[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 209 (Thursday, December 10, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Page S7418]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, the Senate will soon vote on the conference
report for the annual defense policy bill, known as the National
Defense Authorization Act or NDAA. Like all conference reports, this is
a product of negotiations between the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
Producing a conference report takes dedicated negotiators who are
willing to make tough compromises. I commend them for their work, and I
particularly want to thank my friend, Senator Jack Reed, who has shown
strong leadership as the ranking Democrat on the Senate Armed Services
Committee.
I hope these negotiations will be a good omen for how Congress will
work under the incoming Biden administration.
But supporting the process that produced this conference report is
very different from supporting the report on its merits.
I have voted against the Senate version of this defense bill twice
now, once during the rollcall vote in July and then during a voice vote
last month. House negotiators have managed to improve the bill since
then, but not so significantly that I am able to support it now.
I want to be clear that I support plenty of provisions in this NDAA.
I even wrote or negotiated some of the language to improve the bill.
The bill includes anti-money laundering provisions, which I strongly
support. I have twice introduced bipartisan legislation to end the
abuse of anonymous shell companies, and I am happy to see the NDAA
expand upon my efforts.
The conference report will also set in motion a 3-year process to
remove Confederate names from military assets. I would have preferred a
shorter timeline, but I am glad that Congress will be taking this
overdue step to ensure that military bases do not honor traitors who
fought to defend the horrific institution of slavery.
And the conference report also includes my amendments to push the
Pentagon toward encrypting its computers and to require the Army to
provide a plan to finish cleaning up the former Umatilla Army Depot
within 3 years.
But I cannot in good conscience authorize $740 billion in military
spending--including roughly $70 billion to continue the forever wars--
while Senate Republicans are offering mere crumbs to help folks stay
safe from a raging pandemic and help small businesses stay afloat
during this unprecedented time.
I said previously that I could not vote for a defense bill with
Federal agents actively occupying Portland and treating peaceful
protestors like foreign enemies. Donald Trump may have removed much of
his occupying force but this bill does nothing to prevent him or any
future president from ordering similar abuses.
And I have serious concerns about a provision that will permit the
Secretary of the Treasury or the Attorney General to issue subpoenas,
with indefinite gag orders, to foreign banks that maintain a
correspondent account in the United States.
There may be some limited instances where it may be appropriate to
restrict bank employees from notifying account holders about a Federal
subpoena to obtain their records, but as a general rule, I oppose
indefinite gag orders. I worry this section grants dangerous powers to
the executive branch to regulate speech, raising very serious First
Amendment and due process concerns. That is why gag orders should not
be included automatically with every subpoena and should have an
expiration date, so that any restrictions on speech apply no longer
than necessary.
I regret that these and other flaws mean that I must continue to
oppose this NDAA at this time. I yield the floor with the hope that
Republicans will be as willing to provide real help for everyday
Americans suffering--particularly during this tough holiday season--as
they are to greenlight ever-higher levels of military spending.
____________________