[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 144 (Thursday, September 11, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8333-S8334]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of S. 3001, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 3001) to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2009 for military activities of the Department of 
     Defense, for military construction, and for defense 
     activities for the Department of Energy, to prescribe 
     military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for 
     other purposes.

  Pending:

       Reid amendment No. 5290, to change the enactment date.
       Reid amendment No. 5291 (to amendment No. 5290), of a 
     perfecting nature.
       Motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Armed 
     Services with instructions to report back forthwith, with 
     Reid amendment No. 5292 (to the instructions of the motion to 
     recommit), to change the enactment date.
       Reid amendment No. 5293 (to the instructions of the motion 
     to recommit the bill), of a perfecting nature.
       Reid amendment No. 5294 (to amendment No. 5293), of a 
     perfecting nature.

  Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. 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. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 
the order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Tester). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that 
the previous order with respect to the prohibition on a motion to 
proceed remain in effect during today's session.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. 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. SESSIONS. 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for the quorum call be rescinded.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. SESSIONS. Mr. President, we had an announcement yesterday by the 
Secretary of Defense on the procurement question for the tanker for the 
U.S. Air Force that is very disturbing and disappointing to me. 
Basically, the history of that was that the Secretary and the U.S. Air 
Force had evaluated the two competing bids and had selected the 
Northrop team's bid as the best aircraft and best buy for the country.
  The GAO, Government Accountability Office, reviewed that and said the 
Air Force had made errors. I did not think great errors, but they said 
there were errors and they ought to review the process. The Secretary 
of Defense said he, in effect, was disappointed those errors had 
occurred and he personally would take the process under the Department 
of Defense's jurisdiction and he would direct individuals to evaluate 
the two bids and to make a decision on what the best aircraft would be 
and the best buy for the American warfighter.
  Remember that the Air Force had declared that replacing the 50-, 60-
year-old tanker fleet was their No. 1 priority in the entire U.S. Air 
Force. For those of us who know about the Air Force and know how much 
they like fighters and those kinds of aircraft, for them to say that 
was a significant thing. So we were proceeding along that path. 
Secretary Gates said he was going to do it fairly and objectively, and 
he would do his best to complete the process by the end of the year. So 
his announcement yesterday that they could not complete it at the end 
of the year, that there has been controversy about this, and that he 
would, therefore, put it off and cancel the bid process and let the 
next Congress and next President deal with it was a bad mistake. It was 
contrary to what he had said in the country needed to be done a few 
months ago.
  I think this is a matter he made a mistake on. I respect Secretary 
Gates. I was pleased when he stood up and said: We need this tanker. We 
need to get this done. We are going to get it done. I am personally 
going to be responsible to ensure it is done right and fair. Then, to 
walk away from that, and to leave the impression the reason that 
occurred was because of a political brouhaha going on, and Members of 
Congress fussing here and there and making comments was doubly 
disturbing.
  My view has always been the Department of Defense ought to pick the 
best aircraft, and I thought they had when they chose the plane they 
did. I will note the aircraft Northrop Grumman/EADS had offered was 16 
years newer than the aircraft Boeing had submitted, it would have much 
more capabilities, and was a better aircraft. That is what it was, and 
that is how it was selected. The Northrop team submitted a very frugal 
bid, and even though it was an aircraft that had more capabilities, it 
was very competitive or lower on price. So I thought we were heading in 
the right direction.
  I will note for the record I was involved in this early on. When 
Senator McCain questioned a lease agreement that was entered into with 
the Boeing company, he felt something was not healthy there and he 
objected. It was going to release 60 of these aircraft. They had not 
been bid. It was a sole-source contract. It did not go through the 
Armed Services Committee. But it was actually done through the 
Appropriations Committee without the

[[Page S8334]]

Armed Services Committee studying the issue or looking at it. After all 
that happened--and it is unfortunate people went to jail over it in the 
Air Force, and others--we ordered, the Congress did, that a bid process 
take place. There were two bidders. Only two entities could supply this 
kind of aircraft. The Air Force selected the one they thought was best.
  Some people did not like that, and we had a big fuss, and now we are 
at a position where we could literally be looking at a delay of 2 or 3 
more years. It has already been delayed about 7 years. This is very 
disturbing and very concerning to me ultimately because the Air Force 
is going to be further delayed, substantially, in a new aircraft being 
chosen and put into the fleet. It can save money in the long run 
because it will be newer, require less upkeep and maintenance, carry 
more fuel, and it has more capability. It can do the work of three 
airplanes at once.
  I know Senator Warner and others on our committee, when this issue 
arose--Senator Levin and Senator McCain--felt that a bid was the right 
thing to do. We ordered that we pass legislation to do that. I am sorry 
the Defense Department seems to have given up and punted it. Many are 
estimating this could result in a delay of 3 years before the matter 
comes to a conclusion now.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, actually it was 
a series of appropriations. The committee approved it in the House and 
the Senate--the House Armed Services Committee. When it came to our 
committee--at that time I was the chairman--we decided this contract 
was not right, and a lot of work subsequent to that has been done to 
try to correct it. The Deputy Secretary of Defense contacted me 
yesterday. I look upon this latest development with some concern 
because this airplane is needed for the U.S. inventory.
  But I thank the Senator for his support through the years. It was our 
committee that stopped that contract which we felt was faulty at that 
time, and the rest is history.
  Mr. SESSIONS. I could not agree more, I say to Senator Warner. I 
thank the Senator for his leadership at that time. Basically, it did 
point out, did it not, I ask Senator Warner, that the authorizing 
committee is a valuable committee and that those kinds of major 
programs should be taken through the committee of authorization? Would 
the Senator agree to that as a matter of historical perspective here in 
the Senate?
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I share the views of my distinguished good 
friend.
  Mr. President, I have been informed--and I will await the leadership 
to make the formal announcements--but I do believe we are going to move 
to some votes, hopefully, this afternoon on our bill.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Very good.
  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. REID. 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. REID. Mr. President, I further ask that at the hour of 12:30, the 
Chair declare a moment of silence.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________