[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 100 (Thursday, June 13, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Page S4063]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                   National Defense Authorization Act

  Mr. President, now on another matter, this week, the Armed Services 
Committee has been marking up the National Defense Authorization Act 
for the coming year. In the past, the committee has prided itself on 
considering hundreds of amendments and thoroughly exercising Congress's 
oversight responsibilities in the process. I expect this year to be no 
different.
  But one essential question hangs over both the NDAA and the 
appropriations process to come: Is Congress ready--finally ready--to 
fulfill our most fundamental responsibility of adequately providing for 
the common defense? This, of course, remains an open question. For a 
fourth straight year, the process of funding the Federal Government 
began with a White House budget proposal that would impose net cuts to 
the national defense.
  I have said it before. How can we expect to keep up with the pacing 
threat, the PRC, if our military budgets don't even keep pace with 
inflation? I know a number of our Democratic colleagues recognize that 
the threats we face are growing and that our defense requirements are 
growing along with them, but they don't seem to be ready to respond 
with any sense of urgency. Senate Democrats continue to indicate that 
they will stick to their longstanding demand for artificial parity 
between defense and nondefense appropriations for any increases above 
the President's budget.
  It is time for all of us to face the actual facts. The threats we 
face have grown since the bipartisan budget caps were negotiated. They 
have grown since the President's budget was drafted. The defense of 
Israel and Ukraine continue to offer lessons on the glaring need for 
modern air and missile defenses. We have learned how insufficient our 
inventories of critical long-range munitions might be in the event of a 
direct conflict in the Pacific. And with the risk of simultaneous 
conflict in multiple regions actually growing, the enduring importance 
of the two-war force planning construct is making itself abundantly 
clear.
  This is the reality our colleague Ranking Member Wicker was grappling 
with when he put together a detailed plan for an overdue generational 
investment in the national defense, and I am grateful to my friend for 
his leadership. A serious roadmap for preserving our military primacy 
is on the table. The question now is whether the Senate will follow it; 
whether we will lay the groundwork right now for urgent investments in 
critical munitions, long-range fires, sea power, and in the defense 
industrial base required to sustain all of it for long-term strategic 
competition.
  Way back in 1940, when the scope of the Axis threat was finally so 
glaringly obvious that even longtime skeptics began to soften their 
opposition to long-overdue military investment, the Chief of Naval 
Operations, Admiral Harold Stark, pointed out a harsh reality: Dollars 
can't buy yesterday.
  We are already facing a steep uphill climb to prepare America's Armed 
Forces to deter aggression and outcompete our adversaries. You can't 
surge readiness. We can't modernize overnight. Yesterday is right now, 
and it is time to invest in what we need to deter and defeat looming 
threats.
  So I will be watching our colleagues' work closely, and I will urge 
the Democratic leader to bring the NDAA to the floor for consideration 
as soon as the committee completes its work.