[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 7]
[Senate]
[Pages 9343-9344]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 THE NECESSITY FOR THE NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL FOR FISCAL 
                               YEAR 2001

  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise this afternoon to discuss the 
importance--the critical need--for early Senate consideration of the 
defense authorization bill for fiscal year 2001. This bill, which we 
reported out of the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 12th with 
bipartisan support, is a good bill which will have a positive impact on 
our nation's security, and on the welfare of the men and women of the 
Armed Forces and their families. It is a fair bill. It provides a $4.5 
billion increase in defense spending--consistent with the congressional 
budget resolution. But, the real beneficiaries of this legislation are 
our servicemen and women who will not only have better tools and 
equipment to do their jobs, but an enhanced quality of life for 
themselves and their families. We must show our support for these brave 
men and women--many of whom are in harm's way on a daily basis--by 
passing this important legislation.
  I am privileged to have been associated with the Senate Armed 
Services Committee and the development of a defense authorization bill 
every year of my modest career here in the Senate--a career quickly 
approaching 22 years. During those years, the committee has used the 
annual defense authorization bills to address the most fundamental 
national security issues facing the nation, including: the 
revitalization of the Armed Forces under President Reagan; the 
Goldwater-Nichols reorganization of the Department of Defense; the 
restructuring and reduction of the Armed Forces following the end of 
the cold war; investigating the tragedies in Beirut, Somalia, and Saudi 
Arabia (Khobar Towers); and the review and implementation of the 
lessons learned from military operations in Grenada, Panama, the 
Persian Gulf, and, most recently, the lessons learned from the 
operations in the Balkans and, in particular, Kosovo.
  This year's legislation follows in this fine tradition. The 
importance of this bill is without question.
  While this legislation is not the only bill on defense spending, it 
occupies a very unique and critical role in the congressional defense 
funding process. Both it's timing and function in the congressional 
budget process are intended to achieve important goals: fully explore 
public concerns and fulfill statutory requirements.
  The venerable soldier-statesman, General George Marshall once stated, 
``In a democracy such as ours, military policy is dependent on public 
opinion.''
  The crucial step of ensuring that public opinion on national security 
policy issues has a forum begins in the Armed Services Committee. Since 
the beginning of the 106th Congress, the Senate Committee on Armed 
Services has conducted almost 170 hearings, briefings, and meetings, to 
fully explore, examine and deliberate matters of concern to the public 
on national security policy and funding issues. This year, in 
particular, a sample of the issues addressed in our hearings include: 
healthcare for military personnel, their families and retirees; the 
future of the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal; U.S. military involvement 
in the Balkans; Defense Department efforts to counter the threat of a 
terrorist attack; security clearance procedures for defense personnel; 
immunizing our personnel against anthrax; and ensuring Russia safely 
secures and disposes of its nuclear arsenal.
  Mr. President, the discussion on these important issues does not end 
with consideration in the Armed Services Committee. In fact, in the 
last twenty years, our Chamber's collective interest in continuing the 
public debate on pressing national security matters presented in the 
defense authorization bill has significantly increased. In 1979, the 
first opportunity I had to be a part of the defense authorization bill 
process, there were only 11 amendments to the bill during Senate floor 
debate. Last year, during our debate on the national defense 
authorization bill for fiscal year 2000, there were over 160 
amendments.
  But we know our responsibility to consider and pass the defense 
authorization bill goes beyond statutory requirements and historical 
precedent. We must also be aware of the importance of this measure to 
our men and women in uniform around the world.
  U.S. military forces are involved in overseas deployments at an 
unprecedented rate. Currently, our troops are involved in over 10 
contingency operations around the globe. Over the past

[[Page 9344]]

decade, our active duty manpower has been reduced by nearly a third, 
active Army divisions have been reduced by almost 50 percent, and the 
number of Navy ships has been reduced from 567 to 316. During this same 
period, our troops have been involved in 50 military operations 
worldwide. By comparison, from the end of the Vietnam war in 1975 until 
1989, U.S. military forces were engaged in only 20 such military 
deployments.
  In an all-volunteer force, where increasing deployments and 
operations challenge the capabilities of our military to effectively 
meet those commitments, as well as challenge the efforts of our 
military to recruit and retain quality military personnel, we must 
embrace every opportunity to demonstrate our commitment to our military 
personnel. The National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2001 
sends this important message.
  Mr. President, I noted previously in these remarks the important role 
of the defense authorization bill as a means by which the Armed 
Services Committee and the Senate address many of the today's important 
military policy matters. I would like to take a moment to highlight the 
impact of not passing the National Defense Authorization Bill for 
Fiscal Year 2001.
  With respect to personnel policy, the committee included leglsiation 
in the defense authorization bill for fiscal year 2001 to continue to 
support initiatives to address critical recruiting and retention 
shortfalls. In this regard, the committee increased compensation 
benefits and focused on improving military health care for our active 
duty and retired personnel and their families.
  Without this bill, there will be:
  No 3.7 percent pay raise for military personnel;
  No pharmacy benefit for medicare eligible military retirees;
  No extension of TRICARE benefits to active duty family members in 
remote locations;
  No elimination of health care co-pays for active duty family members 
in TRICARE Prime;
  No Thrift Savings Plan for military personnel;
  No five year pilot program to permit the Army to test several 
innovative approaches to recruiting; and
  No transit pass benefit for Defense Department commuters in the 
Washington area.
  And, without this bill, the current Department of Defense Medicare 
subvention demonstration program will not be expanded, as we 
envisioned, but instead terminated. Currently, the Medicare Subvention 
demonstration program provides medical services to approximately 28,000 
military retirees in Mississippi, Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, 
Washington, and Delaware. Expanding the program would provide medical 
services to military retirees living in the District of Columbia, 
Virginia, Ohio, Georgia, Hawaii, and Maryland.
  Without this bill, almost every bonus and special pay incentive 
designed to recruit and retain service members will expire December 31, 
2000, including: special pay for health professionals in critically 
short wartime specialities; special pay for nuclear-qualified officers 
who extend their service commitment; aviation officer retention bonus; 
nuclear accession bonus; nuclear career annual incentive bonus; 
Selected Reserve enlistment bonus; Selected Reserve re-enlistment 
bonus; special pay for service members assigned to high priority 
reserve units; Selected Reserve affiliation bonus; Ready Reserve 
enlistment and re-enlistment bonuses; loan repayment program for health 
professionals who serve in the Selected Reserve; nurse officer 
candidate accession program; accession bonus for registered nurses; 
incentive pay for nurse anesthetists; re-enlistment bonus for active 
duty personnel; enlistment bonus for critical active duty specialities; 
and Army enlistment bonuses and the extension of this bonus to the 
other services.
  The committee has carefully studied the recruiting and retention 
problems in our military. We have worked hard to develop this package 
to increase compensation and benefits. We believe it will go a long way 
to recruit new servicemenbers and to provide the necessary incentives 
to retain mid-career personnel who are critical to the force.
  Mr. President, on many occasions I have shared my concerns about the 
threats posed to our military personnel and our citizens, both at home 
and abroad, by weapons of mass destruction: chemical, biological, 
radiological and cyber warfare. Whether these weapons are used on the 
battlefield or by a terrorist within the United States, we, as a 
nation, must be prepared.
  Without this bill, efforts by the committee to continue to ensure 
that the DOD is adequately funded and structured to deter and defeat 
the efforts of those intent on using weapons of mass destruction would 
not be implemented. Efforts that would not go forward without this bill 
include: establishing a single point of contact for overall policy and 
budgeting oversight of the DOD activities for combating terrorism; 
fully deploying 32 WMD-CST (formerly RAID) teams by the end of fiscal 
year 2001; the establishment of an Information Security Scholarship 
Program to encourage the recruitment and retention of Department of 
Defense personnel with computer and network security skills; and the 
creation of an Institute for Defense Computer Security and Information 
Protection to conduct research and critical technology development and 
to facilitate the exchange of information between the government and 
the private sector.
  Mr. President, I would like to briefly highlight some of the other 
major initiatives in this bill that would be at risk without Senate 
floor consideration of the defense authorization bill:
  Without this bill, multi-year, cost-saving spending authority for the 
Bradley Fighting Vehicle and UH-60 ``Blackhawk'' helicopter would 
cease.
  Without this bill, there would not be a block buy for Virginia Class 
submarines. Without the block buy, there would be fewer opportunities 
to save taxpayer dollars by buying components--in a cost-effective 
manner--for the submarines.
  All military construction projects require both authorizations as 
well as appropriations. Without this bill, over 360 military 
construction projects and 25 housing projects involving hundreds of 
critical family housing units would not be started.
  The Military Housing Privatization Initiative would expire in 
February 2001. Without this bill, the program would not be extended for 
an additional three years, as planned. The military services would not 
be able to privatize thousands of housing units and correct a serious 
housing shortage within the Department of Defense.
  Mr. President, it has been said that, ``Example is the best General 
Order.'' The Senate needs to take charge, move out, consider and pass 
the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2001. This 
legislation is important to the nation and to demonstrating to the men 
and women in uniform, their families and those who have gone before 
them, our current and continuing support and commitment to them on 
behalf of a grateful nation.

                          ____________________