[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 143 (Wednesday, September 6, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4987-S4988]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, what I am really concerned about right now
is that we are getting ready to do the National Defense Authorization
Act. This is something that we will pass. We have passed it now for 55
consecutive years, and it is going to be passed this time. It is
important because one of the primary constitutional responsibilities we
have is to provide for the common defense of our great Nation, and
recent worldwide events highlight the urgency of this need.
I have spoken numerous times about the grave threat that is posed by
North Korea and warned that it would not be long before North Korea
could demonstrate the capability of firing an intercontinental
ballistic missile that would be capable of reaching the United States.
It is not just my saying it; others are saying it. We have a lot of
very courageous individuals who have come forth from the military. I am
not used to this. I have been here for 23 years; yet I have not seen
them come forth and just be clear about the threat that is facing this
country.
In April, ADM Harry Harris, the Pacific Command commander testified
in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee that it is clearly a
matter of when and not if that Korea would develop the capability to
strike the United States of America. This has never happened before. In
May, Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart, who is the Director of the Defense
Intelligence Agency, testified. Actually, he testified before the
subcommittee that I chair. He said:
Let me be clear on this point. If left on its current
trajectory, the regime will ultimately succeed in fielding a
nuclear-armed missile capable of threatening the United
States homeland.
We have talked about this being the most threatened position that we
have been in in the history of this country. I have often referred to
the good old days of the Cold War when we had two superpowers. We knew
what they had, and they knew what we had. It was predictable, but it is
not predictable anymore. You have countries like Yemen, countries like
Iran, countries like North Korea that are developing these capabilities
that they now have. It is within reach.
Since then, unfortunately, I have been proven to be correct as the
North Korea regime continues to demonstrate its dire threat facing us.
On July 4, North Korea successfully launched its first ICBM. It was the
first time that they had done it. If fired on a standard trajectory,
the missile could have ranged Alaska. Some experts say that it could
have gone even deeper into the continental United States.
In light of that test, the Defense Intelligence Agency updated its
assessment of the timeline by which North Korea will be able to
reliably range U.S. cities--we are talking about Washington, DC--with
nuclear missiles as early as the end of next year or even earlier. This
past Sunday, September 3, North Korea tested what is believed to be a
hydrogen bomb, its most powerful nuclear weapon to date--almost seven
times as powerful as the bomb that was detonated over Hiroshima. North
Korean media immediately stated that the nuclear test was to determine
the ``accuracy and credibility'' of its ``hydrogen bomb to be placed at
the payload of an ICBM.''
It does not get any more direct than that. Even if delivered by a
relatively
[[Page S4988]]
inaccurate ICBM--because they are relatively inaccurate--a nuclear
device as powerful as the one that was tested Sunday could devastate
its target. Just think about that--7 to 10 times stronger than the one
that wiped out Hiroshima. It is important to remember that all of this
power is being wielded by an erratic despot, Kim Jong Un.
North Korea's official newspaper relayed the threat of a preemptive
strike in April. This is a quote from their newspaper: ``[It would]
completely and immediately wipe out not only U.S. imperialists'
invasion forces in South Korea and its surrounding areas but the U.S.
mainland and reduce them to ashes.'' This is a newspaper that is behind
this leader over there, and it has made this threat to the United
States. We have never experienced anything like this in this country
before. Now that we are getting into the NDAA this year, we have to
keep this grave threat foremost in our minds, and we are doing it.
I have had numerous conversations with the chairman of our committee,
and we are going to make these commitments. We have serious readiness
deficits that are going to have to be addressed right away. Over the
last 90 days, a spike in accidents across the military services has
occurred. I had the CNO of the Navy and the Secretary of the Navy in my
office a few minutes ago, and we talked about how they are addressing
this thing. It is hard to correlate these accidents with a readiness
decline as a result of numerous continuing resolutions and
sequestration. It is just another surprise that we have not had before.
Our forces are now smaller than the days of the hollow force. Some of
us remember that was back after the Carter administration. It was when
our own forces declared that it was a hollow force of the seventies.
Yet we had a hearing just the other day, and we had some of the top
people in. In fact, it was the vice chiefs of all of the services, and
they agreed that our situation right now is worse than it was in the
days of the hollow force.
Our Air Force is short 1,500 pilots, and 1,300 of those are fighter
pilots. I believe 50 percent of our Air Force squadrons are trained and
ready to conduct all of their assigned missions.
The Navy is the smallest and least ready it has been in years.
Currently, it can only meet about 40 percent of the demand from
regional combatant commanders. More than half of the Navy's aircraft
are grounded because they are awaiting maintenance or lack the
necessary spare parts.
The Marine Corps is struggling to keep their aging F/A-18 Hornets
airworthy. I think the last I heard is that 62 percent of them were not
able to address that readiness.
The Army has said that only about one-third of its brigade combat
teams, one-fourth of their combat aviation brigades, and one-half of
their division headquarters are currently ready. That is a sobering
assessment, and we are again in the most threatened position we have
been in as a nation.
The bill that we have presented out of the Armed Services Committee
goes a long way toward closing these readiness gaps. Our bill increases
end strength and boosts funding for equipment, operations, maintenance,
military construction, and it includes a 2.1-percent pay increase for
our troops. It also addresses many requirements for the services and
combatant commander's unfunded priority lists.
I am also pleased that the Senate Armed Services Committee's NDAA
prohibits a Base Realignment and Closure round this year. It is called
a BRAC round, which is when they go through and make an evaluation as
to what our capabilities are, what changes should be made, and what
bases should be closed--decisions like that. The problem with that is
if you do this when we have gone through a period of disarmament, as
some have called it--and we are in a position right now when we need
every nickel that we can have for the military. One thing that is
always a certainty is that when you go through a BRAC round, it always
costs money for the first few years, and we cannot afford to do it
right now.
Our NDAA also fully funds Missile Defense Agency unfunded priorities,
which is important considering that, since 2006, the Missile Defense
Agency's budget has fallen more than 23 percent. Every amendment that
we consider in our NDAA this year should be equally focused on
increasing readiness across the Services.
I will wrap up with a quote from General Milley, the Chief of Staff
of the Army. This quote is one that we should keep in mind throughout
the NDAA process. By the way, I admire our uniforms for coming forth
and talking about the dilemma that we are in because it is very
difficult for them to do that.
General Milley said it best when it comes to funding our military:
The only thing more expensive than deterrence is actually
fighting a war, and the only thing more expensive than
fighting a war is fighting one and losing one. . . . We're
expensive. We recognize that. But the bottom line is, it's an
investment that is worth every nickel.
It is.
I apologize to my friend.
I suggest that this is probably the most significant bill coming up
this year, and I think Senator McCain said that we are going to be
starting on it next week. It has been the most important bill of the
year for the last 55 years, and it will continue to be this year.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maryland.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, at the outset, I say to the Senator
from Oklahoma that I agree with his statements with respect to the
threat posed by North Korea, its nuclear weapons program, both the
development of nuclear bombs and the most recent explosion, which was a
larger yield than ever before, plus their missile program, including
their ICBMs. I think it is important that this Congress do its part and
act quickly by further economically squeezing North Korea.
I know that the Presiding Officer and Senator Markey have a piece of
legislation. I, together with Senator Toomey, have a piece of
legislation in the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee that
would further tighten the economic pressure on North Korea. So I hope
that the Congress will move forward quickly.
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, I thank the Senator. I would say only that
this is the one thing that we agree on. We disagree on a lot of things
in this Chamber, but this is one that we have to agree on and do what
is necessary to do our job.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Yes, indeed. I think that that is exactly right. We
have 28,000 American soldiers in South Korea and about 50,000 in Japan.
____________________