[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 20 (Thursday, February 16, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1420-S1424]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. BAUCUS:
  S. 2303. A bill to ensure that the one half of the National Guard 
forces of each State are available to such State at all times, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise to support one of our Nation's most 
important domestic policy issues--national security. I understand that 
some would expect me to say competitiveness or health care or farms or 
the environment or education, but what is happening with national 
security today greatly concerns me.
  In the future, I will continue to address different aspects of this 
issue of national security. I will address the war on terror and future 
threats to our Nation. But today I will focus on the primary point of 
failure in keeping the United States safe: how we are meeting our 
responsibility to the troops.
  The support of our troops is at the core of every national security 
issue we face. I urge Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle 
to join me in providing our troops with the tools they need to succeed.
  We are so fortunate to have such a vast number of Americans who are 
committed to fighting for our country, to laying their lives on the 
line every day to protect the freedoms we enjoy. The first thing we 
must do for our warfighters is to keep them safe.
  I want to know why, after 4 years of fighting the war on terror, our 
soldiers do not have the very best that they need to get the job done.
  Last week, President Bush presented his fiscal year 2007 budget to 
the Congress. Even though the defense budget accounts for most of the 
discretionary budget, we still have service members without the 
equipment they need.
  Last month, a Pentagon study revealed that dozens of American lives, 
soldiers' lives, would not have been lost in Iraq if soldiers had the 
proper side body armor. To make matters worse, the military is already 
operating with an equipment shortage. When troops deploy overseas, 
often most of their equipment is left behind, left in the theater and 
not replaced at armories and air wings. This leaves us vulnerable at 
home and dangerously affects national security. How will we be 
protected if our soldiers are not?
  The administration proposes to spend $439 billion on national 
security this year. That is 45 percent more Pentagon funding than when 
President Bush took office 5 years ago.
  There is a war supplemental on the way--more money. Let me make it 
clear that I do not oppose the defense budget. I respect that it is the 
job of the Secretary of Defense to assess the needs of the military in 
the coming year. I commend him. For example, I commend him on 
increasing the funding for special operations. But despite this vast 
budget, our troops are still taking a hit.
  The funding for high-tech weapons systems doubled in current dollars 
from $42 billion in 1996 to $84 billion in 2007. In order to pay for 
these big-ticket items, the 2007 budget reins in personnel costs.
  The military pay raise is only 2.2 percent. Previous years, it has 
been between 3 and 4 percent. During the Clinton administration, we saw 
military pay raises as high as 4.8 percent. It is unacceptable to me 
that the President proposes an increase in pay for our military that is 
less than the current rate of inflation, which is 3.4 percent. Our 
military personnel are losing ground with this so-called increase, and 
this at a time when we are asking so much of them--a time when we are 
at war. Troops have had multiple and lengthy deployments.
  Haven't we all heard the stories of 18-year-olds swiftly driving 
humvees down the roads of Iraq, praying that they will avoid roadside 
bombs and shoulder-fired missiles? Some of these young men and women 
joined the military after 9/11 seeking retribution; others joined 
intent on finding a way to college. They are all patriots who should be 
honored.
  I am concerned that we are in a fight right now between force 
structure and weapons systems. Our troops are caught in the crossfire. 
If they lose, we lose--at a time when we desperately need boots on the 
ground, particularly here at home.
  We are well aware that our National Guard has risen to the challenges 
of the war on terror in an unprecedented way. Our national security, 
however, is compromised on the homefront. Our States do not have the 
ability to respond with sufficient combat structure to domestic 
security missions, natural emergencies, and disasters.
  Former Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird noted last week:

       When you call out Guard and Reserve units, you call out 
     America.

  Our Active-Duty Forces have fought bravely on our behalf, and the 
Guard has fought with them.
  Montana is just one of the States with an infantry battalion that is 
facing major changes due to the Army's proposal to reduce 34 combat 
brigades to 28. We have based much of our State's military strategy on 
the capabilities and equipment our infantry battalion provides.
  The combat brigades provide a balance of combat force structure to 
the combat service support units already in the State. This balance is 
essential to ensure that we have the full spectrum of capabilities 
within Montana for homeland defense and national security.
  I am introducing a bill today which will ensure that each adjutant 
general will have the resources of 50 percent of their National Guard 
troops available to them at all times in the State. Deployments 
overseas will not be allowed to exceed that number. This bill 
recognizes the national security contribution of the Air National Guard 
and the Army National Guard, in particular the brigade combat teams and 
their subordinate units. This will help the country to achieve a 
standard level of emergency preparedness.
  When those troops come home, Active and Reserve, they must come home 
to jobs and veterans' benefits. That is the only right thing to do. In 
its 2007 budget for the Department of Veterans Affairs, the 
administration calls for a 6-percent increase in total veterans 
spending to $36 billion. Much of this increase, however, depends on the 
adoption of new health care fees. For example, the budget proposes a 
$250 enrollment fee and an increase in prescription drug copayments to 
$15, from $8, for higher income, less disabled veterans. If these new 
fees are adopted, they would dissuade 200,000 veterans from even 
enrolling in the VA health care system. The veterans themselves are 
paying for the increase to the veterans budget. That is what is 
happening.
  I frequently hear that questioning issues of national security 
undermines the missions of our troops and that some Members of Congress 
just criticize and do not have a plan. Well, here is the plan: It is 
imperative that we provide everything possible for our troops in order 
to keep the United States safe. We have a responsibility to speak up on 
their behalf because I firmly believe that when we neglect our troops--
including our National Guard men and women--we are gambling with the 
national security of our Nation.
  We have the best soldiers, airmen, marines, and sailors in the world. 
I have tremendous respect for all of them, and I am committed to 
helping them succeed. We are engaged in a war now, and we must give our 
troops the tools to win overseas while simultaneously protecting our 
homefront.
  I urge my colleagues to pay close attention to this bill I am 
introducing. I hope that at the appropriate time, we can get it 
enacted, basically get some more balance to our force structure, and 
also make sure our National Guard and Army and Air Guard have the 
support they need, not only for themselves but to keep our country safe 
and secure.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois is recognized.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I commend my colleague for raising this 
important issue which affects every State in the Union. Of our National 
Guard in Illinois, 80 percent have been deployed overseas, and more 
this year. At this point, they have come home to empty parking lots 
where they used to have vehicles and equipment which they trained on 
and would use at times of national emergency.
  We cannot allow this Guard to become a hollow Army. It must be a 
viable force. I look forward to reviewing the bill the Senator 
introduced to see if I can join him in this effort to strengthen our 
Guard nationwide.

[[Page S1424]]

                                 ______