
                                            Isabel.
Virginia.................................  VA04-1, August 2004 Tropical             12,787,000        47,149,055
                                            Storm Gaston.
Virgin Islands...........................  VI04-1, November 2003 Rainfall...         1,100,000         1,100,000
Washington...............................  WA01-1, Feb 28, 2001 Nisqually            3,989,000
                                            Earthquake.
Washington...............................  WA02-1, Nov/Dec 2001 Flood.......           725,000
Washington...............................  WA02-2, January 2002 Storm.......           549,000
Washington...............................  WA03-1, February 2003 Storms-             1,460,000
                                            Multiple Cos..
Washington...............................  WA04-1, October 2003 Storms &            11,508,000
                                            Flooding.
Washington...............................  WA04-2, November 2003 Storms &            1,185,000        19,416,000
                                            Flooding.
West Virginia............................  WV01-2, July 7, 2001 Flood.......           925,000
West Virginia............................  WV02-1, May 2002 Flood...........         3,216,000
West Virginia............................  WV03-1, February 2003 Storms.....         3,468,152
West Virginia............................  WV03-2, June 2003 Storms/flooding         3,126,695
West Virginia............................  WV04-1, November 2003 Rains &             6,202,805
                                            Flooding.
West Virginia............................  WV04-2, May 2004 Flooding........         5,063,199        22,001,851
Wyoming..................................  WY02-1, August 2002 Flood........         1,097,955         1,097,955
FLH Manag. Agencies......................  Various events...................       114,862,000       114,862,000
                                                                             -----------------------------------
      Subtotal...........................  .................................       752,099,386       752,099,386
Various States...........................  2004 Hurricanes (Charley,               764,000,000
                                            Frances, Ivan, Jeanne)*.
                                                                             ------------------
      Total..............................  .................................     1,516,099,386
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Preliminary estimates.

  Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to recommend approval by the 
Senate of the fiscal year 2005 Military Construction appropriations 
conference report, which contains emergency supplemental appropriations 
needed by States seeking Federal funding from the disaster relief fund 
administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
  On September 8, the President signed into law $2 billion in 
supplemental appropriations for FEMA. Since then, the President has 
made 3 more requests for funding for various departments within the 
Government. Today we are responding to those requests and including 
$6.5 billion in emergency funding which will return the balance of the 
disaster relief fund to a healthy level. This is in addition to the $2 
billion supplemental the Congress provided immediately following the 
devastation caused by Hurricane Charley. Additional appropriations for 
FEMA's disaster relief fund cannot wait because the balance of this 
important program has again been depleted to a dangerously low level 
following three additional hurricanes and other natural disasters.
  This funding will not only be needed by the victims of recent 
hurricanes in the southeast but will also be used for the several 
hundred repair projects and mitigation activities across the country 
resulting from every other federally declared disaster of the past few 
years. I have been assured by the Department of Homeland Security that 
these funds are sufficient to cover the current needs of our Nation's 
disaster victims and I support this funding.
  Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, on Friday night, as Senators headed home 
after the final vote of the day, the House-Senate conference on the 
military construction appropriations bill reached its conclusion. With 
the conferees in agreement, all that remained to be

[[Page S11226]]

done on that bill was to file and pass the conference report.
  But work on that bill did not stop there. In the dead of night, the 
leadership intervened in the conference to jam an additional $11.6 
billion funding package onto that bill. The Senators who served on that 
conference committee didn't know what hit them. This disaster 
supplemental was never considered, debated, or voted on by the Senate. 
Senators never had a chance to examine or weigh in on this spending.
  Appropriations for disaster relief to address the problems resulting 
from the four recent hurricanes are undoubtedly required. However, 
there are extensive backlogs of unfunded needs resulting from earlier 
disasters that are not addressed at all in this relief package. This 
bill fails to provide the funds to address the $752 million backlog for 
34 States in the emergency highway program or a $128 million backlog 
for 43 States in the USDA debris removal programs. In 43 States, the 
debris from past floods and other disasters has yet to be cleaned up. 
So, the next time a flood comes rolling down the valley, the water will 
have no place to go, making the damage even worse. What kind of a 
short-sighted policy is that?
  Sadly, our President and administration seem to only be able to focus 
on the immediate crisis. By all means, we should provide the $11.6 
billion of assistance to the victims of the four recent hurricanes. But 
why has the President shown no interest in helping the communities hit 
by past disasters in West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio, or California? 
The Federal Government owes just those four States over $307 million. I 
simply do not under why this so-called compassionate President can 
treat the victims of disaster in one State differently than victims in 
other States.
  The military construction conference report also includes $2.9 
billion in emergency assistance for farmers experiencing crop losses 
caused by natural disasters, such as drought conditions, hurricanes and 
other disasters.
  It is a worthwhile effort for the Congress to assist the Nation's 
farmers in their time of need. However, the same relief package 
includes an onerous provision which decreases another farm aid program 
by nearly $3 billion to pay for the drought disaster aid. In short, 
this disaster relief package robs Peter to pay Paul. While it increases 
aid to farmers with one hand, it takes it away with the other.
  This is no way to run the United States Senate. I signed the 
conference report for the military construction aspect alone. That 
funding went through normal procedures. It was debated and voted on by 
both Houses, and it was subject to bipartisan negotiations in 
conference.
  I commend the two managers of this bill for their perseverance in 
following regular order to the great extent that they did. The managers 
were under great pressure from the Republican leaders of Congress to 
cut a backroom deal in the dead of night, simply to allow members of 
the House to leave town before the Senate.
  The managers stuck to their guns and insisted that the conferees meet 
again in open session to consider the whole package. This is as much as 
they could do in the face of the majority leadership. The managers of 
the military construction bill held as firm as they could against the 
arm-twisting of the Republican leaders. But the deck was stacked, and 
the leadership never intended to allow the Senate a moment of debate on 
this spending package. It was just jammed in at the last minute.
  In this respect, my refusal to sign the conference report, except for 
the military construction aspect, reflects my solidarity with the 
Senator from Iowa, Mr. Harkin, and his battle to implement the 
Conservation Security Program, which he authored as part of the 2002 
farm bill. It is unfair for this Senator to have to keep fighting for 
the survival of this program year after year before. Any Senator who is 
familiar with the difficult decisions a farmer must make to operate a 
successful business knows that when a farmer decides to commit to the 
conservation practices required by this important environmental 
program, that farmer is making a long term commitment. But year after 
year, the Republican majority tries to shackle this program with new 
limits. How can a farmer make a long term commitment to conservation 
when the rules keep changing?
  I hope that the Senate will return to its prior way of doing 
business, when the regular order was followed and the rights of all 
Senators, including those in the minority, were fully protected. Such 
practices serve this institution well. It promotes respect among 
Members and quells unnecessary disputes.
  The leadership of the Senate would do well to turn away from the 
increasingly common gambit of trying to jam legislation down the 
throats of Senators at the last possible moment. It is most unfortunate 
that the Republican leaders chose to pursue this tactic on spending 
that is intended to help countless Americans recover from recent 
disasters.
  It is some small consolation that the Senate has recognized its 
obligation to the Senator from Iowa, Mr. Harkin, by agreeing to adopt a 
concurrent resolution relating to the enrollment on the fiscal year 
2005 military construction appropriations bill. This concurrent 
resolution, if adopted by the House, would have the effect of deleting 
the onerous offset against the Conservation Security Program that the 
Senator from Iowa, Mr. Harkin, and others find so offensive. The 
concurrent resolution would, in contrast to the FY 2005 military 
construction appropriations bill, substitute language similar to that 
employed with regard to the hurricane disaster aid, thus making the 
drought aid to farmers an emergency without an offset.
  I yield the floor.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased today that the Senate 
will accept by voice vote the fiscal year 2005 Military Construction 
Appropriations Conference Report.
  The conference report includes important funding for the 
reconstruction efforts in States affected by recent hurricanes and 
assistance for agricultural producers suffering from drought and other 
natural disasters.
  First let me address the military construction portion of the 
agreement. While the President's budget request was $9.55 billion, only 
2.5 percent over last year's enacted level, the conference report 
provides $10 billion for military construction and family housing 
programs for fiscal year 2005.
  These new facilities are crucial to the well being of our troops, 
especially at a time when our active and reserve forces are, along with 
their families, being asked to make enormous sacrifices for our 
country.
  The conference report also provides $11.6 billion in disaster 
assistance, including $8.8 billion for hurricane-related relief which 
is designated as emergency spending and $2.8 billion in assistance for 
agricultural producers suffering through drought and other natural 
disasters, which is offset by a cap on spending for the Conservation 
Security Program.
  I think we all recognize the importance of this assistance package, 
but I am disappointed that the majority insisted on treating 
emergencies in different parts of the Nation unequally.
  Drought relief for farmers in the Midwest and across the Nation is no 
less important than hurricane relief in the Southeast and should not 
have required an offset from the Conservation Security Program.
  Offsetting this funding hobbles the effectiveness of one of the most 
important environmental programs in the Department of Agriculture.
  I was also concerned that the package requested by the President 
leapfrogged Federal Highway Administration assistance for damage done 
by the hurricanes ahead of the backlog of projects required to repair 
damage from past disasters.
  However, this concern was by an agreement to fully fund the 
backlogged emergency relief program in the pending omnibus bill.
  Chairman Hutchison indicated at the conference that Speaker Hastert 
and Majority Leader Frist have committed to fully fund the States that 
need this assistance, and I appreciate their help on this issue.
  There are currently $752 million in projects that have not been 
funded, even though they have already qualified for emergency relief.
  California alone has over $240 million in projects that have not been 
funded. I appreciate Chairman Young's willingness to rectify this 
situation and look forward to the emergency relief funding program 
being funded in the omnibus.

[[Page S11227]]

  The conference agreement also includes Senator Stevens' provision on 
the Alaska Natural Gas pipeline.
  Senator Stevens has worked for the past few years to authorize 
funding for this pipeline, and I am pleased that we could get this done 
for the senior Senator from Alaska.
  The provision authorizes the construction of a pipeline from Prudhoe 
Bay, AK, to the lower 48, with a dedicated supply of natural gas to 
California.
  The provision provides Federal loan guarantees to whatever entity 
decides to build the pipeline, as Senator Stevens requested.
  The demand for natural gas in this country is growing exponentially, 
particularly in my State of California. Natural gas prices have risen 
dramatically over the past several years, from $2 per thousand cubic 
feet in 1998 to over $7 just this week.
  We need more natural gas, and I hope that Senator Stevens' provision 
to bring Alaska natural gas down to the lower 48 States and 
particularly California will help meet that demand.
  While I would have preferred to pass the Military Construction 
conference report without the contentious issues surrounding this 
disaster assistance package, I support this conference report and I am 
pleased that my colleagues have agreed to accept it.
  Finally, I thank Senator Hutchison for the manner in which she 
handled this process. I have long admired her integrity and her 
leadership in reaching this agreement was outstanding.
  (At the request of Mr. Daschle, the following statement was ordered 
to be printed in the Record.)
 Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I would like to focus the attention 
of the Senate on the recent devastation to many nations in the 
Caribbean as a result of a half a dozen hurricanes and tropical storms 
in the autumn of this year, 2004.
  More than a thousand people have perished; many are still missing. 
Thousands of families are homeless and jobless. Non-governmental 
organizations such as the International Red Cross, the United Nations, 
and religious organizations, rushed to the scene with relief aid and 
volunteers to help the survivors. The United States Government has sent 
U.S. AID teams to assess the damage. Early estimates reveal hundreds of 
millions of dollars of physical damage to homes and businesses. On the 
Island of Grenada industries have been completely wiped out. There are 
riots in the streets of cities in Haiti where stockpiles of 
nonperishable food and potable water are diminishing fast.
  In April, 2001 President Bush instituted the ``Third Border 
Initiative'' that anticipated a quick response by our government that 
would, in his words, ``. . . fund disaster preparedness and mitigation 
efforts to shield critical commercial and environmental infrastructure 
from natural disasters, such as hurricanes.'' This is important because 
it signals a focus not only on emergency assistance, but on trying to 
reduce the amount of damage caused by future hurricanes. In other 
words, the President was also signaling a welcome focus on rebuilding 
homes and businesses in a manner that is resistant to potential damage 
by hurricanes. These types of buildings would also reduce the dreadful 
death toll of future hurricanes.
  We have an opportunity to aid our friends and partners in the 
Caribbean. The administration has attached a $50 million request for 
the Caribbean to a larger package of help for Florida and other States 
in the South hit by the rolling series of storms this summer and fall. 
Our colleagues in the U.S. House of Representatives have requested an 
additional $50 million, so the total is $100 million for the Caribbean. 
Secretary Colin Powell recently visited Grenada and stated that the 
first aid will come in phases, starting with an emergency shipment of 
food, medicine, construction materials and other supplies, about a 
quarter of which will go to Grenada.
  It is at this time that we have an opportunity to thoughtfully help 
the region. As Secretary Powell said, ``. . . that help was needed not 
simply to repair homes and schools, but also to restore the economic 
infrastructure of the country.'' He went on to say that, ``experts had 
begun discussing `creative suggestions' for how Grenada could diversify 
its agricultural output. . . .'' I agree with Secretary Powell that the 
time has come to try to better spend our assistance dollars. As is the 
case with weather disasters, economic disasters also ruin the hopes of 
families. As long as we are helping in the rebuilding efforts, we 
should try to make more permanent improvements in infrastructure.
  The region needs many ``creative suggestions'' for its redevelopment. 
At the University of Vermont, the students and faculty have made many 
suggestions, from agriculture and food processing to sustainable 
permanent modular housing solutions utilizing recycled materials. One 
appropriate solution has been devised by world acclaimed architect Adam 
Kalkin. It is the Quikbuild Modular System. An example of this unique, 
sustainable housing solution is on display in the permanent collection 
of the Shelburne Museum, in Shelburne, Vermont.
  This type of dwelling utilizes recycled cargo containers, many of 
which are being shipped down to the region with a full load; they will 
remain there empty without the cargo to fill them; and with no place to 
ship them. Each is an ecological disaster waiting to happen. They also 
present a great opportunity if we take advantage of using them.
  Recycled containers may be converted into durable, sustainable, 
water-tight, hurricane-proof dwellings that can be used as permanent 
housing as well as field kitchens, medical triage units, schools, 
dormitories, as well as structures for commercial businesses and 
meeting places. Ten percent of the funds we provide should be for these 
more permanent housing solutions. It is imperative that the community 
planners consider mid-range and long-term solutions today as they 
manage the ``first response'' mission. We have seen in many regions 
around the globe that well-intentioned temporary and transitional 
housing ultimately becomes permanent housing. Priorities shift, money 
runs out and a new disaster knocks the old disaster off the front page. 
The inherent nature of shanty towns, full of permanent refugees, takes 
away the dignity and hope of their inhabitants.
  I have received pleas from the family members residing in the United 
States to help their loved ones. I have received a strong request from 
the Ambassador of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, Ambassador 
Marina Valere, on behalf of the affected nations imploring us to also 
think about permanent housing solutions, that also respects their 
unique and fragile ecosystem. This request made clear that some portion 
of the aid package should be set aside for this purpose. Our friends in 
the Caribbean need permanent, safe, secure dwellings otherwise this 
crisis will repeat itself, year after year.
  In addition to urgent emergency aid, America should help the 
survivors in the Caribbean to rebuild their communities with permanent 
housing solutions as well as rebuild their respective 
economies.
 Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, with reservations I support passage 
of the conference report to the fiscal year 2005 Military Construction 
Appropriations Act. This bill provides $10 billion in funding for 
important military construction activities including base housing as 
well as the construction and maintenance of base infrastructure.
  When we passed the Senate version of this legislation, I declared 
that this appropriations bill was a good example of how the legislative 
process is expected to work, wherein the work of the authorizers is 
fully taken into account by the appropriators. The legislation was 
relatively free of earmarks and riders that were not related to 
Military Construction. However, during the conference, a legislative 
rider that has no business in an appropriations bill found its way into 
the conference report.
  I am referring to the section of the conference report that 
authorizes a $18 billion loan guarantee program for the construction of 
an Alaska natural gas pipeline. This authorizing provision is found in 
neither the House nor the Senate version of this legislation, yet with 
characteristically little attention, it has found its way into the 
conference report. Once again, it pays to have powerful members of the 
Appropriations Committee representing your State or district.
  Congress has a legislative process that has two separate tracks for 
authorization and appropriation. Merging

[[Page S11228]]

these tracks and eliminating the essential discourse and deliberation 
necessary to establish sound public policy is not in the Federal 
taxpayers interest. Nevertheless, here we are again, faced with the 
necessity of approving appropriations for military construction with an 
enormous pork program attached at the last minute. All the more 
problematic is that this same piece of legislative text was included in 
the failed energy bill. The Senate rejected this provision then, but we 
are unable to do it again, as it was snuck into a conference report on 
a totally unrelated bill. It is a clear violation of the legislative 
process, specifically Rule 28, and it's simply wrong.
  My objections to the Alaska pipeline provision are not only 
procedural. Many of my colleagues may not be aware that what they are 
approving here is an economic cushion for three extremely wealthy 
corporations. Undoubtedly, these three corporations have the financial 
resources to proceed with this project without taxpayers' dollars, but 
once again, we will manage to provide generous financial incentives to 
corporate interests with public funds. These selective subsidies are 
clearly inequitable and contrary to the interests of the rest of 
American taxpayers.
  The sponsor of this provision may maintain that the American public 
will benefit from the natural gas supply that may flow through this 
pipeline years from now. Undoubtedly, if the supply is there, the 
consumers will be, too. And that is my point. This is an economic 
venture that will yield significant profits for those companies 
involved. It is my understanding that as a result of the financial 
promise of this venture that there are other companies that would very 
much like to be involved. What this provision does is to codify the 
terms set by these three corporations to provide an even sweeter 
opportunity with $18 billion in federally backed loan guarantees.
  These loan guarantees are the thick rich icing on the tax break cake 
included in the FSC-ETI conference report, which also passed today. Tax 
breaks totaling $445 million are provided for pipeline construction and 
gas processing, again directed to the same corporations, which together 
have shown after-tax profits of $95 billion since 2001. I am certain 
that American taxpayers do not appreciate paying twice for their 
expensive energy supplies. Once at the pump and for their home heating 
bills, and then again for tax subsidies to profitable energy subsidies.
  Also contained in this legislation is funding for drought assistance. 
I sympathize with the proponents of this agricultural disaster 
assistance and I do not question that drought and abrupt changes in 
climate are having a severe impact on the crops grown in the states 
covered in this conference report. While I do agree that prolonged 
drought and other natural disasters are having devastating effects on 
many Americans and sectors of our economy, crop assistance does not 
belong on Military Construction funding legislation.
  When the Senate considers legislation to address drought-induced and 
other climate damages, shouldn't all affected states receive 
assistance? How are we to say that one group of people or sector of our 
economy deserves financial assistance over another? According to the 
Congressional Research Service, Congress provided about $3 billion in 
assistance for crop and livestock losses in 2001 and 2002. Coupled with 
all the other billions in agricultural subsidies, American taxpayers 
could conclude that Congress has determined, without clear 
deliberation, that this is the priority need.
  There are many States, including Arizona, that are facing terrible 
drought-induced problems and do not receive assistance in this 
conference report. Destructive wildfires have spread through the 
Western United States because of the dry conditions there, causing 
billions of dollars in property and resource damage. Drought-induced 
insect infestations have increased wildfire risks to our communities 
and natural resources. Water levels in reservoirs in our parched states 
have dropped dramatically, reducing water supplies, causing millions of 
dollars in losses to the recreation and tourism industries and reducing 
hydropower generation. In some areas, the lack of precipitation and 
water supply recharge, has resulted in wells running dry. I can't think 
of a more disastrous situation than that. However, the people who fall 
into these categories are not covered by the drought assistance 
provisions.
  I have found this report contains 62 earmarks totaling $98.7 million. 
I am also troubled by a provision in the explanatory statement that 
accompanies this conference report. According to the explanatory 
statement, ``The language and allocations set forth in House Report 
108-607 and Senate Report 108-309 should be complied with unless 
specifically addressed to the contrary in the conference report and 
statement of the managers.'' This has the composite effect of 
essentially doubling the number of earmarks in the Military 
Construction Appropriations Act. As legislators we are often forced to 
make difficult budgetary decisions. However, in the instance of this 
conference report, the most difficult decisions were avoided. With 
looming budget deficits, it is as important as ever to practice fiscal 
responsibility and avoid the practice of earmarks.
  The above statement ensures all $44.7 million in earmarks added by 
the Senate as well as the $38.5 million in earmarks contained in the 
House version of this legislation. As I stated when we considered that 
legislation, nearly all of these earmarks are funded under the minor 
construction account. Normally, this account is intended to be used for 
urgent and unforeseen requirements and therefore neither the 
President's budget nor the authorizing committees identify specific 
projects to be funded. Once the Services decide to spend the money, the 
authorizing and appropriations committees must approve or disapprove of 
the minor construction project to which the Services plan to fund. By 
earmarking the funds in the minor construction account, the 
appropriators have usurped the authority of the authorizing committee 
to approve or reject these projects. I can only hope that next year, 
when the appropriators stray from this practice.
  With the passage of the conference report to the fiscal year 2005 
Defense Authorization Act, the legislative branch has once again 
affirmed its support for the important round of base closure and 
realignment that will occur next year. With this being an election year 
and Member's parochial concerns being as strong as ever, I am 
encouraged to see that my colleagues have resisted the temptation to 
add pork to bases in their states in what would be a misguided effort 
to save their bases from base closure. Such efforts would be a waste of 
taxpayer money, and would not prevent their base from being closed.
  I commend the chairman of the Military Construction Subcommittee, 
Senator Hutchison, and the ranking member, Senator Feinstein, for their 
hard work on this bill and their continued support for our military. 
Their attention and commitment to only supporting high priority 
projects for the Navy, Marine Corps, Army, and Air Force is once again 
exemplary and provide for a sound measure to fund military construction 
in the coming fiscal year. I only wish they were able to hold to the 
Senate version of this legislation and were able to keep extraneous 
non-military construction provisions out of this conference 
report.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the vote on the 
motion to invoke cloture is vitiated.
  The question is on agreeing to the report to accompany H.R. 4837.
  The conference report was agreed to.

                          ____________________