[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 74 (Monday, June 12, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5701-S5711]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the hour of 3 
o'clock having arrived, the Senate will proceed to the consideration of 
S. 2766, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 2766) to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2007 for military activities of the Department of 
     Defense, for military construction, and for defense 
     activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe 
     personnel strengths for such fiscal year for the Armed 
     Forces, and for other purposes.

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, if there is no one seeking recognition, 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. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, we are now on the bill. Is that correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent if I may depart 
from the bill to speak as if in morning business regarding our 
distinguished colleague, Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The remarks of Mr. Warner are printed in the Record under ``Morning 
Business.'')
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, to accommodate Members, we will be on the 
bill for some period of time. I will be joined by the distinguished 
ranking member, Mr. Levin, shortly after 5 o'clock today. In the 
meantime, we are open for statements.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Colorado.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I appreciate this.
  I rise today to discuss several noteworthy provisions in the fiscal 
year 2007 Defense authorization bill. I will provide an overview of a 
couple of amendments I will offer.
  First, I commend the managers of this bill, Senators John Warner and 
Carl Levin, for the work they have put into this legislation. I also 
recognize in a public way the fine work Chairman Warner has done. I 
have had an opportunity to work with the chairman both as a member of 
the Committee on Armed Services, and after leaving that committee to 
serve on the Committee on Appropriations. I found Senator Warner 
certainly has been very gracious and helpful on many issues and has 
certainly kept the men and women of the Armed Forces primary in his 
mind.
  It is comprehensive and addresses many of the issues important to our 
Armed Forces. Indeed, many of the provisions in this bill are essential 
to the health and well being of our soldiers and are needed in order to 
defeat terrorism and defend our Nation from future attacks.
  In the missile defense arena, for example, the Senate Armed Services 
Committee took several steps to encourage the Department of Defense to 
focus on near-term missile defense systems over longer-term next 
generation

[[Page S5702]]

systems. I support this direction and agree that MDA is not investing 
enough time and money in those systems that may be able to provide 
limited defense capability in the near term.
  I personally believe we need to be conducting more tests within the 
missile defense mid-course intercept program. Although the Missile 
Defense Agency will be conducting two flight intercepts later this 
year, the agency only requested funding for one intercept in fiscal 
year 2007. This test plan is insufficient in my eyes and should be 
greatly expanded. 
  We need to conduct many more flight intercepts, much more often. We 
need to be challenging the system with our tests and working on the 
areas we need improve upon. I do not expect perfection. In fact, I 
expect some failures. But, in the context of several missile defense 
intercepts tests per year, one or two failures only means that we are 
pushing to find out the real capabilities of the system. They do not 
mean missile defense is not possible.
  The bottom line here is that I do expect for the Missile Defense 
Agency to try. We all know that hit-to-kill technology works. We have 
used it successfully in the Patriot and Aegis Programs. We now need to 
further develop the mid-course system and introduce greater capability 
to that system.
  Let me turn to another provision in the Senate version of the defense 
authorization bill that I thought was appropriate and deserved mention. 
That provision pertained to the Department's request for $127 million 
for the development and procurement of Trident conventional submarine 
launched ballistic missiles. Under the Pentagon's proposal, the Navy 
would equip several of its Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines with 
Trident missiles tipped with conventional warheads.
  These missiles are intended to give the President a real option for a 
responsive, global strike capability in the short term.
  I support the concept of developing a conventional ballistic missile 
capable of reaching almost any target in the world in under an hour. In 
an era when targets of opportunity shift rapidly, there is a real need 
for systems that can reach these targets within narrow time frames. A 
conventional ballistic missile is perhaps the best option for this 
purpose in the near term.
  That being said, this is still a very new concept, and the Department 
of Defense has yet to work out all the details. Of particular concern 
is the fact that the Department is still developing a variety of 
transparency, confidence building, and operational measures to ensure, 
there is no confusion about our intentions.  The last thing we want is 
for Russia or China to think we are launching a nuclear strike when we 
use one of these submarine-launched conventional missiles.

  To address this concern, the Senate Armed Services Committee included 
a provision in this bill that prohibits the expenditure of this funding 
until the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State submit a 
joint report that discusses potential alternatives, describes the 
discrimination capabilities of other nations, and states how the United 
States would work with other nations to prevent an inadvertent nuclear 
attack by another country.
  I believe this provision is a reasonable approach to this issue and 
still allows the Department of Defense to go forward with the 
development and procurement of this system. I think there might be 
other less challenging global strike options available, such as land-
based conventional ballistic missiles in California or Guam, so I look 
forward to the Department's discussion about possible alternatives.
  I next wish to address the Senate Armed Services Committee's decision 
to increase by $30 million the Department of Defense buffer zone 
conservation projects account. These projects help military bases 
around the country address the growing problem of encroachment from 
residential and industrial development. At Fort Carson, CO, we have 
seen the fruits of conservation projects such as those funded under 
this account.
  Fort Carson's southeastern and southern borders are now protected 
with money from this account. I believe as more conservation projects 
come on line, competition for the funding in this account will grow 
exponentially. We needed extra money to meet this demand, and the 
funding provided by this bill is a step in the right direction.
  Now let me turn to another provision in the bill that I think should 
be highlighted. Section 372 provides the Secretary of Defense with 
authority to include incentivized clauses in contracts for the 
destruction of chemical weapons within the U.S. stockpile.
  To my extreme disappointment, the Department of Defense announced 
last April that it most likely would not be able to comply with our 
treaty obligations under the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention. I was 
displeased by this announcement because the way the Department had 
managed its chemical demilitarization program virtually assured our 
Nation's noncompliance.
  Nevertheless, I still believe if we use the incentivized contracts 
this section provides, we might be able to complete the destruction of 
our chemical weapons stockpile earlier than what is currently expected. 
Those contractors who can meet a more aggressive schedule should be 
rewarded for their effort. At the same time, I believe that the 
penalties for safety or environmental violations should also be 
increased.
  At Rocky Flats, a former Department of Energy plutonium pit 
production facility located just outside of Denver, we have seen the 
value of these contracts. This facility was initially expected to cost 
as much as $70 billion and take over 30 years to clean up. The 
Department of Energy was able to find a contractor who was willing to 
accelerate the contract in return for a huge incentive. I am pleased to 
tell you today that the contractor safely completed the cleanup of 
Rocky Flats last December, over a year ahead of schedule and several 
hundred million dollars under budget.
  This incentive provision puts the Department of Defense in position 
to use similar contracts to encourage contractors to finish earlier and 
cheaper than expected while protecting the environment and ensuring 
safety. I strongly support it and commend the managers of the bill for 
including it in the bill before us.
  The last provision I would like to discuss is section 911. This 
provision creates an office for the management and acquisition of 
operationally responsive space capabilities. I support this provision 
because the Department of Defense has not done enough to investigate 
the value of operationally responsive space.
  One of the reasons why this has occurred is because of the absence of 
a dedicated office to manage our operationally responsive space, known 
as ORS, efforts. The GAO recently reported that the absence of a 
strategic direction within the Department on operationally responsive 
space activities was hindering the program. This provision solves that 
problem and should encourage the Department to move forward with ORS 
types of systems.
  Over the next couple of days, I plan to offer several amendments 
which I hope will be accepted by the managers of this bill. Most of 
these amendments should be noncontroversial and helpful but are 
important to the global war against terror and to helping the families 
of our servicemembers. I look forward to working with Chairman Warner 
and Senator Levin so we can get these amendments cleared as quickly as 
possible.
  Again, I thank the chairman of the Armed Services Committee for his 
exceptionally good work on this bill. I know he has put in hours of 
thought and deliberation on this bill, and his committee, working with 
him, has done a good job.
  So, I say to the Senator, I want to recognize that I believe this is 
your last year as the chairman of the Armed Services Committee because 
of our term limits, and I am sorry to see you have to step down because 
I think you have done a tremendous job as chairman. Again, I appreciate 
the opportunity to work with you as chairman of the Armed Services 
Committee.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Alexander). The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, before the Senator parts the floor, I say 
thank you for your kind remarks.
  Yes, I do graciously and willingly step down. It is the rules of our 
caucus, and I respect that. But it has been a marvelous opportunity for 
me to have

[[Page S5703]]

this 6 years, and, indeed, a year or 2 before that as chairman. But I 
want to particularly comment on the long association and continued 
association of the senior Senator from Colorado with respect to issues 
of national security. The Senator has served on our committee, I think, 
about 8 years.
  How many years?
  Mr. ALLARD. Six years, I believe, yes.
  Mr. WARNER. That is correct. And you are distinguished in your 
steadfastness on the subject of missile defense and how to protect this 
country. How many times have you taken the floor and asked and received 
silence from the Senate: Do we have one--one--system that can knock 
down an intercontinental ballistic missile should we have the 
misfortune, be it accidental or otherwise, to have it targeted against 
our country? There has been silence in this Chamber until we started 
the missile defense program, and you steadfastly fought for that.
  I say to the Senator, I also commend you for Rocky Flats. Year after 
year after year, you shepherded through the Senate, in the 
appropriations cycle, the funds to do that because of not just the 
importance of Rocky Flats but the importance of the overall program, 
what we call the cleanup program, the environmental program, in the 
Department of Defense to clean up a lot of the former military 
installations and particularly those associated with the production of 
fissionable material.
  So I commend the Senator.
  Mr. ALLARD. I thank the chairman. We do these things by working 
together as a team, and the Senator is a great team leader. I 
appreciate all the support of my efforts in trying to get some of these 
things done. The Chairman has always set a good example for the rest of 
us by way of his diligence and working through legislation. So I want 
to thank him publicly for a job well done.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague.
  Mr. President, it is my privilege to bring forward on behalf of the 
Armed Services Committee, and now on behalf of all of our colleagues, 
the annual Defense authorization bill. I do so with my longtime 
colleague and dear friend of 28 years serving on this committee, the 
senior Senator from Michigan, Mr. Carl Levin, who is currently the 
ranking member of the committee. He has been a working partner of mine, 
and I have been a working partner of his. He was once chairman of this 
committee. We have always been able to put aside such differences that 
we may have. I respect his difference of views, and he respects mine. 
We work as a team on behalf of our committee and all of our colleagues 
in producing this annual bill, and in all of these 28 years we have 
been together.
  I thank all members of the Armed Services Committee. We have one of 
the larger committees. I thank our senior staff, particularly Mr. 
Charles Abell, my current chief of staff, and Rick DeBobes, the current 
chief of staff of the minority, and each and every one of their team, 
because it is a team effort. Our committee, I think almost more so than 
any others I know of, relies on this professional staff. It is really a 
professional staff that we have, in many respects, to put together this 
bill.
  The bill before the Senate was unanimously reported out of the 
committee on May 9 after holding 36 hearings and receiving numerous 
policy and operational briefings on the President's budget request for 
fiscal year 2007 and related Defense issues. I commend my colleagues 
for their hard work and the swift manner in which they contributed to 
developing and writing this important legislation, not only at the 
hearings we had but in the subcommittee structure that worked so 
effectively to produce this bill.
  Since the Armed Services Committee reported out this legislation, the 
United States remains engaged in the global war on terrorism, now in 
its fifth year.
  Currently, the central battlegrounds in the war on terrorism are in 
Iraq and Afghanistan. But there are many, many other areas throughout 
the world where quietly, yet no less effectively, the men and women of 
the Armed Forces are stationed and joining in this collective effort of 
all uniformed personnel to perform the duties necessary to let this 
country remain free and those of our allies in the face of this 
terrorist threat.
  It is so important, as we go through this bill, to pay our respects 
collectively to the men and women in uniform and their many civilian 
counterparts. There is an enormous cadre of civilians in the Department 
of Defense and serving elsewhere who are alongside the uniformed men 
and women throughout the world. But I want to pay particular respect to 
the Guard and Reserve who have risen to the call far beyond 
expectations in these conflicts of terrorism and have done their duties 
time and time again with great honor and distinction.
  For each of the countries, the road to peace and stability and 
democracy has been marked by historical milestones, including a 
referendum in both Iraq and Afghanistan that adopted a constitution, 
elections that chose a democratically elected representative 
government, the formation of a unity government, and progress in 
building security forces capable of protecting their nation's freedom. 
Those are landmark and historical accomplishments in the course of 
world history, and they would not have been achievable without the 
sacrifices--regrettably, the loss of life, the loss of limb--by so many 
men and women in the Armed Forces and the support their families, by 
their side, have given them.
  These accomplishments in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war on 
terrorism are a tribute to the dedication and skills of our uniformed 
men and women who are willing to respond to the call of duty, and to 
the military leaders who lead them.
  The successes achieved in Iraq and Afghanistan have come at a great 
sacrifice, as I said, in life and limb. These sacrifices and service of 
our men and women in uniform have also removed obstacles to freedom and 
democracy in regions of the Middle East and elsewhere in Asia.
  Throughout my many years of service I have never seen--and I repeat, 
I go back some 60 years, to the closing year of World War II, when I 
was a young 17, 18-year-old sailor--but I have had the privilege of 
being associated with the men and women in uniform in these 60-plus 
years, and we have never as a nation witnessed a finer, more dedicated 
professional force, both Active and Guard and Reserve, than we have 
today.
  As I look back over the history of the U.S. Armed Forces, the 
challenges and responsibilities have never been greater than those that 
rest upon the shoulders of today's generation of the military--their 
leaders, their civilian leaders in the Department of Defense, with the 
Secretary of Defense and others, the Secretary of State, the Secretary 
of Energy--all of this team that puts together our national security.
  As such, we must take our responsibilities equally as serious to 
ensure that those who serve have the resources and authorities they 
need to win the global war on terrorism.
  Again, drawing on my modest contribution in active service during 
World War II and again in Korea and time in the Reserve, I must say, it 
is so different, in this span of over a half century that I have had 
the privilege to be associated with these men and women, the challenges 
that face them today. In World War II we knew precisely who the enemy 
was. We knew the nations that sponsored the aggression. We knew 
generally the capabilities of their military, and we knew with greater 
specificity what we needed to do in America to arm ourselves, first and 
foremost, with the finest trained men and women--16 million responded 
in World War II to serve in uniform--and the equipment that they 
needed.
  But today's war on terrorism is largely nonstate-sponsored. We do not 
know the origins of the hatred that is in the minds of those people who 
proudly claim the role of terrorist, what it is that engenders that 
hate such that they wish to strike out, often sacrificing their own 
life to do harm to those who love and cherish freedom. That is a 
particular challenge that our young men and women face today, unlike 
any other conflict of the magnitude we are now engaged in in 
Afghanistan and Iraq principally, unlike any other conflict in the 
history of our country. Therefore, we ask much of that individual in 
uniform today.
  It is our privilege as Members of this venerable and distinguished 
Senate to,

[[Page S5704]]

at least once each time every year, and then, of course, in the 
subsequent appropriations process, provide nothing but the finest 
equipment obtainable, fair pay and allowances and health care and other 
requirements that the young men and women and their families of the 
Armed Forces so richly deserve. What a privilege it is to do that.
  With our Armed Forces deployed in distant battlefields and countless 
others standing watch at home, we are committed to providing the 
necessary resources and authorities for each of them and their 
families.
  Accordingly, this bill provides $467.7 billion overall in budget 
authority for fiscal year 2007--that is an enormous sum of money--an 
increase of $26.2 billion or 4.1 percent in real terms over the amount 
authorized by Congress for fiscal year 2006; additionally, $50 billion 
in emergency supplemental funding for fiscal year 2007 for activities 
in support of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere in the 
global war on terrorism.
  That is a new concept unlike any I have experienced in the early 
years in this Chamber, where we literally put in a block sum of money. 
Since we cannot anticipate with full specificity the needs and special 
requirements that flow from these operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, 
it is prudent and a necessary plan.
  The bill further includes many important legislative provisions that 
would set forth critical policies for the Department of Defense. I 
would like to highlight a few provisions that would continue to support 
the modernization and transformation of the Armed Forces and highlight 
other provisions that would strengthen interagency operations abroad 
and at home.
  The Secretary of Defense, Mr. Rumsfeld, is to be commended. When he 
first came to office we had no way of envisioning the magnitude of the 
war on terrorism. But he set in place the transformation, particularly 
of the United States Army but other areas of the Department of Defense. 
And that same transformation and modernization has gone ahead largely 
parallel to the efforts that we have undertaken in the actual combat of 
the world war on terrorism.
  First of all, my colleagues and I on the committee and others in the 
Senate remain particularly concerned about the size of the Navy's 
fleet. In the past 15 years, there has been a declining trend in 
shipbuilding and a diminishing capacity in the shipbuilding industrial 
base. The fleet has been reduced to its smallest size since before 
World War II in terms of number of ships. There are fewer ships today 
than before World War II. That is an accurate statistic. But it would 
be incorrect if I didn't say that the smaller number of ships that we 
have today far exceeds the capabilities of the ships that we had when 
we entered World War II. So it is not just a numbers game. But it is 
interesting to point out that statistic in terms of the numbers.
  The fleet has been reduced as a result of budget necessities and the 
extraordinary cost of the individual ships. That has dictated fewer 
ships, regrettably. But the current Chief of Naval Operations and the 
current Secretary of the Navy are determined to try, together with the 
support of the Congress, to turn that curve around and begin to 
increase the number of ships in the Navy. The time has come to reverse 
that current trend, and I commend the Secretary of Defense, the 
Secretary of the Navy, Chief of Naval Operations, and all others 
working to try to reverse the trend. Indeed, the Deputy Secretary of 
Defense, Gordon England, former Secretary of the Navy, has been at the 
helm in trying to increase the size and number of the United States 
Navy. Each of those individuals is mindful of what the Constitution 
says. It is the duty of the Congress to maintain--I repeat, maintain--
at all times a United States Navy, and then an Army and the size of the 
Army in accordance with what the needs are. We raise that Army 
depending upon the threats facing the country. But it is interesting 
that the Framers clearly recognized the importance of this Nation 
having maritime supremacy, which we do have today.
  In many respects, we are an island nation--yes, bordered by our 
friends to the north, Canada, and our neighbors to the south. But 
nevertheless, with two mighty oceans on either side, it is imperative 
that this country maintain maritime superiority. So we worked 
diligently to strengthen the shipbuilding program and the industrial 
base which provides us those ships.
  We fund the construction this year of eight warships, one above the 
President's request, and two new warship classes, the DDX destroyer and 
LHA(R) amphibious assault ship. We implement a long-range plan for the 
procurement of three ships of the future aircraft carrier class CVN-21 
to improve the affordability of the future aircraft carrier class by 
authorizing multiple ship material procurements over 4-year increments. 
So that ship, indeed, is coming to life. The parts are being brought 
together to build that mighty warship of the future, the CVN-21.
  We lay the groundwork to increase the submarine build rate to ensure 
our continued underseas superiority and increase our investment in the 
National Shipbuilding Research Program. The bill also includes a 
provision that would increase investment in unmanned systems to provide 
more flexible capabilities to the warfighter by requiring the Secretary 
of Defense to develop a departmentwide policy for development and 
operation of unmanned systems.
  I am very proud of the record of our committee in encouraging the use 
here year after year of great numbers of unmanned platforms and to 
provide the research and development to achieve more new platforms. The 
recent extraordinary military accomplishment of, at long last, putting 
to rest the threat from Zarqawi was made possible by the use of an 
unmanned system in part, together with all elements of our intelligence 
collection, both military and civilian, and, indeed, finally the 
execution of a plan with great professionalism by those flying aircraft 
and those manning ground responsibilities. We will have further to say 
about that operation as this bill proceeds.
  The bill further includes a provision that would continue the 
development and sustainment of the Joint Strike Fighter Program. After 
holding 2 days of hearings, I remain concerned that relying on a sole 
engine supplier for single-engine aircraft to do multiple missions for 
multiple services and multiple nations presents, indeed, a very serious 
challenge to the industrial base, the designers, and the manufacturers 
and all involved. I felt that we could not take the risk of this 
important program by limiting the engine base to but one single 
consortium of companies; rather, that we should have the two.
  This concern is not a new one that I share, nor is it a concern of 
mine alone. Ten years ago, a decade ago, I and other colleagues on the 
Armed Services Committee expressed concern regarding the lack of engine 
competition for aircraft. In response to that concern, the committee 
included a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act for 
fiscal year 1996 that directed the Secretary of Defense to ``evaluate 
at least two propulsion concepts from competing engine companies.'' Now 
a decade later, my colleagues and I on the committee continue to have 
that same concern, and we want to have competition for this engine, in 
the development of this engine and eventually in the manufacture, 
because competition historically has produced a better product.
  Competition requires both competitors to constantly try to improve 
the technology of the engine, constantly to try to find means to reduce 
the cost of the engine. This is an enormously expensive program. 
Hopefully, we will procure more than several thousand airframes of 
different types, some to operate on carriers, some from land, some a 
mix, some with destall capabilities.
  It is essential that the magnitude and complexity of this program 
rest on a solid foundation of propulsion, propulsion provided by two 
very competent and capable industrial base consortiums competing not 
only in cost but the continuing competition of design to perfect the 
best engine man and woman can make for this complicated aircraft. I am 
proud of what the committee has achieved on this program.
  Therefore, the bill includes a provision that would add $400.8 
million--that is not in the President's budget but in the committee's 
mark, now the bill before the Senate--for the development of the 
interchangeable engine during fiscal year 2007. Two models will

[[Page S5705]]

continue to strongly compete, one by one consortium, another by a 
second consortium of manufacturers. Indeed, I think by doing that we 
better serve those nations which have signed up and committed their 
dollars to the development of this aircraft, nations that are dependent 
upon this aircraft being designed and built and at a cost that they can 
afford.
  We direct the Secretary of Defense to continue the development and 
sustainment of the Joint Strike Fighter Program with two competitive 
propulsion systems throughout the life of the aircraft or enter into a 
one-time, firm-fixed price contract for a single propulsion system 
throughout the life of the aircraft.
  In addition to modernizing and transforming the Armed Forces to meet 
current and future threats, we must also strengthen interagency 
operations abroad and at home. The challenges posed by the Second World 
War led to increasingly more joint and combined operations within the 
U.S. military.
  Now operations have become more interagency and coalition in nature 
and will be for the foreseeable future. The success of the U.S. efforts 
in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the global war on terrorism will 
depend on coordinating all instruments of our national power to achieve 
peace and security in troubled regions around the world.
  This will include deploying civilian personnel of each agency of our 
Government with expertise in the areas of rule of law and 
administration of justice, economic development, and civil 
administration to partner with U.S. military forces in Iraq, 
Afghanistan, and other locations to secure hard-won military successes 
and to preserve peace and freedom.
  To strengthen interagency operations and to provide greater 
flexibility in the U.S. Government's ability to partner with nations in 
fighting terrorism, the bill includes provisions that would require the 
President to develop a plan to establish interagency operating 
procedures for Federal agencies to plan and conduct stabilization and 
reconstruction operations; provide to the heads of all executive branch 
agencies the same authorities the Secretary of State has with respect 
to providing allowances, benefits, and death gratuities for Foreign 
Service or civilian personnel serving in Iraq and Afghanistan; expand 
authorities for geographic combatant commanders to train and equip 
foreign military forces, and to provide urgent humanitarian relief and 
reconstruction assistance to foreign nations; expand authority to the 
Department to lease or lend equipment for personnel protection and 
survivability to our allies and coalition partners; and expand 
authority to provide logistics support, supplies, and services to our 
allies and coalition partners.
  With the increased role of the Armed Forces in homeland security, I 
also remain concerned about whether current authorities on the use of 
the Armed Forces are adequate to deal with a serious or widespread 
breakdown in public order caused by a terrorist attack or natural 
disaster. The bill includes a provision that would update the provision 
in title 10 known as the Insurrection Act to clarify the President's 
authority to use the Armed Forces to restore order and enforce Federal 
laws in cases where, as a result of a terrorist attack, epidemic, or 
natural disaster, public order has broken down beyond the ability of 
local law enforcement or the State Guard, or a combination thereof, to 
effectively bring about law and order.
  To more effectively support local, state, Federal agencies in 
response to manmade or natural disasters, the bill includes provisions 
that would authorize the Secretary of Defense to approve the deployment 
of Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams to Canada and 
Mexico, if requested.
  We have perfectly equipped teams--at least one for each State--to 
deal with these problems. We should share them with our neighbors to 
the north and to the south, if so requested.
  It would expand the types of emergencies for which the Secretary of 
Defense may prepare or employ Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support 
Teams; and add $13.5 million to provide for the training and equipment 
of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams.
  They were a concept developed in the Armed Services Committee, and I 
am very proud. It has taken us many years to get the funding stream to 
provide these teams so they cover adequately the best we can equally 
all 50 States.
  These are just a few of the essential authorities among the more than 
300 provisions included in this year's bill. I believe the National 
Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2007 sustains the advances 
made in recent years, and provides the necessary investments to prepare 
for the security of our Nation in the future.
  I urge my colleagues to debate this bill in a constructive manner and 
to bring forth those amendments which you believe would further 
strengthen this bill. They will be fairly considered, I assure you. 
Therefore, I am anxious that this bill be established and passed by the 
Senate, having been amended where it is necessary. It has been the 
tradition of the Senate for 45 years to pass this bill each year.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, 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. CHAMBLISS. 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. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise today to offer opening remarks 
on the 2007 National Defense Authorization bill. Chairman Warner and 
Ranking Member Levin, as well as the entire committee, worked very hard 
during the markup process to produce a bill that would support our 
troops and would provide what our military needs to fight and win the 
global war on terrorism, and I am pleased to say this bill does just 
that. This bill provides our service men and women with the resources 
necessary to continue the war on terrorism, keep our country safe, and 
will greatly improve the quality of life for our soldiers, sailors, 
airmen, and marines, as well as their families.
  Despite what one reads or hears in the news sometimes, it is 
absolutely clear to me that we are winning this war on terrorism; 
specifically, that we are winning the war in Iraq. I have heard 
recently from soldiers of the Third Infantry Division at Fort Benning, 
GA, about the great progress they made during their recent deployment 
to Diyala Province in Iraq. Over the course of their year there, the 
security situation in Diyala Province improved dramatically, as did the 
rule of law and the presence and capability of Iraqi security forces 
and police.
  As we all know today, Diyala Province was where U.S. forces found and 
killed the leader of the anti-Iraqi insurgence, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, 
and I believe it was the hard work that the Third ID did in improving 
the security and developing relationships with the Iraqis in Diyala 
Province that allowed for the intelligence and network of information 
that allowed our forces to track Zarqawi down. I am very proud of the 
situation of the members of the Third ID in that effort.
  We need to realize this is hard work that all of our troops are doing 
in Iraq and that successes often take a long time. But if we stick with 
it and follow the course we are on, that success will come, and this 
operation against Zarqawi proves this is the case.
  Mr. President, having been briefed in the Intelligence Committee at 
the end of last week on the takedown of Zarqawi, I think it is one of 
the great successes, without question, we have seen in this war. 
Military operations are often sophisticated. The planning is very 
detailed, and that was exactly the case in this situation. It was a 
perfectly executed plan that was carried out by our military that 
allowed Zarqawi--one of the meanest, nastiest killers ever to inhabit 
this Earth--to be taken down.
  We absolutely must stay the course and finish the job because the 
future of the Middle East, as well as our own future security, lies in 
the balance. I believe there might be some amendments filed to this 
bill that seek to immediately withdraw troops or set a timetable for 
troop withdrawal. Clearly, both these approaches are extremely unwise, 
and I hope my colleagues will join me in voting down those amendments 
overwhelmingly.

[[Page S5706]]

  Related to some specific issues in the bill, I have received numerous 
letters and phone calls from both Active-Duty soldiers and retirees who 
are concerned with the proposed increases in TRICARE premiums. So I am 
pleased to see that the Senate bill does not approve DOD's proposed 
increases in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees. In my home State of 
Georgia, there are a large number of military personnel and retirees 
living in rural areas where quality health care is often not as readily 
available as in more urban areas. This bill will help to improve health 
care access for those individuals by authorizing incentive payments for 
civilian health care providers who provide services to TRICARE 
beneficiaries in rural and medically underserved areas. This is a good 
provision, and I commend the chairman and ranking member for its 
inclusion.
  This legislation will authorize $45 million in supplemental education 
funding for local school districts that are heavily impacted by the 
presence of military personnel and families, including $30 million for 
impact aid, $5 million for educational services to severely disabled 
children, and an additional $10 million for districts experiencing 
rapid increases in the number of students due to rebasing, activation 
of new military units, or base realignment and closure.
  This provision is of particular importance to my State. As a result 
of the 2005 base closure and realignment round, Fort Benning and the 
school systems in the surrounding area will experience an influx of 
approximately 10,000 students into their school systems over the next 
several years as new troops arrive.
  This funding will ensure that areas such as Fort Benning have the 
facilities and teachers in place to provide the children of our Armed 
Forces members with a top-notch education when they do arrive.
  This bill also requires DOD to report to Congress on their plan for 
working with other Federal agencies and local school districts to 
accommodate this growth. Unfortunately, DOD has been slow to recognize 
the burden that such unprecedented growth places on small communities, 
and it is important that DOD do the necessary planning and coordination 
in advance to ensure that military families are taken care of when they 
move to a new installation.
  During the war in Iraq, our intra- and inter-theater airlift assets 
have gone above and beyond the call of duty and have been used at a 
much greater rate than we ever planned to use them. These airplanes 
played the critical role of airlifting supplies, vehicles, and other 
equipment to our troops. In order to recapitalize some of the losses 
and overuse of these airlift assets, this bill authorizes $2.6 billion 
for strategic airlift capability, including an increase of two C-17 
aircraft above the budget request and advance procurement for continued 
C-17 production. These are superb airplanes and have proven to be 
extremely reliable and, along with the C-130, have become the backbone 
of the airlift fleet.
  This bill also provides a well-deserved pay raise of 2.2 percent for 
all military personnel effective January 1, 2007, and approves targeted 
pay raises for midcareer and senior enlisted personnel and warrant 
officers effective April 1, 2007. I have heard directly from troops in 
the field and personnel at Georgia military installations about how 
important these targeted pay raises are to retaining our men and women 
in uniform in the service and taking advantage of their hard-to-replace 
skills. So I commend the chairman and ranking member for including this 
provision in the bill.

  In order to clarify the role and use of the Armed Forces for domestic 
use during natural disasters or other events, the bill also includes a 
provision that would update the Insurrection Act to make explicit the 
President's authority to use the Armed Forces to restore order and 
enforce Federal law in cases where public order has been broken. In 
light of Hurricane Katrina and other hurricanes along the gulf coast 
last year, this provision is especially important in clarifying the 
role that Federal troops have in these situations.
  I am also pleased that the committee adds $1.4 billion for the F-22A 
aircraft in order to fully fund procurement of 20 aircraft, as well as 
fully fund the C-130J multiyear contract which this committee has 
worked so hard to support, even as the contract is restructured from a 
commercial to a traditional contract.
  This is a good bill that the Chairman and ranking member have crafted 
with the needs of our troops and the national security of our Nation 
foremost in their minds. I hope my colleagues will join me in 
expeditiously considering this legislation so that our men and women in 
uniform can get the equipment, the benefits, and the support they need 
and deserve.
  (The remarks of Mr. Chambliss and Mr. Warner are printed in today's 
Record under ``Morning Business.'')
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to comment on the F-22. It is a 
magnificent aircraft. It is absolutely essential for our inventory of 
weapons.
  Stop to think that any use of our Armed Forces, wherever they may be 
in the world, is dependent on air superiority. The United States has 
that air superiority, but there are nations night and day trying to 
fashion airplanes or instruments that could take away that air 
superiority. This Nation is banking its future on that aircraft.
  I am very pleased that our committee has marked up a strong bill on 
that issue. The Senator from Georgia may have some additional thoughts 
on it, which we will turn to in the course of the deliberations on this 
bill.
  I salute the Senator from Georgia, Mr. Chambliss, for doing 
everything he can to ensure that the United States of America maintains 
its air superiority so that the men and women of the other Armed 
Forces, be they at sea, on the land--wherever they may be--have the 
sense of confidence that the skies above will not become some 
instrument of war in harm's way to them.
  Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I thank the chairman for his comments 
and for his leadership. It is a pleasure to serve with him in this 
body. It is a pleasure to serve with him as a member of the Armed 
Services Committee.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, we have before the Senate the extremely 
important Defense authorization bill, led in the Armed Services 
Committee by my friend, the Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner, and the 
Senator from Michigan, Mr. Levin. I look forward to these next several 
days debating this issue. I commend them, as we begin this debate, for 
the way they considered the various recommendations and suggestions 
that have been made by the members of the committee in developing this 
bill.
  I ask unanimous consent to proceed for a few minutes in morning 
business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The remarks of Mr. Kennedy are printed in today's Record under 
``Morning Business.'')
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President: Is it appropriate 
that I ask for 5 minutes as in morning business?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The remarks of Mr. Domenici are printed in today's Record under 
``Morning Business.'')
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized.
  Mr. LEVIN. I am pleased, once again, to join the chairman of the 
Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Warner, in bringing the 
National Defense Authorization Act to the Senate floor. This bipartisan 
bill was favorably reported by unanimous vote of the Senate Armed 
Services Committee on May 4, 2006, as our distinguished Presiding 
Officer is well aware, since he had an important role bringing this 
bill to the floor.
  This is the sixth Defense authorization bill that Senator Warner has 
brought to the Senate floor as chairman of our committee. Under the 6-
year term limitation imposed on committee chairmen under the Republican 
Conference, it will also be his last.
  Senator Warner served this country as an enlisted man in the Navy in 
World War II, as an officer in the Marine Corps in the Korean war, and 
as Secretary of the Navy during the Vietnam war. He has continued that 
service as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee since his 
election to the Senate in 1978.

[[Page S5707]]

  As Senator Warner has pointed out on many occasions, he and I came to 
the Senate together. We have now served side by side on the Senate 
Armed Services Committee for more than 27 years.
  As chairman of our committee, Senator Warner is unfailingly patient, 
courteous, and thoughtful. He has always been willing to listen. He has 
always tried to work out constructive solutions to even the most 
difficult problems. And when he is unable to work out those solutions, 
he is always up front and is always protecting the opposition's 
procedural rights. Senator Warner has consistently shown his dedication 
to providing the resources that are needed for our national defense and 
meeting the needs of our men and women in uniform.
  Senator Warner has served in the finest tradition of our committee, a 
tradition of bipartisan dedication to the national defense established 
by previous giants such as Richard Russell, John Stennis, and Sam Nunn, 
and we thank him for it. He is now and will, hopefully for a long time, 
be on that list of giants--but after this year and after this bill, not 
as chairman of our committee.
  Every Senator in this body trusts John Warner. Perhaps this is the 
highest of all the tributes that one can pay. The unanimous vote of the 
committee on the bill we bring before the Senate today is a fitting 
statement about Senator Warner's chairmanship.
  This bill contains many important provisions that will improve the 
quality of life of our men and women in uniform.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, I wish to say 
with a deep sense of humility how much I appreciate his comments. To 
the extent I have had achievements as chairman of this committee, and 
before that as ranking member, it was largely due to the long-term 
friendship and confidence we share in each other's decisions.
  Mr. LEVIN. Again, we all thank the Senator. His service on the 
committee is not over, and his service as chairman is not over. We 
still have a long way to go, through the floor of the Senate and 
through conference, but we have no doubt about the outcome of either 
the floor debate or the conference. He will pull this bill through 
again, as he invariably has.
  This bill contains many important provisions that will improve the 
quality of life of our men and women in uniform. It will provide needed 
support and assistance to our troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and around 
the world, and make the investments that we need to meet the challenges 
of the 21st century.
  First and foremost, the bill before us continues the increases in 
compensation and in quality of life that our service men and women and 
their families deserve as they face the hardships that are imposed by 
continuing military operations. For example, the bill contains 
provisions that would prohibit increases proposed by the administration 
in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees and require the Comptroller General to 
conduct a comprehensive analysis of Department of Defense health care 
costs and savings proposals.
  The bill rejects cuts proposed by the administration for the National 
Guard budget, ensuring that National Guard end strength will be fully 
funded.
  The bill would repeal provisions of the Survivor Benefit Plan that 
reduces military retirement payments by amounts received for dependency 
and indemnity compensation, and the bill would require an audit of pay 
accounts of wounded soldiers and actions to correct erroneous payments, 
including a toll-free hotline for military personnel and next-of-kin 
who are experiencing pay problems.
  The bill also includes important funding authorities needed for our 
continuing operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and our efforts to secure 
our Nation against terrorism.
  For example, the bill contains provisions that would authorize over 
$2 billion for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund to 
facilitate the rapid development of new technology and tactics and the 
rapid redeployment of equipment to counter the IED threat.
  The bill authorizes an additional $950.5 million for force protection 
equipment including $559.8 million for up-armored High Mobility Multi-
purpose wheeled vehicles and $100.0 million for counter-IED engineer 
vehicles:
  The bill provides $115.2 million over the President's budget request 
for combating terrorism and enhancing domestic preparedness:
  The bill authorizes $50.0 billion supplemental to cover the cost of 
ongoing military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and the global war on 
terrorism in fiscal year 2007, and it provides expanded authorities for 
regional combatant commanders to train and equip foreign military 
forces, provide logistics support, supplies and services to allies and 
coalition partners, and lease or lend equipment for personnel 
protection and survivability to foreign forces participating in 
combined military operations with U.S. forces.
  I am pleased that the bill contains a provision requiring that 
Congress be provided a coordinated U.S. Government legal opinion on 
whether certain specified interrogation techniques would constitute 
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment under the Detainee Treatment Act 
of 2005 and other applicable provisions of law. This provision is 
necessary because the administration has refused to provide Congress 
existing legal opinions on the conduct of interrogations and detainee 
operations and failed to live up to its responsibility to provide clear 
guidance to our troops in the field on these issues.
  Finally, the bill contains a number of provisions that will help 
improve the management of the Department of Defense and other Federal 
agencies. For example, the bill contains provisions that would improve 
the management of major defense acquisition programs by increasing the 
authority and responsibility of program managers and linking the 
payment of award and incentive fees directly to program outcomes; help 
identify and address problems with major information technology 
programs by establishing cost, schedule and performance requirements 
similar to those applicable to the acquisition of major weapon systems; 
ensure that the public receive accurate information on the department's 
budget requirements by prohibiting the ``parking'' of funds in one 
budget account when the funds are intended for a different purpose; 
continue the committee's oversight of interagency contracting by 
extending the current series of joint DOD inspector general audits to 
include interagency contracts managed by the National Institutes of 
Health and the Veterans' Administration; and address abusive 
contracting practices by requiring the Secretary of Defense to 
prescribe regulations prohibiting excessive pass-through fees charged 
on contracts and subcontracts: 
  For example, recent press articles have described a process in which 
work was passed down from the Army Corps of Engineers to a prime 
contractor, then to a subcontractor, then to another subcontractor--
with each company charging the government for profit and overhead 
before finally reaching the company that would actually do the work.
  In one such case, the Army Corps reportedly paid a prime contractor 
$1.75 per square foot to nail plastic tarps onto damaged roofs in 
Louisiana. The prime contractor paid another company 75 cents per 
square foot to do the work; that subcontractor paid a third company 35 
cents per square foot to do the work; and that subcontractor paid yet 
another company 10 cents per square foot to do the work.
  In other words, we paid the prime contractor $1.75 per square foot 
for their work. He used a sub, who used a sub, who used a sub, who 
ended up paying the people who actually did the work 10 cents per 
square foot to do the work that we and the taxpayers paid $1.75 per 
square foot to accomplish.
  In a second such case, the Army Corps reportedly paid prime 
contractors $28 to $30 per cubic yard to remove debris. The companies 
that actually performed the work were paid only $6 to $10 per cubic 
yard. A representative of one of the companies was quoted as saying:

       Every time it passes through another layer, $4 of $5 is 
     taken off the top. These others are taking out money, and 
     some of them aren't doing anything.

  We have many important issues to address as we consider this bill 
over the next few days. For example, I am sure that we will deal with 
amendments addressing the way forward for

[[Page S5708]]

our forces in Iraq. My own view, consistent with the long-held advice 
of our senior military commanders, is that there will be no military 
solution to the violence in Iraq and no way to defeat the insurgency 
until a political solution is achieved and accepted by the Iraqis 
themselves.
  And we must find ways to press the Iraqis to make those political 
accommodations.
  The good news that we received about the death of Abu Musab al-
Zarqawi, and perhaps the more important news that the Iraqi parliament 
had approved the nominees for ministers of defense, national security, 
and the interior will hopefully foster greater cooperation among the 
various Iraqi parties.
  The Iraqis must now turn to the difficult but critical task of making 
their constitution a unifying and inclusive document. The 
administration needs to be pressing the Iraqis to complete this 
essential task within the timeline which is provided by the 
constitution itself. Only the Iraqis can reach a political settlement 
that unifies their country.
  Among the amendments that we will deal with in the coming days is one 
I intend to offer to reduce funding provided in the bill for ballistic 
missile interceptors and related deployment sites for the Ground-based 
Midcourse Defense--GMD--program. The GMD system has yet to have a 
single successful intercept test, yet this bill would provide funding 
for the final 10 operational interceptors requested by the Department 
of Defense. The flight tests that have occurred to date have shown the 
program to be immature and developmental in the test failures and 
numerous problems remaining to be solved, The Department's proposal to 
complete the acquisition of operational missiles before these missiles 
have been successfully tested puts us at risk of spending hundreds of 
millions of dollars on the deployment of a system that may not work.
  I look forward to debating these and other issues as we move forward 
with this bill over the next few days.
  As of today, more than 130,000 U.S. soldiers, sailors, airmen and 
marines are engaged in taking on an aggressive insurgency and helping 
the Iraqi security forces to prevent civil war in Iraq, almost 20,000 
remain in harm's way in Afghanistan, and tens of thousands more are 
supporting the war effort through deployments thousands of miles from 
home. Our Armed Forces have also played a critical role in responding 
to the devastation left by Hurricane Katrina and other disasters both 
at home and overseas.
  Senate action on this bill will improve the quality of life of our 
men and women in uniform. It will give them the tools that they need to 
remain the most effective fighting force in the world. Most important 
of all, it will send an important message that we, as a nation, stand 
behind them and appreciate their service--and that is true regardless 
of one's position on the wisdom of our Iraq policy.
  I again congratulate our chairman, Senator Warner, for bringing forth 
this bill in a unanimous way, as he has and always does. I look forward 
to working with our colleagues to pass this important legislation as 
promptly as possible.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I again thank my long-time friend, the 
ranking member of this committee.
  We shall now be available for amendments. The bill is open for 
amendment. I intend to remain here for a while this evening. I think 
there is a strong likelihood that I will have an amendment to be 
offered on behalf of colleagues on our side very shortly relating to 
the military operation which resulted in the extinguishing of the life 
of al-Zarqawi.
  Mr. LEVIN. We look forward to that amendment. I am sure there will be 
a lot of support for that operation on both sides of the aisle. We 
haven't seen the language, but I am sure we will support it.
  Mr. WARNER. I anticipate that. The Senator from Michigan will have it 
as soon as it is in final form.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, 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. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Voinovich). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to address the 
Senate as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The remarks of Mr. ISAKSON are printed in today's Record under 
``Morning Business.'')
  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  Mr. CORNYN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Will the Senator from Georgia withdraw his 
suggestion of the absence of a quorum?
  Mr. ISAKSON. I withdraw my suggestion of the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, thank you.
  Mr. President, I express my gratitude to the Senator from Georgia for 
his remarks.
  Mr. President, I rise to speak on the National Defense Authorization 
Act for 2007, the bill that is on the floor. Passage of the bill is 
critical to ensuring that our military has the resources necessary to 
accomplish the demanding missions we have asked them to undertake 
around the globe.
  I am privileged to chair, on the Senate Armed Services Committee, the 
Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities, and to work closely 
with my colleague on the other side of the aisle, the ranking member, 
Senator Jack Reed. Together, we ensured that this year's National 
Defense Authorization Act would make a number of important 
contributions in the areas of combating terrorism, homeland defense, 
nonproliferation, and investments in defense science and technology.
  I want to spend a few minutes highlighting the subcommittee's work as 
part of this larger Defense authorization bill. But before addressing 
those specifics, I commend Chairman Warner for his outstanding 
leadership of the Armed Services Committee in the time I have been in 
the Senate.
  This markup, as has already been noted, is his last markup as 
chairman of the committee. But I am confident that Senator Warner will 
continue to contribute in many ways and play a key role in the work of 
the committee, even after he no longer is chairman. We are fortunate to 
have his expertise in the Senate, particularly on the Senate Armed 
Services Committee. And I congratulate him for a job well done.
  This bill builds on the President's budget request of $11.1 billion 
for science and technology by adding $362 million in authorization 
language to these important programs. This year's additional science 
and technology investment is focused on unmanned systems, energy and 
power, information assurance, combat medicine, force protection, 
transformational technologies, and basic research.
  The bill sustains the committee's investment in research and 
technology to defeat improvised explosive devices, otherwise known as 
IEDs, that are having such a devastating effect on our troops and 
civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq.
  Reflecting a focus on transformational technologies, the bill directs 
the Secretary of Defense to develop a Department-wide unmanned systems 
policy, and to give preference to unmanned systems and vehicles in 
development of these new systems. The bill also directs the Secretary 
of Defense to establish a joint technology office to coordinate, 
integrate, and manage hypsersonic research, development and 
demonstration projects and budgets.
  To support the Department's commitment to combat terrorism and to 
protect our homeland, this bill authorizes nearly $150 million above 
the President's budget request in this area. The bill adds $13.5 
million for homeland defense research, equipment and operations, and 
$17.3 million to meet unfunded priorities of the Northern Command 
responsible for the area, including the continental United States.
  The bill provides additional resources and authorities for the 
Weapons of Mass Destruction--Civil Support

[[Page S5709]]

Teams, including adding $8.5 million for the development of a 
sustainment training program for the 55 congressionally authorized WMD-
CSTs--Weapons of Mass Destruction--Civil Support Teams--and an 
additional $5 million to address equipment upgrades for the first 32 of 
those teams to ensure standardization of equipment for all teams.
  The bill authorizes the Secretary of Defense to approve the 
deployment of these teams to Canada and Mexico, with the consent of 
appropriate authorities in each of those countries, and expands the 
types of emergencies for which the Secretary may prepare or employ 
these civil support teams.
  The recent arrests of terrorists in Canada make it all too easy to 
imagine a circumstance in which we might want to employ these Weapons 
of Mass Destruction--Civil Support Teams beyond our borders when 
requested by our neighbors either to the north or to the south.
  Reflecting the importance the committee places on information 
assurance and cyber-security, the bill requires the Department to 
report to Congress on progress in addressing a list of identified 
deficiencies in the area of cyber-security, information assurance, and 
network protection.
  In recognition of the critical and growing role of Special Operations 
Forces in the global war on terrorism, this bill adds $102.4 million 
for Special Operations Command to address unfunded priorities, and 
includes a provision to enhance acquisition oversight for the Special 
Operations Command to make sure the dollars it does spend are spent 
well.
  Our troops must be prepared for the possibility of a chemical or 
biological attack by terrorists at home or on the battlefield. 
Accordingly, the bill adds $68 million for chemical-biological defense, 
including $30 million to procure equipment to address shortfalls in 
National Guard units for chemical agent detection equipment and 
monitors, and $38 million for chemical and biological defense research, 
development, test, and evaluation programs to counter the threat of 
chemical and biological weapons.
  In the area of nonproliferation and weapons of mass destruction 
threat reduction, this bill fully supports the President's budget 
request, authorizing $1.7 billion for the Department of Energy nuclear 
nonproliferation programs and more than $372 million for the Department 
of Defense Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. These important 
programs are preventing weapons of mass destruction from getting into 
the hands of terrorists.
  Finally, the bill includes several provisions to extend and expand 
the Department of Defense counterdrug authorities, including those 
relating to support of Colombian efforts against terrorist 
organizations involved in narcotics activity; DOD support of the 
counterdrug activities of other U.S. Government agencies; and 
Department of Defense support of the counterdrug activities of other 
countries.
  Before I conclude, I would like to spend just a couple minutes on a 
section of the bill with which I strongly disagree. The committee bill 
recommends a 1-year delay in the production of the Joint Strike 
Fighter. I share my colleagues' concerns and commitment to acquisition 
reform, and I am pleased that the committee bill contains many 
provisions to improve our acquisition process. We have to get 
acquisition costs under control if we are going to be able to procure 
the weapons systems our Nation needs to meet the threats of the 21st 
century. But I am deeply concerned that the committee's recommendation 
will undermine the Joint Strike Fighter Program in terms of cost 
increases and schedule slips.
  The Joint Strike Fighter Program is the largest acquisition program 
in the history of the Department of Defense. There are legitimate 
questions regarding the level of concurrency between research and 
development and procurement in this program that have been subject to 
criticism by the General Accounting Office. The committee 
recommendations closely follow those recent GAO reports on the Joint 
Strike Fighter. But I would note that the GAO recommendations have not 
been subject to a business-case analysis. In fact, implementation of 
the General Accounting Office recommendations could likely cost more 
and result in further delays of the program.
  In short, I am concerned that the committee recommendation of a 1-
year production delay may be penny-wise and pound-foolish. For example, 
do we know how the proposed 1-year delay in production will affect the 
overall cost of the Joint Strike Fighter program? Do we know how the 
proposed 1-year delay in production will affect the Initial Operational 
Capability of the Joint Strike Fighter? And, finally, do we know how 
the proposed 1-year delay in production will affect our international 
partners?
  These are questions raised at the committee level and I think still 
are deserving of good, solid answers. I strongly believe we need the 
answers to these questions before undertaking major changes in this 
important program. I am hopeful that as we move forward we can get the 
answers Congress needs in order to help, and not hurt, this important 
program.
  I have highlighted those elements of the fiscal year 2007 national 
Defense authorization bill that were developed by the Subcommittee on 
Emerging Threats and Capabilities. There are, of course, many other 
important provisions in this bill which my colleagues on the committee 
will have the opportunity to describe.
  I urge all Senators to support the legislation and, in doing so, send 
a resounding signal of support to our men and women in uniform.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii is recognized.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, before I begin talking about the 
legislation before us today, I would like to thank Chairman Warner and 
Ranking Member Levin who have continued their tradition of strong 
bipartisan leadership of the Senate Armed Services Committee. In 
particular, I want to commend my dear friend and colleague, Senator 
John Warner, for his service to this distinguished committee. As chair, 
he has been a true statesman and shown how Congress should work. He 
understands the issues that come before this committee are ones that 
should not be caught in party bickering. It has truly been an honor to 
work with him to ensure that our men and women in the armed services 
have the tools necessary to successfully meet the challenges of today 
and into the future. While this will be the last Defense Authorization 
bill that he will oversee as the chairman of the committee, it surely 
will not be the last one where his expertise will be felt. Again, I 
thank him and look forward to working with him in the future on issues 
before this committee.
  This bill exemplifies what can be achieved through the spirit of 
bipartisan cooperation to address a number of important defense 
priorities. For example, this bill makes sure the Department of Defense 
has the resources it needs to combat terrorism by authorizing an 
additional $115.2 million over the President's budget request. And it 
includes a number of provisions designed to protect the quality of life 
of our service members.
  But I have several concerns related to this bill. First and foremost, 
I am concerned that the administration continues to fund this war 
through emergency supplemental appropriations. While I support our 
soldiers currently serving overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan and I am 
pleased that this committee has authorized an additional $81.9 billion 
for ongoing operations, I believe that the administration's current 
policy is fiscally irresponsible. Unlike true national emergencies and 
natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina, the funds required for 
these ongoing operations can be assessed, identified and included in 
the regular budget process. It is time for this administration to make 
the true cost of war transparent to both the Congress and the American 
public.
  Just today, I returned from Iraq where I had an opportunity to meet 
and speak with our brave men and women in the Armed Forces in Iraq. 
They are truly doing an excellent job in a difficult and often 
dangerous environment. Thanks to the efforts of our soldiers, the 
people of Iraq are better equipped to begin the task of self-
governance. During this trip, I spoke to the new Iraqi Minister of 
Defense and Iraq's National Security Advisor who are both optimistic 
about Iraq's progress toward democracy. I, myself,

[[Page S5710]]

witnessed the advances made by the Iraqi people who are building a 
strong democratic foundation for the future of their nation. However, 
more needs to be done. While I do not believe that we should leave 
before the Iraqi people are equipped with the tools necessary to 
support a stable democratic society, we must ensure that the progress 
already started with the recent election of the Iraqi Minister of 
Defense and the Minister of Interior continues. At the same time, 
whether we leave Iraq tomorrow, or in 6 months, or longer, it is 
important for the President to inform Congress and the American people 
as to when and how our troops will be coming home.
  I am also disappointed that this year's authorization bill reduced 
the amount of funding for corrosion prevention and control programs. 
Corrosion is a costly problem. In fact, it is one of the largest costs 
in the life cycle of weapons systems. In addition, corrosion reduces 
military readiness as the need to repair or replace corrosion damage 
increases the downtime of critical military assets. Consequently, I 
firmly believe that cohesive corrosion control programs are integral to 
maintaining military readiness. This critical maintenance activity 
increases the life of multimillion dollar weapons systems and ensures 
their availability during times of crisis. Effective corrosion control 
should be made a key component of the Department of Defense's resetting 
strategy and funds should be allocated accordingly.

  Despite these concerns, I feel that this year's authorization 
includes a number of significant provisions that will greatly benefit 
our military personnel. I am particularly pleased to see provisions 
that address issues related to the quality of life of military members 
and their families. I believe that it is our responsibility, as 
Government leaders, to guarantee that our men and women in uniform are 
appropriately compensated. Consequently, I support the committee's 
approval of a 2.2 percent pay raise for all military personnel and 
targeted pay raises for mid-career and senior enlisted personnel and 
warrant officers. I am also encouraged that the committee prohibited 
increases in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees in fiscal year 2007 and 
authorized $10 million for pilot projects related to the treatment of 
post traumatic stress disorder. In addition, I am glad to see a number 
of provisions that directly benefit the children of our Nation's 
soldiers such as the authorized $45 million in supplemental education 
aid to local school districts that are affected by a large increase of 
students due to base realignments or the activation of new military 
units. I also support a 3-year pilot education program on parent 
education to promote early childhood education for military children 
who have been affected by their parent's deployment or relocation.
  As the ranking member of the Readiness Subcommittee, my colleagues 
and I included a number of provisions in the bill that are vital to the 
near-term readiness of our Armed Forces. Most notably, this bill 
includes several provisions designed to address problems related to the 
DOD's acquisitions policies. One key provision would give DOD program 
managers more authority while at the same time holding them accountable 
for results--a best practice currently employed in the private sector. 
A provision requiring DOD officials to certify that the cost estimate 
for programs are reasonable and funding is available prior to 
initiating a major defense acquisition program was included as well. 
This bill also makes provisions that address DOD contracting policies 
and practices. For example, the DOD would be required to track and 
report cost overruns and schedule delays on major information 
technology purchases.
  I am also encouraged by our ability to provide support for programs 
and projects funded through the operation and maintenance account which 
directly impact the readiness of our troops. These include an 
additional $52.9 million for force protection, including combat 
clothing and field medical equipment and $97.3 million for training 
resources. In addition, the Readiness Subcommittee included an increase 
of $400 million for critical military construction projects that were 
identified by military installation commanders as top priorities.
  I am pleased that the bill also contains my legislation to establish 
a National Language Council to develop a long-term and comprehensive 
language strategy and oversee the implementation of that strategy. In 
2004 the Department of Defense hosted a conference on foreign language 
education and the development of such a council and strategy was the 
number one recommendation of those in attendance--including 
administration officials. Without a comprehensive strategy addressing 
all of our language needs, combined with a real investment in language 
education, the strength and security of the United States remains at 
risk. It is imperative that our education system produce individuals in 
a broad spectrum of occupations who are able to effectively communicate 
and understand the cultures of the people with whom they interact. This 
includes scientists, lawyers, doctors, and educators, in addition to 
diplomats, law enforcement officers, and intelligence analysts. 
Moreover, I believe that we must focus on more than just the languages 
deemed ``critical'' today. Rather, we should learn all languages in 
order to develop long-term relationships with people all across the 
world. To do this, we need a cross-cutting and comprehensive plan that 
states where we are today, where we want to be, and how we are going to 
get there. My legislation that establishes a National Language Council 
goes a long way toward providing a national language strategy that 
reflects the views of all stakeholders--academia, industry, language 
associations, heritage communities, and governments at all levels--
because this is an issue that impacts every segment of society and is 
too big for only one sector to handle.
  I believe that the Senate Armed Services Committee has created a bill 
that will provide the necessary funds required to support our 
servicemen and women and that allows the military to continue to meet 
our Nation's future defense needs.
  I yield the floor and 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. WARNER. 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. WARNER. Mr. President, by previous agreement between the 
distinguished majority leader and the Democratic leader, the chairman 
and ranking member of the committee will, for the remainder of this 
evening, as well as tomorrow morning, follow this protocol.
  I will put forth an amendment momentarily on behalf of myself, Mr. 
Frist, Mr. Reid, and Mr. Levin, and it is a joint, hopefully 
bipartisan, accepted amendment to be debated further in the morning.
  The military operation that resulted in the death of Zarqawi was a 
stunning accomplishment for U.S. forces. It displayed the precision, 
perseverance and professionalism of our Armed Forces supported by a 
sophisticated and superb intelligence apparatus that included U.S, 
Iraqi, and Coalition intelligence organizations. Behind the details 
that were made public, I can tell you, were months of coordinated, hard 
work by analysts, human intelligence operatives, and military planners.
  The death of Zarqawi will hopefully lessen, but not end the violence 
in Iraq, but it is certainly a significant blow to the terrorist 
network in Iraq, to Osama bin Laden, and the al-Qaida organization.
  Zarqawi was the most prominent insurgent in Iraq and the most active 
of bin Laden's affiliates. While bin Laden hides in mountain caves, 
capable of making occasional audio tapes, Zarqawi was working to 
trigger a civil war, disrupt the democratic process of the new unity 
government in Iraq, and then use Iraq as a base to launch attacks 
throughout the region. There is proof of that intent.
  He had eluded capture for 3 years, he was indeed cruel, cunning, and 
cagey--and now gone.  
  I proudly salute the brave and professional work of our military 
forces as well as the formidable efforts of our military, civilian, and 
allied intelligence operations. This success is one that the entire 
intelligence community

[[Page S5711]]

should find very satisfying. The combined efforts of the Directorate of 
National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, and all of our 
defense intelligence capabilities, and our military forces in Iraq, 
collaborated on this effort. I believe this success displays that 
reforms are working.


                           Amendment No. 4208

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, this amendment is regarding the successful 
operation by our military forces, the coalition forces, the civilian 
and military intelligence both abroad in Iraq, as well as those teams 
here in the United States, in the successful elimination of what is 
regarded as the No. 1 terrorist in all Iraq, Zarqawi. He is no longer 
able to operate as he once did.
  At this time, I send this amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Virginia [Mr. Warner], for Mr. Frist, for 
     himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Warner, and Mr. Levin, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 4208.

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

 (Purpose: To express the sense of Congress that the Armed Forces, the 
 intelligence community, and other agencies, as well as the coalition 
partners of the United States and the Security Forces of Iraq should be 
commended for their actions that resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-
Zarqawi, the leader of the al-Qaeda terrorist organization in Iraq and 
                   the most wanted terrorist in Iraq)

       At the end of subtitle I of title X, insert the following:

     SEC. 1084. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE COMMENDABLE ACTIONS OF 
                   THE ARMED FORCES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) on June 7, 2006, the United States Armed Forces 
     conducted an air raid near the City of Baquba, northeast of 
     Baghdad, Iraq, that resulted in the death of Ahmad Fadeel al-
     Nazal al-Khalayleh, better known as Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the 
     leader of the al-Qaeda in Iraq terrorist organization and the 
     most wanted terrorist in Iraq;
       (2) Zarqawi, as the operational commander of al-Qaeda in 
     Iraq, led a brutal campaign of suicide bombings, car 
     bombings, assassinations, and abductions that caused the 
     deaths of many members of the United States Armed Forces, 
     civilian officials of the United States Government, thousands 
     of innocent Iraqi civilians, and innocent civilians of other 
     nations;
       (3) Zarqawi publicly swore his allegiance to Osama bin 
     Laden and al-Qaeda in 2004, and changed the name of his 
     terrorist organization from the ``Monotheism and Holy War 
     Group'' to ``al-Qaeda in Iraq'';
       (4) in an audiotape broadcast in December 2004, Osama bin 
     Laden, the leader of al-Qaeda's worldwide terrorist 
     organization, called Zarqawi ``the prince of al-Qaeda in 
     Iraq'';
       (5) 3 perpetrators confessed to being paid by Zarqawi to 
     carry out the October 2002 assassination of the United States 
     diplomat, Lawrence Foley, in Amman, Jordan;
       (6) the Monotheism and Holy War Group claimed 
     responsibility for--
       (A) the August 2003 suicide attack that destroyed the 
     United Nations headquarters in Baghdad and killed the United 
     Nations envoy to Iraq Sergio Vieira de Mello along with 21 
     other people; and
       (B) the suicide attack on the Imam Ali Mosque in Najaf that 
     occurred less than 2 weeks later, which killed at least 85 
     people, including the Ayatollah Sayed Mohammed Baqr al-Hakim, 
     and wounded dozens more;
       (7) Zarqawi is believed to have personally beheaded 
     American hostage Nicholas Berg in May 2004;
       (8) in May 2004, Zarqawi was implicated in a car bombing 
     that killed Izzadine Salim, the rotating president of the 
     Iraqi Governing Council;
       (9) in November 2005, al-Qaeda in Iraq attacked 3 hotels in 
     Amman, Jordan, killing at least 67 innocent civilians;
       (10) Zarqawi and his terrorist organization were directly 
     responsible for numerous other brutal terrorist attacks 
     against the American and coalition troops, Iraqi security 
     forces and recruits, and innocent Iraqi civilians;
       (11) Zarqawi sought to turn Iraq into a safe haven for al-
     Qaeda;
       (12) to achieve that end, Zarqawi stated his opposition to 
     the democratically elected government of Iraq and worked to 
     divide the Iraqi people, foment sectarian violence, and 
     incite a civil war in Iraq; and
       (13) the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, 
     the intelligence community, and other agencies, along with 
     coalition partners and the Iraqi Security Forces, should be 
     commended for their courage and extraordinary efforts to 
     track down the most wanted terrorist in Iraq and to secure a 
     free and prosperous future for the people of Iraq.
       (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     Congress--
       (1) commends the United States Armed Forces, the 
     intelligence community, and other agencies, along with 
     coalition partners, for the actions taken through June 7, 
     2006, that resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the 
     leader of the al-Qaeda in Iraq terrorist organization and the 
     most wanted terrorist in Iraq;
       (2) commends the United States Armed Forces, the 
     intelligence community, and other agencies for this action 
     and their exemplary performance in striving to bring freedom, 
     democracy, and security to the people of Iraq;
       (3) commends the coalition partners of the United States, 
     the new government of Iraq, and members of the Iraqi Security 
     Forces for their invaluable assistance in that operation and 
     their extraordinary efforts to secure a free and prosperous 
     Iraq;
       (4) commends our civilian and military leadership for their 
     continuing efforts to eliminate the leadership of al-Qaeda in 
     Iraq, and also commends the new government of Iraq, led by 
     Prime Minister Jawad al-Maliki, for its contribution to that 
     achievement;
       (5) recognizes that the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is a 
     victory for American and coalition forces in the global war 
     on terror and a blow to the al-Qaeda terrorist organization;
       (6) commends the Iraqi Prime Minister Jawad al-Maliki on 
     the finalization of the new Iraqi cabinet;
       (7) urges the democratically elected government in Iraq to 
     use this opportunity to defeat the terrorist enemy, to put an 
     end to ethnic and sectarian violence, and to achieve a free, 
     prosperous, and secure future for Iraq; and
       (8) affirms that the Senate will continue to support the 
     United States Armed Forces, the democratically elected unity 
     government of Iraq, and the people of Iraq in their quest to 
     secure a free, prosperous, and democratic Iraq.

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that this be the 
pending business, with the understanding that it be laid aside 
tomorrow, in the morning, for such time as the distinguished ranking 
member seeks to gain recognition for the purpose of introducing an 
amendment from his side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________