[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 124 (Thursday, September 29, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10702-S10705]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]





                    Amendment No. 1901, as Modified

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, the amendment before the Senate is now 
the Leahy-Bond amendment?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is correct.
  Mr. STEVENS. I have a modification at the desk. I ask unanimous 
consent that the amendment be so modified.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The 
amendment is so modified.
  The amendment, as modified, is as follows:
       On page 228, between lines 4 and 5, insert the following:

                  National Guard and Reserve Equipment

       For an additional amount for ``National Guard and Reserve 
     Equipment'', $1,300,000,000, to remain available until 
     expended: Provided, That the amount available under this 
     heading shall be available for homeland security and homeland 
     security response equipment; Provided further, That the 
     amount provided under this heading is designated as an 
     emergency requirement pursuant to section 402 of the 
     conference report to accompany S. Con. Res. 95 (109th 
     Congress).

  Mr. STEVENS. There was one problem. The number of the Congress has 
been changed.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified.
  Mr. STEVENS. I ask for consideration of the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If 
not, the question is on agreeing to amendment No. 1901, as modified.
  The amendment (No. 1901), as modified, was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. INOUYE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, is there a pending amendment before us?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is not.


                           Amendment No. 1908

  Mr. DURBIN. I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Durbin], for himself, Ms. 
     Mikulski, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Salazar, Mrs. Murray, Mr. 
     Lautenberg, Mr. Biden, Mr. Nelson of Florida, and Mr. 
     Bingaman, proposes an amendment numbered 1908.

  Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be 
dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

[[Page S10703]]

(Purpose: To ensure that a Federal employee who takes leave without pay 
 in order to perform service as a member of the uniformed services or 
member of the National Guard shall continue to receive pay in an amount 
which, when taken together with the pay and allowances such individual 
is receiving for such service, will be no less than the basic pay such 
individual would then be receiving if no interruption in employment had 
                               occurred)

       At the appropriate place, insert the following:

     SEC. __. NONREDUCTION IN PAY WHILE FEDERAL EMPLOYEE IS 
                   PERFORMING ACTIVE SERVICE IN THE UNIFORMED 
                   SERVICES OR NATIONAL GUARD.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the 
     ``Reservists Pay Security Act of 2005''.
       (b) In General.--Subchapter IV of chapter 55 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``Sec. 5538. Nonreduction in pay while serving in the 
       uniformed services or National Guard

       ``(a) An employee who is absent from a position of 
     employment with the Federal Government in order to perform 
     active duty in the uniformed services pursuant to a call or 
     order to active duty under a provision of law referred to in 
     section 101(a)(13)(B) of title 10 shall be entitled, while 
     serving on active duty, to receive, for each pay period 
     described in subsection (b), an amount equal to the amount by 
     which--
       ``(1) the amount of basic pay which would otherwise have 
     been payable to such employee for such pay period if such 
     employee's civilian employment with the Government had not 
     been interrupted by that service, exceeds (if at all)
       ``(2) the amount of pay and allowances which (as determined 
     under subsection (d))--
       ``(A) is payable to such employee for that service; and
       ``(B) is allocable to such pay period.
       ``(b)(1) Amounts under this section shall be payable with 
     respect to each pay period (which would otherwise apply if 
     the employee's civilian employment had not been 
     interrupted)--
       ``(A) during which such employee is entitled to 
     reemployment rights under chapter 43 of title 38 with respect 
     to the position from which such employee is absent (as 
     referred to in subsection (a)); and
       ``(B) for which such employee does not otherwise receive 
     basic pay (including by taking any annual, military, or other 
     paid leave) to which such employee is entitled by virtue of 
     such employee's civilian employment with the Government.
       ``(2) For purposes of this section, the period during which 
     an employee is entitled to reemployment rights under chapter 
     43 of title 38--
       ``(A) shall be determined disregarding the provisions of 
     section 4312(d) of title 38; and
       ``(B) shall include any period of time specified in section 
     4312(e) of title 38 within which an employee may report or 
     apply for employment or reemployment following completion of 
     service on active duty to which called or ordered as 
     described in subsection (a).
       ``(c) Any amount payable under this section to an employee 
     shall be paid--
       ``(1) by such employee's employing agency;
       ``(2) from the appropriation or fund which would be used to 
     pay the employee if such employee were in a pay status; and
       ``(3) to the extent practicable, at the same time and in 
     the same manner as would basic pay if such employee's 
     civilian employment had not been interrupted.
       ``(d) The Office of Personnel Management shall, in 
     consultation with Secretary of Defense, prescribe any 
     regulations necessary to carry out the preceding provisions 
     of this section.
       ``(e)(1) The head of each agency referred to in section 
     2302(a)(2)(C)(ii) shall, in consultation with the Office, 
     prescribe procedures to ensure that the rights under this 
     section apply to the employees of such agency.
       ``(2) The Administrator of the Federal Aviation 
     Administration shall, in consultation with the Office, 
     prescribe procedures to ensure that the rights under this 
     section apply to the employees of that agency.
       ``(f) For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) the terms `employee', `Federal Government', and 
     `uniformed services' have the same respective meanings as 
     given them in section 4303 of title 38;
       ``(2) the term `employing agency', as used with respect to 
     an employee entitled to any payments under this section, 
     means the agency or other entity of the Government (including 
     an agency referred to in section 2302(a)(2)(C)(ii)) with 
     respect to which such employee has reemployment rights under 
     chapter 43 of title 38; and
       ``(3) the term `basic pay' includes any amount payable 
     under section 5304.''.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 
     55 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to section 5537 the following:

``5538. Nonreduction in pay while serving in the uniformed services or 
              National Guard.''.

       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to pay periods (as described in 
     section 5538(b) of title 5, United States Code, as amended by 
     this section) beginning on or after the date of enactment of 
     this Act.

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this amendment has been offered before and 
agreed to before. Unfortunately, it has not been enacted into law. It 
does very well on the floor of the Senate. It just doesn't do very well 
in conference committee. For some reason, when it gets to a conference 
committee, it is usually removed. I hope this will be an exception 
because I think what we are talking about with this amendment is 
something that most Senators on both sides of the aisle would agree 
with.
  The premise behind this amendment is as follows: If you are willing 
to serve in the Guard or Reserve and if you are willing, when 
activated, to leave your job and your family behind to risk your life 
for America, we should do our best as a nation to stand behind you. 
That is it.
  How do we stand behind the men and women of the Guard and Reserve 
when they are activated to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan? In a variety 
of ways. Communities come forward, churches, friends, community groups 
help the family of a soldier who is overseas. But there is one other 
thing that happens that is as important, if not more. Many times that 
activated Guard or Reserve member faces a cut in pay. They have a good 
job. They have been activated. They have to serve for a year or more. 
They are being paid less during the time they are serving our country. 
So we encourage employers across America to stand behind their 
employees. If your employee is activated, stand behind your employee. 
Make up the difference in their pay.
  It turns out that hundreds of corporations across America have said 
that is the right thing to do. That is the patriotic thing to do. Yes, 
we will stand behind the men and women activated into the Guard and 
Reserve. We will make up the difference in pay so that their families 
back home have financial peace of mind that they can pay the mortgage, 
the utility bills, keep the family together while that soldier is 
risking his life overseas.
  We think so highly of these companies for their patriotism and 
dedication to our soldiers that we have created a Web site at the 
Department of Defense. You can go to it. It is a site that 
congratulates these employers for their devotion and allegiance to our 
troops.
  Unfortunately, there is one employer that refuses to do this. It 
turns out it is the largest single employer of all the Guard and 
Reserve who are being activated. One employer that refuses, despite 
this Web site, despite all these speeches, one employer that refuses to 
stand behind the soldiers who were activated in the Guard and Reserve 
and to make up the difference in pay if they are paid less when they 
are activated than they were paid in civilian life. Who is this 
deadbeat employer that won't listen to these calls for patriotic 
responsibility to the men and women in uniform? What employer in 
America, after all that these soldiers have been through, will not 
stand behind them and make up the difference in pay? That employer is 
the Federal Government of the United States.
  One out of 10 Guard and Reserve serving today are Federal employees. 
The Federal Government refuses to make up the difference in pay for 
those who have had a cut in pay because they are risking their lives 
for America.
  I have offered this amendment time and again. I don't understand why 
it gets killed in conference committee every time I offer it. So many 
Senators come to the floor and say what a great idea it is. Yet when it 
goes to conference committee, it doesn't survive. This amendment brings 
the Federal Government into the 21st century and into line with 
countless other major employers. So many of America's top companies do 
the right thing for members of the National Guard and Reserve. So many 
of these are good patriotic corporate citizens in our private sector. 
But in the public sector, 24 State governments, including my home State 
of Illinois, provides the same income protection for their State 
government workers. Counties do it, cities do it, villages do it at 
great sacrifice, and we thank them for that.

  This amendment simply allows the Federal Government to catch up with 
the times, to match what other major employers are already doing, and 
to provide the same type of income protection for our Federal 
Government civilian employees who also serve in the Guard and Reserve.
  I propose this amendment because it is not clear that a real 
opportunity to

[[Page S10704]]

offer it will ever come on the Department of Defense authorization bill 
this year.
  The Senate is on record as supporting this measure. We have passed it 
on three previous occasions. Two of those occasions were amendments to 
appropriations bills, such as the one before us.
  This is the same language as reported out of the Governmental Affairs 
Committee last Congress, except this version does not include any 
retroactivity provision. Though I personally support that, this 
amendment doesn't go that far.
  The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that this measure has a 
cost but not a budget score. It is not retroactive. It is prospective 
only and subject to available appropriations. The funds to provide this 
differential pay to these Federal employees in the Guard and Reserve 
can come from funds already appropriated to the agencies for salaries. 
Twenty-four State governments do this. We have letters from those 
States attesting to the fact that the benefit has required no 
additional appropriations.
  Many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have supported this 
measure in the past, and I thank them from the bottom of my heart for 
standing with our men and women in uniform.
  Let me show data which is illustrative of what we are facing.
  Recent data from the Department of Defense's newest ``Status of 
Forces Survey of Reserve Components'' tells us that 51 percent of 
reservists lose income during mobilization, and 11 percent lose more 
than $2,500 per month.
  So in addition to the sacrifice of being separated from their family, 
risking their lives in service to their country, many of them are 
taking substantial cuts in pay.
  The new ``Status of Forces Survey of Reserve Components'' also 
reveals that income loss is one of the top factors cited by National 
Guard and Reserve components as reasons they might choose to stop 
serving in Reserve components. This is not only an injustice that we in 
the Federal Government are not making up the pay differential, it, in 
fact, is one of the reasons some in the Reserve and Guard say they are 
not going to re-up. We cannot retain their good services to our country 
because of the economic sacrifice which that service creates.
  The Department of Defense operates a program called Employer Support 
of Guard and Reserve--ESGR for short--which recognizes and pays tribute 
to those patriotic, outstanding employers who go beyond the legal 
minimum job protections in support of their workers who are citizen 
soldiers. ESGR operates this Web site which lists 900 companies, 
nonprofits, and State and local governments which offer this pay 
differential for mobilized workers. Search our Government Web site all 
you will, but you will not find the Federal Government on the list. We 
do not provide the same benefit to these men and women in service to 
our country as these other employers.
  The number of employers providing this type of support to their 
workers in the National Guard and Reserve has grown steadily, and we 
owe them a great debt of gratitude for the love of country and devotion 
to our men and women in uniform, but the Federal Government is still 
not one of those employers.
  I think this measure is long overdue. The Federal Government should 
not be lagging behind major corporations and roughly half of the 
governments of the States of the United States in terms of the quality 
of support for the men and women in the Guard and Reserve.
  We should be a leader, not a follower. We should set the example 
right now with this amendment. We can fix this problem, and we can do 
it quickly.
  Let me briefly make a few points for the minority of my colleagues 
who might continue to have reservations about this concept.
  This measure does not bust the budget. Certainly, it results in some 
expenditures, but the money to make up for any lost income by these 
mobilized Federal workers is drawn from the funds already previously 
appropriated to the same agency the workers were serving in before they 
were activated. The money is already there. State governments that 
provide similar benefits report that they require no additional 
appropriations to meet this responsibility.

  Second, this measure is not additional pay for military service. 
Reservists continue to receive the same military pay for the same 
military job. Any differential pay they receive from their Federal 
civilian employer is separate and apart from that and is simply 
intended to keep such employees financially whole while they are away. 
It is a reflection of the value they provided to their Federal agency 
before they were mobilized and a reflection of the value they will 
provide again when they return.
  The military pay a reservist gets during mobilization is for the 
military role he or she performs and is utterly unchanged by this 
amendment.
  Third, the wisdom of this amendment is readily understandable by the 
entire force, whether Active Duty or Reserve. Some people ask how to 
explain to an Active-Duty soldier or his or her family why a Reserve 
soldier sharing the same foxhole--to use an old colloquialism--
performing the same duties, is allowed to draw both military pay as 
well as the lost portion of their civilian income. This is easy to 
explain and easy to understand.
  Unlike Active component troops, Reserve component troops structure 
their lives and make their financial commitments based on their regular 
civilian income. Their house payments, their car payments, the kids' 
tuition payments--everything in their financial picture is based on the 
income of a civilian life. When that income disappears during 
mobilization and is replaced by lower military income, the family 
suffers a real hardship.
  The Active component family may not suffer that hardship. They 
understood going in what the parameters of their family budgets were. 
Allowing a Federal civilian employer to alleviate this hardship for 
their workers, as many private employers already do, makes clearly 
explainable and understandable sense.
  Soldiers take care of one another. No troop wants to see his buddy 
struggle or suffer problems with their family. Certainly, no Active-
Duty soldier wants that Reserve soldier standing by his side helping 
him to fight this war to be distracted by financial hardship back home.
  Let me tell you who endorses this legislation: the American Legion, 
the National Military Family Association, the Reserve Officers 
Association, the National Guard Association of the United States, and 
the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States.
  The reason to support this measure is simple and straightforward: the 
Federal Government cannot and should not do less for its employees in 
the Guard and Reserve than other major employers in America. It is time 
for the U.S. Government to be an employer which is as supportive of our 
troops as Sears, IBM, Home Depot, General Motors, and 24 State 
governments. They have already passed similar legislation. They have 
already made a commitment to our troops. How can we commend all these 
other employers who go the extra mile to support our troops while we 
fail to do so? Can we hold them up as examples and not be an example 
ourselves? I think the answer is no.
  What we can do is adopt this amendment. I invite all my colleagues to 
come together once more to adopt the Reservist Pay Security Act, and I 
urge my colleagues on the Appropriations Committee, when this amendment 
is adopted, for goodness' sake and for the sake of these soldiers, 
don't kill it in conference committee. Stand by these soldiers all the 
way through the process. For years now, these soldiers have been 
shortchanged. It is time for us to make a difference in their lives and 
make a commitment to these great men and women.
  Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the pending amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chafee). Is there a sufficient second?
  At this moment, there is not a sufficient second.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I withdraw that request and ask for the 
adoption of the pending amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate? If not, the question 
is on agreeing to amendment No. 1908.
  The amendment (No. 1908) was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I move to reconsider the vote.

[[Page S10705]]

  Mr. DURBIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. STEVENS. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, for the information of Senators, there 
will be no further action on the Defense appropriations bill tonight.

                          ____________________