[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 165 (Thursday, November 17, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6440-S6442]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         CONTINUING RESOLUTION

  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, here we go again. For the eighth 
consecutive year, Congress has failed to pass an appropriations bill 
for the Department of Defense on time, leaving our troops operating on 
a so-called ``continuing resolution.''
  Now, fresh off an election where the American people were clear that 
they are fed up with business as usual, that is exactly what we are 
about to get if Congress adopts another continuing resolution that 
would cut resources to our troops, hamper the war against ISIL, and 
delay the cutting-edge equipment and reforms they need.
  A continuing resolution would also make the job of managing the 
government's largest agency even more difficult--and at the worst 
possible time.
  The Presidential transition process currently underway is difficult 
enough on its own, but no incoming President has ever had to inherit a 
Department of Defense operating under a continuing resolution--no 
incoming President--but this is not the time for us to break that 
streak.
  As the name suggests, a continuing resolution is supposed to continue 
funding the government in situations where the Congress fails to pass a 
regular appropriations bill. So what is the big deal about continuing 
last year's funding levels?
  Our Nation asks a lot of the men and women serving in uniform. We are 
asking them to defend our Nation and our interests in real time against 
rapidly changing threats and adaptive adversaries, but a continuing 
resolution would lock our military into last year's budgets and last 
year's priorities. Does anybody believe this year isn't greatly 
dissimilar from last year on the battlefield?
  A continuing resolution would place our troops at greater risk by 
forcing them to operate under an outdated budget that does not 
recognize the full extent of the threats they face. Worse still, a 
continuing resolution doesn't quite live up to its name. A continuing 
resolution would actually cut funds for our troops. The continuing 
resolution passed by Congress in September to keep funding through the 
end of this year cut the military's budget by $9 billion at annualized 
levels. Under a potential yearlong continuing resolution, our military 
would be short $12 billion.
  The incoming and elected President of the United States stated time 
after time that we needed to spend more money on defense; we are not 
taking care of the defense needs of this Nation; we are not taking care 
of the equipment, training, and benefits of men and women who are 
serving in the military; that we have the smallest Army that we have 
had since World War II; that we have the smallest Air Force that we 
have had since the end of the Korean war; that we have the smallest 
Navy since the end of World War I.
  So what are we going to do? What are we going to do in response to 
all that? As the conditions around the world become more chaotic, we 
are going to cut defense spending by $12 billion. Not only would a 
continuing resolution cut resources, it would leave them with the wrong 
mix of funding among accounts.

[[Page S6441]]

That means the wrong kinds of money is being spent on the wrong 
programs because we are continuing what we did last year.
  Under a continuing resolution, our military would experience 
shortfalls in some very important areas. Training for our National 
Guard and Reserve troops would be at risk of falling off-track. As 
Vladimir Putin's Russia continues to menace our NATO allies, our 
military would not be able to carry out the expansion of the European 
Reassurance Initiative, which is essential to deterring Russian 
aggression in Eastern Europe.
  Might I add an aside, it didn't seem to get much notice that a 
Russian aircraft carrier, launching aircraft with airstrikes into 
Aleppo--my friends, that is the first time in history that Russia, 
generally regarded as a land power, now has sufficient ships and 
aircraft capability to launch attacks into Aleppo, Homs, and other 
parts of Syria. Guess what they are doing. They are slaughtering 
innocent men, women, and children. They are killing the very people 
whom we have armed, trained, equipped, and sent into battle. It is 
atrocious.
  A continuing resolution would put our groups at greater risk in 
Afghanistan and in the fight against ISIL. The President has requested 
a $5.8 billion emergency supplemental to cover the costs of additional 
troops deployed to Afghanistan and expanded operations against ISIL in 
Iraq and Syria, but a continuing resolution would not include any of 
these necessary funds which would fill a shortfall that is looming in 
January.
  Put simply, this cockamamie idea, this abrogation of our 
responsibilities called a continuing resolution would shortchange 
American troops who are putting their lives on the line in Afghanistan, 
Iraq, and Syria.
  Meanwhile, the Department of Defense could have an excess of as much 
as $6 billion in money under a yearlong continuing resolution. However, 
those funds would be unusable because of restrictions on new 
procurement, on buying new weapons systems, and other requirements. 
There are restrictions on that and there is not authorization for 
increases in production rates.
  For example, we are firing off a lot of missiles. We need to replace 
those missiles. We need to replace the aircraft that are wearing out. 
We need new parts for them. None of that is possible under what is now 
being contemplated.
  Under a continuing resolution of any duration, our military would 
have to delay 78 new starts, 89 production increases which would affect 
critical programs. That includes the Ohio-class submarine replacement 
program, the KC-46 tanker, the Apache, the helicopters--the Black Hawk 
helicopters.
  A continuing resolution would also delay major research and 
development initiatives. In short, what we are contemplating--cutting 
funds for our troops--inhibits their ability to serve the Nation, and 
they are putting the men and women who are serving in the military at 
greater risk.
  Why? Why? Because we refuse to act. We who represent them, we who are 
supposed to be standing for them. We are not going to pass a new 
appropriations bill. We are just going to kick the can down the road 
for another 3 months or more. In other words, some may ask: If this 
continuing resolution delays some programs, can't we just make it up 
later? For some programs, perhaps, but there is one area where we 
cannot make up the losses of a continuing resolution, and that is 
readiness. We are asking our troops to be ready to defend this Nation 
at a moment's notice. We are asking our troops to be ready to take the 
fight to ISIL. We are asking our troops to be ready to deter and, if 
necessary, defeat aggression in Europe, the Middle East, and the Asia-
Pacific. We are asking them to be ready today.
  But a continuing resolution would force tradeoffs that undermine 
readiness. In other words, they will not be able to conduct the 
training operations, the replacement of parts, the maintenance, all the 
things that go into making a ready military that is ready to fight. We 
are impacting them. With a continuing resolution, we are harming their 
ability to do that. Adding additional readiness funds later in the year 
would be too little, too late, just papering over our failure to give 
our troops the resources they need when they need it.
  Readiness tomorrow does not replace readiness today. Every senior 
leader--uniform and nonuniform at the Department of Defense--has warned 
Congress about the negative impact of a continuing resolution on our 
men and women who are serving us in the military.
  Secretary of Defense Ash Carter has stated that ``a continuing 
resolution is a straitjacket'' that ``prevents us from fielding a 
modern, ready force in a balanced way.'' Secretary Carter said a 
continuing resolution ``undercuts stable planning and efficient use of 
taxpayer dollars.''
  Commandant of the Marine Corps General Neller warned that a long-term 
continuing resolution ``dramatically increases risk to an already 
strained fiscal environment and disrupts predictability and our ability 
to properly plan and execute a budget and a 5-year program.''
  Suppose you had a company or a corporation and that company--like 
most companies and corporations small and large--operate on a year-to-
year basis. So you tell that company: Wait a minute. For the first 3 
months of next year, you are not going to get any additional funds. You 
are not going to be able to plan. You are not going to be able to do 
what is necessary.
  They wouldn't stay in business.
  Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Richardson warned that a continuing 
resolution would lead to wasted taxpayer dollars. Under a continuing 
resolution, the Navy would be forced to break up its contract actions 
into small pieces. Admiral Richardson warned that as a result, the Navy 
would not be able to ``take advantage of savings from contractors who 
could better manage their workload and pass on lower costs to the Navy. 
These redundant efforts drive additional time and cost into the system, 
for exactly the same output.''
  Army Chief of Staff General Milley made a similar warning about waste 
and inefficiency resulting from budgetary uncertainty. Have no doubt, 
what a continuing resolution does is causes budgetary uncertainty. It 
is just a fact. He said:

       Things like multiyear contracts, developing long-term 
     relationships with industry where they can count on us and so 
     on--that becomes very difficult. And what ends up happening 
     is the price per unit goes up. So it has built in 
     inefficiency. It has built in cost overruns. It is an un-good 
     situation. It is not good and it needs to end.

  General Milley is right. This madness needs to end.
  It is time for Congress to do its job. When it comes to doing our 
constitutional duty to provide for the common defense, there is no call 
for lazy shortcuts and shortchanging of our troops.
  Let's pass a Defense authorization bill as soon as we get back. Let's 
pass a Defense appropriations bill that gives our troops the resources, 
predictability, and flexibility they need and deserve.
  Next year, with a new President and a new Congress, let's go to work 
immediately on ending sequestration once and for all and returning to a 
strategy-driven defense budget. Let's work together on a Defense 
supplement that will serve as a downpayment on rebuilding military 
capacity, capability, and readiness that have suffered under years of 
budget cuts and uncertainty.
  This year, this Congress, let's do our jobs and pass Defense 
authorization and appropriations bills. This is what the American 
people expect of us, and it is what the men and women who serve and 
sacrifice on our behalf deserve from us.
  Almost everybody I know--except those who don't tell the truth--did 
not predict the result of this Presidential election. What we are 
finding out--much to the dismay of some and to the surprise of almost 
all--is that the American people, particularly in some parts of the 
country, are very unhappy. One of the reasons of their unhappiness is 
that they believe they have a Congress that doesn't work for them. They 
believe their elected representatives no longer have their interests 
uppermost. When they see continued gridlock in Congress, of course the 
frustration level goes up and the approval rating goes down. I haven't 
met anyone who approves of Congress recently who wasn't paid staff or 
blood relatives.

  So the fact is that when we kick the can down the road and do not 
provide

[[Page S6442]]

the fundamental necessities for the most important obligation we have--
to defend this Nation and provide the men and women with the training, 
equipment, readiness, and capabilities they need--then it is no wonder 
the American people hold us in such low regard.
  So I urge my colleagues and I urge our leaders on both sides to take 
up the Defense authorization bill when we get back, and I think we can 
do that. Then let's take up the Defense appropriations bill. I have 
confidence in our appropriators. I don't agree with some of the things 
they have done, but they have carried out their duties. Why don't we 
move forward? Instead, for 3 months or more, we are going to put the 
military in a state of uncertainty--in limbo--and we will harm their 
ability to defend this Nation. That is not John McCain's view. It is 
the view of the leaders of the military to whom we entrust our men and 
women.
  So I urge my colleagues to get going. Let's get the Defense 
authorization bill done. We could get the Defense appropriations bill 
done in a matter of hours.
  Let's get those other appropriations bills done as well--those for 
the FBI, for the CIA, for our other intelligence agencies, and for 
those agencies of government that also are entrusted with the security 
of this Nation. Let's get something for them too. Let's not kick the 
can down the road. Let's do the people's work.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, as a longtime member of the Appropriations 
Committee, I strongly believe that we should have regular, yearlong 
appropriations, not continuing resolutions. I would like to remind my 
friend from Arizona that, by tradition, appropriations bills begin in 
the other body, in the House of Representatives. They have not yet sent 
over regular appropriations bills.
  It was just reported in the last few hours that Donald Trump has told 
them not to have regular appropriations bills, but to have a continuing 
resolution until the end of March.
  Frankly, the Senator from Arizona is right. I agree with him. We 
should have appropriations bills on all subjects. I am sorry the 
President-elect has decided that in his spare time he will also run 
Congress and will not allow full appropriations bills to be passed.

                          ____________________