[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 173 (Monday, December 9, 2013)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8548-S8552]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




        NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of S. 1197, which the clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1197) to authorize appropriations for fiscal 
     year 2014 for military activities of the Department of 
     Defense, for military construction, and for defense 
     activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military 
     personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other 
     purposes.

  Pending:

       Reid (for Levin/Inhofe) amendment No. 2123, to increase to 
     $5,000,000,000 the ceiling on the general transfer authority 
     of the Department of Defense.
       Reid (for Levin/Inhofe) amendment No. 2124 (to amendment 
     No. 2123), of a perfecting nature.
       Reid motion to recommit the bill to the Committee on Armed 
     Services, with instructions, Reid amendment No. 2305, to 
     change the enactment date.
       Reid amendment No. 2306 (to (the instructions) amendment 
     No. 2305), of a perfecting nature.
       Reid amendment No. 2307 (to amendment No. 2306), of a 
     perfecting nature.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, before we left for the Thanksgiving break, 
Senator Inhofe and I said we would come to the Senate floor today to 
update Members on the status of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for Fiscal Year 2014.
  Before the break we spent a week on the Senate floor trying to bring 
more amendments up and to have them debated and voted on, but we were 
unable to do so. We tried to reach agreement to limit consideration to 
defense-related amendments, but we were unable to do that. We tried to 
get consent to vote on two sexual assault amendments--the Gillibrand 
amendment and the McCaskill amendment--that had been fully debated, but 
we could not get that consent. We tried to get consent to lock in 
additional amendments for votes and to move a package of cleared 
amendments, but we were unable to do so.
  At this point, the House of Representatives will be adjourning for 
the year at the end of this week, and there is simply no way we can 
debate and vote on those amendments to the pending bill, get cloture, 
pass the bill, go to conference with the House, get a conference report 
written, and have it adopted by the House of Representatives all before 
the House goes out of session this Friday. There simply is no way all 
of those events can take place to get a defense bill passed.
  So Senator Inhofe and I believe it is our responsibility to the Armed 
Services Committee, to the Senate, to our men and women in uniform, and 
to the country to do everything we can to enact a defense authorization 
bill. For this reason, we are taking the same approach we took when we 
were unable to finish the bill and go to conference with the House in 
2008 and 2010. What we did is we sat down with our counterparts on the 
House side--in this case, chairman Buck McKeon and ranking member Adam 
Smith of the House Armed Services Committee--and we set our staffs to 
work to come up with a bill that would have a chance of getting passed 
by both Houses.
  The four of us have reached agreement on a bill that we hope will be 
passed by the House before it recesses this Friday and, if it does, 
then be considered by the Senate next week.
  We worked hard to blend the bill that was overwhelmingly voted out of 
the Senate Armed Services Committee with the bill that was 
overwhelmingly approved by the House of Representatives. We have 
worked, as we always do, on the SAS Committee on a bipartisan basis.
  We took into consideration as many proposed Senate amendments as we 
could. We focused on amendments that had been cleared on the Senate 
side when the bill was being debated in the Senate. We approached these 
amendments and others in much the same manner as we did provisions that 
were in the bill, working to come up with language, wherever possible, 
that could be accepted on the Democratic and Republican sides in both 
the Senate and the House.
  The bill we have come up with is not a Democratic bill or a 
Republican bill. It is a bipartisan defense bill, one that serves the 
interests of our men and women in uniform and preserves the important 
principle of congressional oversight over the Pentagon. Here are some 
examples of what will be in the bill that will be considered by the 
House later this week and then hopefully by the Senate next week.
  The bill will extend the authority of the Department of Defense to 
pay combat pay and hardship duty pay for our troops. The bill, relative 
to Guantanamo, includes that part of the Senate language easing 
restrictions on overseas transfers of Gitmo detainees, but it retains 
the House prohibitions on transferring detainees to the United States.
  Although we were unable to consider the Gillibrand and McCaskill 
amendments on the Senate floor or in the bill itself that will be 
forthcoming, the bill includes more than 20 other provisions to address 
the problem of sexual assault in the military that were in the Senate 
bill that came to the floor out of the committee and that were in the 
House of Representatives bill as well.
  These provisions include the following: They provide a special 
victims' counsel for survivors of sexual assault, make retaliation for 
reporting a sexual assault a crime under the Uniform Code of Military 
Justice. The provisions require commanders to immediately refer all 
allegations of sexual assault to professional criminal investigators. 
They would end the commanders' ability to modify findings and 
convictions for sexual assaults, and would require higher level review 
of any decision not to prosecute allegations of sexual assault.
  The bill will do the following that will be hopefully coming here 
next week: Make the Article 32 process more like a grand jury 
proceeding. Under the UCMJ, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 
currently the proceeding that is taken under Article 32 is more like a 
discovery proceeding rather than a grand jury proceeding, and it has 
created all kinds of problems, including for victims of sexual assault 
who would have to appear and be subject to cross-examination by the 
defense.
  This bill will extend supplemental impact aid to help local school 
districts educate military children. The bill will extend existing 
military land withdrawals in a number of places that would otherwise 
expire, leaving the military without critical testing and training 
capabilities. The bill includes a new land withdrawal to enable the 
Marine Corps to expand its training area at 29 Palms.
  The bill provides needed funding authority for the destruction of the 
Syrian chemical weapons stockpile and for efforts of the Jordanian 
Armed Forces to secure that country's border with Syria.
  Earlier today GEN Martin Dempsey, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of

[[Page S8549]]

Staff, wrote a letter to the leadership of the Senate and the House of 
Representatives in which he strongly urges completion of action on the 
National Defense Authorization Act this year. General Dempsey's letter 
provides a long list of essential authorities that will lapse if this 
bill is not enacted. This is just one paragraph from his letter:

       The authorities contained [in the National Defense 
     Authorization Act] are critical to the Nation's defense and 
     urgently needed to ensure we all keep faith with the men and 
     women, military and civilian, selflessly serving in our Armed 
     Forces.

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that General Dempsey's letter, 
with that attachment, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                             Chairman of the Joint


                                              Chiefs of Staff,

                                 Washington, DC, December 9, 2013.
     Hon. Harry Reid,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington. DC.
       As we enter the final weeks of December, I write to urge 
     you to complete the National Defense Authorization Act this 
     year. The authorities contained therein are critical to the 
     Nation's defense and urgently needed to ensure we all keep 
     faith with the men and women, military and civilian, 
     selflessly serving in our Armed Forces. Allowing the Bill to 
     slip to January adds yet more uncertainty to the force and 
     further complicates the duty of our commanders who face 
     shifting global threats. I also fear that delay may put the 
     entire Bill at risk, protracting this uncertainty and 
     impacting our global influence. For your reference, enclosed 
     is a list summarizing expiring authorities.
       I deeply appreciate congressional efforts to achieve a 
     budget deal and subsequent appropriations. Your efforts to 
     provide the Joint Chiefs the Time, Certainty, and Flexibility 
     in both our budget and authorities will help ensure we keep 
     our Nation safe from coercion.
       I appreciate your continued concern for and support of our 
     men and women in uniform
       Sincerely,
                                                Martin E. Dempsey,
     General, U.S. Army.
                                  ____


                      LIST OF EXPIRING AUTHORITIES
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Title                             Expiration
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Authority Issues:
    Afghanistan Security Forces Fund-...................       9/30/2013
    Authority for Joint Task Forces to Provide Support         9/30/2013
     to Law Enforcement Agencies Conducting Counter-
     Terrorism Activities -.............................
    Authority for Reimbursement of Certain Coalition           9/30/2013
     Nations for Support Provided to United States
     Military Operations-...............................
    Authority to Provide Additional Support for Counter-       9/30/2013
     drug Activities of Other Countries-................
    Authority to Support Unified Counter-drug and              9/30/2013
     Counter-terrorism Campaign in Colombia.............
    Commanders Emergency Response Program in Afghanistan-      9/30/2013
     ...................................................
    Authority to Establish a Program to Develop and            9/30/2013
     Carry Out Infrastructure Projects in Afghanistan-..
    Logistical Support for Coalition Forces Supporting         9/30/2013
     Operations in Afghanistan-.........................
    Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund (DoS)-..............       9/30/2013
    Task Force on Business and Stability Operations in         9/30/2013
     Afghanistan and Economic Transition Plan and
     Economic Strategy for Afghanistan-.................
    Enhancement of Authorities Relating to DoD Regional        9/30/2013
     Centers for Security Studies-......................
    Authority to Support Operations and Activities of          9/30/2013
     the Office of Security Cooperation in Iraq-........
    Ford Class Carrier Construction Authority-..........       9/30/2013
    North Atlantic Treaty Organization Security                9/30/2013
     Investment Program-................................
    Reintegration Activities in Afghanistan-............      12/31/2013
    Military Special Pays and Bonuses-..................      12/31/2013
    Expiring Bonus and Special Pay Authorities provided       12/31/2013
     by P.L. 112-239, sections 611-615 (National Defense
     Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013)-...........
    Travel and Transportation Allowances-...............      12/31/2013
    Authority to Waive Annual Limitation on Premium Pay       12/31/2013
     and Aggregate Limitation on Pay for Federal
     Civilian Employees Working Overseas-...............
    Non-Conventional Assisted Recovery Capabilities-....       9/30/2013
    Support of Foreign Forces Participating in                 9/30/2013
     Operations to Disarm the Lord's Resistance Army-...
    Authority to Provide FAA War Risk Insurance to CRAF       12/31/2013
     Carriers-..........................................
    Authority to Provide Temporary Increase in Rates of       12/31/2013
     Basic Allowance for Housing Under Certain
     Circumstances -....................................
Acquisition Issues:
    New Starts, Production Increases, Multiyear                  Various
     Procurements-......................................
    80/20 Rule-.........................................             N/A
    General Transfer Authority & Special Transfer                    N/A
     Authority-.........................................
    AP of Virginia Class-...............................       10/1/2013
------------------------------------------------------------------------

  Mr. LEVIN. We have not failed to pass a National Defense 
Authorization Act for 52 years even when, as I mentioned, in a couple 
cases in recent years the final bill was the result of a process like 
we have had to follow with this year's authorization bill.
  This is not the best way to proceed, but our troops and their 
families and our Nation's security deserve a defense bill, and this is 
the only practical way to get a defense bill done this year. There is 
no other way, because, as I indicated before, the House of 
Representatives is--we could not get a bill done before the end of this 
week if we brought back the bill that was pending before Thanksgiving. 
There is no way we can do it. And the experience in the week before the 
Thanksgiving recess demonstrated pretty clearly there is no way we 
could get a defense bill, such as the one that was pending, passed in 
this body before the end of this week.
  The problem is that the House of Representatives is done at the end 
of this week. If we use the pending bill that was previously pending as 
the vehicle, we cannot possibly get to a conference, get an agreement 
on a conference, get a conference report, go back to the House of 
Representatives, and then get a conference report here, because the 
House of Representatives is done on Friday.
  This is the only path to a bill. We have not missed in 52 years, and 
the reason we do not miss is our troops and their families and the 
national security of this country. That is why we have not failed. We 
cannot fail this year. The only practical way to avoid failure is if we 
follow the course which Senator Inhofe and I are now proposing to this 
body. Again, it is not the preferred course. It just happens to be the 
only course.
  I thank Senator Inhofe and all the members of our committee for the 
way they have worked on this bill for now almost a whole year and for 
the final product, which I believe will have the full committee support 
or at least almost all of us. There were only three members of our 
committee who did not vote for the bill that came to the floor before.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. King). The Senator from Oklahoma.
  Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, first of all, let me express my 
appreciation for not just since this last Monday--a week ago today--
when we met and put together a negotiated settlement, a negotiated 
bill, but all year long, in the previous year, Senator Levin has been 
very good to work with. We did our best to get a bill. We passed our 
bill out of committee months ago--months ago--and the problem has been 
here.
  I am critical of the leadership of the Senate and a lot of the people 
who wanted amendments. I have to say this: On the Republican side, we 
agreed, finally, to cut it down to 25 amendments, which I think is very 
reasonable, and we were denied that. I could be critical. It does not 
do any good to be critical of the majority right now because we are 
where we are now.
  The chairman has stated that looking at December we only have between 
now and Friday at 11 o'clock. That is it; the House is gone. They have 
already made that decision. They have made the announcement. It is 
going to happen. So mechanically, if we are all going to embrace and 
love each other and not disagree with anything, it still could not be 
done. There is no way in the world we can have a defense authorization 
bill this year except to do the negotiated bill we got together on.
  By the way, when people say they want to wait until January, keep in 
mind that on December 31 the services will no longer be authorized to 
pay hazardous pay to the troops serving in hostile-fire areas. After 
December 31 the services will no longer be authorized to offer 37 
specific special and incentive pays, including enlistment and 
reenlistment bonuses.
  These people in service, those who have been in service, we know they 
approach them when it is getting close to the time they are going to 
get out. They say: These are the benefits that are going to be there if 
you will reenlist. It is absolutely necessary that they have that 
information. All of a sudden, we are pulling the rug out from under 
them, after they had anticipated what their reenlistment would be.
  Those things stop December 31. If you say: Well, we will come back in 
January and do it, I can show you this calendar right here. We start on 
January 6, and we are going to be in the CR on January 15. There is no 
way they are going to pay any attention to Defense authorization during 
that time period. There is not the time to do it.
  I will not be redundant and repeat what the chairman talked about 
that would not happen.
  Gitmo is controversial. However, the provisions in the Fiscal Year 
2013 NDAA which prohibit the transfer of Gitmo detainees to the United 
States have expired. The prohibitions, which are currently in effect, 
which prevent the transfer of detainees to the United States are 
provisions which were included in an Appropriations Act. That Act, 
which has been extended due to

[[Page S8550]]

the CR, is set to expire in January. Therefore, it is important to 
enact the FY'14 NDAA since our bill will extend these prohibitions for 
all of 2014. Of course, we also passed prohibitions on construction and 
modifying facilities in the United States. However, all of these 
prohibitions could come to an end if we do not have this bill.
  Now, we have covered this. I appreciate the fact--and I want to 
repeat what the chairman said--that we actually had and cleared and 
considered some 87 amendments. In this bill we got 79 of the 
amendments; that is, Democratic and Republican amendments. So we have 
done this in the areas where we are supposed to be accomplishing it.
  I looked at some of the things in military construction. We will have 
to stop work on any major projects that are currently under 
construction. I mean, they could be partway through a project. For 
example, the bill contains $136 million to continue construction for 
the replacement of a command center for the U.S. Strategic Command at 
Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska. If this amount is not authorized for 
appropriations, DOD will have to stop work halfway through 
construction, leading to a contract claim, lost time, maybe even 
lawsuits, but certainly extra work. I can say the same about areas in 
Maryland, Kentucky, Washington, Texas, and New York. If we look at the 
construction of aircraft carriers, without the congressional action we 
have in this bill to update the statutory cap on construction of the 
CVN-78--the USS Ford, the first aircraft carrier of the Ford class--the 
Navy will be forced to cease construction of the CVN-78 when it is 
already 75 percent complete, denying our Nation this critical asset 
after we have already spent $12 billion on it. We are talking about 
huge amounts of money. We are talk about defending the United States of 
America.
  I hate to think we got here the way we did. We should not have had to 
do that. There is some blame to go around on both sides, but 
nonetheless we have been unable to do it the way we have done it in the 
past.
  I will tell you something that is kind of interesting. We did a 
study. We found that in the last 30 years we have never gone into 
January before. Never. Not once.
  The two times we went in were after a veto of the bill, and then 
after that we immediately overrode the veto and we were home free. So 
this has not happened before. For people to say that it has and that it 
is not unusual to go into January, factually that is just not true.
  So we have special operations, and we have land use agreements. This 
is a big one that will ensure special operations forces have sufficient 
access to training ranges. The SEALs, the Navy SEALs--I think many of 
us have been to the Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range in 
California, which serves an indispensable role in training the Navy 
SEALs for deployment. Failure to adopt the NDAA agreement we are 
talking about now will result in sending Navy SEALs to combat with 
insufficient training, undermining mission effectiveness and increasing 
the risk of losing lives.
  So we have every reason to be concerned about this. We have only one 
way that we are going to be able to get a defense authorization bill. 
If we do not do it, this will be the first year in 52 years that we 
have not had one. So that is how serious this is. I do not like the way 
it was done, but I can like the end product.
  I think the chairman mentioned the sexual assault discussion we have 
had. We had the Gillibrand amendment, and we had the McCaskill 
amendment. We did not get a chance to talk about those. But we actually 
have 27 specific reforms to support victims and encourage sexual 
assault reporting, expanding it and so forth. So we have done a lot.
  I do not think anyone can argue that we would in any way be better 
off not having an authorization bill or just lumping it together and 
putting it on a clean CR. That is not any way to do business. It does 
not accomplish any of what I just mentioned and that the chairman 
mentioned as progress in this bill.
  With that, I am happy to join the chairman of the committee in a 
bipartisan way to help try to defend America. The first thing we need 
to do is to pass our negotiated bill.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to engage in a 
colloquy with the chairman and ranking member if necessary as we 
discuss this legislation----
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCAIN. Or lack of legislation, which may be unique in the 
history of the Senate in that for 51 years this body has passed a 
defense authorization bill, gone to conference between the two Houses, 
and sent a bill to the President's desk--legislation that I think most 
Americans would agree is our first priority, and that is to defend the 
security of this Nation.
  I guess one of the questions I have for the distinguished chairman of 
the committee, and obviously the ranking member, is that by us not 
acting on this bill before the end of the year, is it not true, I would 
ask Chairman Levin, that we have already done some damage to the 
military and our readiness? Is it not also true that in the years that 
Senator Levin and I and Senator Inhofe have been together in the Armed 
Services Committee, we have never tried to do an authorization bill in 
a week? There are too many issues that are worthy of debate and votes 
on the part of this body. So is it not true, I would ask Senator Levin, 
that if we fail to take up this legislation, we will be embarking into 
unknown and uncharted waters because then we will be leaving it, isn't 
it true, to various appropriations bills or continuing resolutions or a 
patchwork kind of addressing what I would argue--and I do not know how 
anyone could dispute--is the most important obligation the Congress of 
the United States has; that is, to authorize the provisions in law that 
are necessary to defend this Nation? I would ask the Senator from 
Michigan those questions.
  Mr. LEVIN. The point of the Senator from Arizona is extremely well 
taken. There is, relevant to his point, a list of expiring authorities 
which we have just received from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, 
General Dempsey. I put that letter in the Record; we got it literally a 
few hours ago--listing some of the expiring authorities, including a 
number that the Senator mentioned and----
  Mr. McCAIN. Would the chairman mention a couple of those?
  Mr. LEVIN. Special pay and bonuses, combat pay, travel and 
transportation allowances, nonconventional assisted recovery 
capability, the authorities to do MILCON, which were mentioned by the 
Senator from Oklahoma. It is a long list. There will be a real chasm if 
we don't do this this year. You cannot just say: Well, it will go to 
next year. Senator Inhofe pointed out, I believe, that in one or two 
cases where it actually did get signed in the year after the bill was 
passed, it was because there was a veto by a President and the veto 
override took place, I believe, in the weeks after January.
  But these expiring authorities are very serious. We are going to tell 
men and women in combat that there is a gap in their combat pay? We 
don't know for sure that it will ever be filled. This is what General 
Dempsey mentioned in his letter. He said: Allowing the bill to slip to 
January adds yet more uncertainty to the force and further complicates 
the duty of our commanders who face shifting global threats. I also 
fear that delay may put the entire bill at risk, protracting this 
uncertainty and impacting our global influence.
  Then he gave us a list of the expiring authorities.
  So the Senator from Arizona raises a very critical issue. Now, it is 
not desirable for us to pass a bill as we have. But with the help of 
the Senator from Arizona when he was the ranking member, we were able, 
on two occasions, in a situation where there were objections to 
amendments being offered on the Senate floor--I will not go into all 
the details, but 2 of the last 5 years we were put in a position where 
we could not get the usual course followed, where the bill had a full 
amendment process on the Senate floor--it had some, as this bill has, 
but not enough time. Then we ran into that wall, and we were able to 
work out a bipartisan resolution to present to the Senate, sort of a 
virtual conference report--not

[[Page S8551]]

technically a conference report but a bill, a fresh bill, a new bill 
which merged and blended the bill that passed the Senate Armed Services 
Committee in those 2 years with the bill that passed the House of 
Representatives. We then on a bipartisan basis presented those two 
bills to the Senate, and they were passed.
  Mr. INHOFE. Let me mention a couple of others to the Senator from 
Arizona. His specific question is, What expires on December 31? In 
addition to the hazard pay that was articulated by the chairman, we 
also have the reenlistment bonus. I think any of us who have served in 
the military remember that as you get close to your date of discharge, 
you make a plan for the future as to what you are going to do in terms 
of reenlistment. It is all based on assumptions of reenlistment 
bonuses. If all of a sudden they disappear, you could not have that. 
What is that going to do to our forces? Impact Aid. Impact aid is 
something people do not really think about unless they happen to be in 
an area that has a lot of military activity where people have been 
taken off the tax rolls. On January 1, impact aid would end.
  So, yes, there is a lot of concern over this. We talked for a long 
time about what will happen with this bill in terms of military 
construction that is partially done or the building of various 
platforms. But what would actually happen as of January 1 would be 
really a crisis if we were to have to stop these things.
  Mr. McCAIN. I should have stated at the beginning that I am very 
proud of the leadership that both Senator Inhofe and Senator Levin have 
provided to the Armed Services Committee.
  I serve on a number of committees and have served on a number of 
committees in my time in the Senate. The bipartisanship and cooperative 
legislating that is exemplified by both Senators makes me proud and 
makes me believe there is still some hope for bipartisanship in the 
Senate. Their leadership has been vital in putting together an 
authorization bill which is, as we have described, incredibly 
important.
  I ask both of my colleagues, I am hearing--especially now from this 
side of the aisle--it is OK if we let this go over into January. After 
all, we only have another week. We have the farm bill, we have the 
budget agreement, et cetera. The House, the other side of the Capitol, 
is going out of session.
  Why isn't it OK to wait until January? We will be back early in 
January and work on this legislation then.
  I am sure I know the answer, but I ask of the chairman if that isn't 
nearly as easy as it sounds, even if, contrary to custom in January, we 
would do anything legislatively.
  Mr. LEVIN. The Senator points out the reality, which is what is 
likely to happen in January. There is another reality that what will 
happen in January is it will be very difficult to get to this bill 
because of the crushing business of CRs and other crushing business in 
January, even if we meet in January.
  The shortest answer I could give to my friend from Arizona is the 
following: I am in combat. I am in combat somewhere in the world and I 
am going to read: Combat pay stops on December 31.
  There are dozens of these kinds of authorizations that are listed in 
General Dempsey's letter, dozens of them, that just stop on December 
31. Take only that one. Think about that and what kind of an impression 
we are giving to our men and women who are in combat, in harm's way, 
when they read: Combat pay stops.
  Yes, maybe it will be extended in January or in February, but that is 
actually unsatisfactory. It will be outrageous for us not to pass this 
bill.
  Mr. McCAIN. Does the Senator from Oklahoma have a response?
  Mr. INHOFE. Yes. I wish to note that the average time it takes to 
debate on the floor and to pass the NDAA is 9 days. That is the average 
over the last 10 years.
  As I look at the calendar for January, we return on January 6 and we 
have the CR on January 15. We are going to be spending that time on the 
CR. Then, of course, we will be faced with the debt ceiling. I don't 
see that is going to happen. I think it is going to happen in some 
other way, but it is not going to happen in these reforms.
  I very much appreciate the Senator from Arizona calling this to 
attention, that we can't wait until January. It is not going to work. 
We know it is going to expire December 31. We also know it can't happen 
in January because there flat isn't time.
  Mr. McCAIN. I don't know if my colleagues wish to respond, but I wish 
to make two comments: One is that I am deeply disappointed--deeply, 
deeply disappointed--in the majority leader for not taking up this 
legislation much earlier. The majority controls the calendar. That is 
one of the key elements of the majority winning elections and majority 
in the Senate.
  For us to wait since June, when we passed the bill out of the Armed 
Services Committee, until only a short time ago and then only allowing 
a few days is a grave disservice--not so much to the Members of the 
Senate--and a lack of prioritization of the importance of this 
legislation.
  I am deeply disappointed the majority leader of the Senate, because 
of his manipulation of the calendar, has put us in this position.
  Having said that, I spent time--as I know the Senator from Oklahoma 
and the Senator from Michigan, our distinguished chairman--in the 
company of the men and women who serve. One of our obligations, as 
members of the Armed Services Committee, is to spend time with the 
military. I know the Senator from Oklahoma and the chairman do as well.
  Their morale isn't good. They have seen sequestration take place, 
across-the-board cuts that have been done with a meat ax and not a 
scalpel.
  All three of us would agree there are enormous savings that could be 
enacted in our Nation's Defense Department. We haven't even received an 
audit of the Defense Department. Year after year we demand that an 
audit be conducted by the Department of Defense by a certain year, and 
it has never happened.
  We are not apologists. In fact, I believe the chairman and the 
ranking member have been zealous in their efforts to reduce waste, 
mismanagement, and duplication in the Armed Services and the Defense 
Department through their work on the Armed Services Committee.
  The morale of our men and women who are serving is being harmed. It 
is not something that shows up in dollars and cents, but it does show 
up over time.
  I say to the Senator from Michigan it does show up over time in their 
willingness to remain in the military. I was recently in Fort Campbell, 
KY, with the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Alexander. We had an excellent 
briefing from the colonels, the generals, and the chief master 
sergeants of the U.S. Army.
  Their unanimous view was that they believe we in the Congress of the 
United States are not taking care of them. They have always looked to 
us to provide them with the pay, the benefits, the housing, the 
equipment, and the training that is necessary to do their job.
  They don't believe we are doing that anymore. They believe, when we 
enact sequestration with a meat-ax cut across the board--don't ask me 
about it. Ask General Odierno and the Chiefs who testified before the 
Armed Services Committee about the devastating effect of cuts to 
readiness, training, acquisition and, most of all, on the morale of the 
men and women who are serving. They literally don't know, some of them, 
what they are going to be doing the next day. The next day they don't 
know if they will be able to fly their airplanes, run their tanks or 
have the exercises that have been planned for months and even years. 
They don't know because we are almost day-to-day trying to apportion 
funds that are remaining in the most efficient and beneficial way.
  I stand before my colleagues in the Senate and the two leaders in the 
authorization committee, and I am embarrassed--embarrassed--and a bit 
ashamed that we have done this to these good men and women who are 
willing to put their lives in harm's way to defend us. We can't even 
pass a bill that authorizes what they need to defend this Nation. It is 
shameful.
  I wish to thank the chairman and ranking member for the hard work 
they have done on this legislation and the thousands of hours they have 
spent

[[Page S8552]]

on behalf of defending this Nation and the men and women who serve it.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. LEVIN. I thank the Senator from Arizona for everything he has 
been doing for so many decades for this country, including our 
committee. It is invaluable. We are going to get this bill passed. That 
is our determination.
  It will be a shock to every American if we are unable to pass the 
Defense authorization bill. It will be totally intolerable. I know 
Senator Inhofe and I will help Senator McCain and others get this bill 
done this year.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. INHOFE. One last comment I wish to make is people listen to us 
speak on the floor and do not understand the full impact. I carry this 
card with me. The very top military person in the country, the Chairman 
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dempsey, told our committee: We 
are putting our military on a path where the force is so degraded and 
so unready that it would be immoral to use force.
  He is the No. 1 Chief. The No. 2 Chief is Admiral Winnefeld, who 
stated that ``there could be for the first time in my career instances 
where we may be asked to respond to a crisis and we will have to say 
that we cannot.''
  We can't correct all of that with this bill, but we can keep it from 
getting worse and get back and do what we have done over the last 52 
years and pass the NDAA bill.
  I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________